Revenge of the Metacritics: Diablo III Getting Review-Bombed

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

Halyah:
Given the fact that at day 1 I couldn't play at all and that while I could play yesterday, I logged on today only to find both my characters deleted and thus a ton of progress has been completely lost forever. So yeah if I had to rate the game at this point, I'd have to give it a 0 as a score and nothing above. After all if the game can't perform such basic things as being playable and saving my progress, it's pretty much the only score I can ever give it.

So you'll never play it again?

Buretsu:

Halyah:
Given the fact that at day 1 I couldn't play at all and that while I could play yesterday, I logged on today only to find both my characters deleted and thus a ton of progress has been completely lost forever. So yeah if I had to rate the game at this point, I'd have to give it a 0 as a score and nothing above. After all if the game can't perform such basic things as being playable and saving my progress, it's pretty much the only score I can ever give it.

So you'll never play it again?

I don't see any point in trying if the game isn't playable to begin with. If they can fix this issue however, I might reasses any score I'd give it.

EDIT: And now I know why I couldn't find them. Somehow the game stored them on the american servers even though in my options it was marked as the -EUROPEAN- servers! Appearantly this issue is widespread as well and I honestly wonder how in the fucking hells they managed to botch this up so badly.

[insert your own comment about the solution being offline mode here]

Well I hope this raises up Torchlight 2 sales. I'm still waiting on my D3 order, so I hope they fix this problem soon though. Can't say that I blame people who review bomb the game if blizzard can't get its shit together.

Which will you choose?

Aw, and I was looking forward to this game...
Not a fan of DRM and can see where this comes from
Ha, serves them right for this "always on" BS.
Not news. The gamers should have seen this coming. I mean, have any of you even PLAYED online Diablo 2? You get killed from across the room constantly. Anyone who thought this game wasn't going to have gaping flaws isn't paying attention.

Hm, I'm not too crazy about red but it's the closest to my opinion (AKA I get to bitch about D2's problems).

meh this is one of the occasions were i would say that the metacritic bombing is OK.most of these guys will have just experienced a menu screen and an error message and I wouldn't rate that very highly.

It was a 4chan stunt, they wanted to bring the score to 3.7.

Some people can be so immature. "OMG LIEK THIS DRM SUKS YO, LET'S REVIEW BOM DIS SHIT!!!!111!"

Log in issues aside, the game is fantastic and some people just need to grow the fuck up.

My views on this are as follows: Imagine you've bought your pizza from Papa John's for years. You've tried other pizza makers, but they just can't compare.
And suddenly Papa John's declares that all new pizzas they make will come with free, live scorpions in the box. Turns out it's more efficient for them to pack scorpions in than otherwise - it'll save 'em a bit of money due to labor union agreements, and anyway their research shows that a large portion of their audience have pet scorpions anyway.
Once the scorpion rollout is complete, you can still have one of their old pizzas - just be aware that it'll be getting moldier and moldier over time. Plus, if this is successful, you can expect Little Caesars and Domino's to include scorpions in their boxes too.
And if you don't like it? You're a prissy, entitled bastard who needs to shut up and accept the way things are. After all, this won't hurt many other people, and it sure helps PJ's bottom line...

omicron1:
My views on this are as follows: Imagine you've bought your pizza from Papa John's for years. You've tried other pizza makers, but they just can't compare.
And suddenly Papa John's declares that all new pizzas they make will come with free, live scorpions in the box. Turns out it's more efficient for them to pack scorpions in than otherwise - it'll save 'em a bit of money due to labor union agreements, and anyway their research shows that a large portion of their audience have pet scorpions anyway.
Once the scorpion rollout is complete, you can still have one of their old pizzas - just be aware that it'll be getting moldier and moldier over time. Plus, if this is successful, you can expect Little Caesars and Domino's to include scorpions in their boxes too.
And if you don't like it? You're a prissy, entitled bastard who needs to shut up and accept the way things are. After all, this won't hurt many other people, and it sure helps PJ's bottom line...

Wait...so the internet is... like scorpions?

Well, maybe this particular forum is, but apart from that your analogy is seriously weak.

This is more like a pizza parlor deciding that you can no longer just phone in an order, you have to place it via their website. It can be a minor inconvenience at worst, but I couldn't really care less as I've already got constant internet connection anyway.

Elcarsh:

omicron1:
My views on this are as follows: Imagine you've bought your pizza from Papa John's for years. You've tried other pizza makers, but they just can't compare.
And suddenly Papa John's declares that all new pizzas they make will come with free, live scorpions in the box. Turns out it's more efficient for them to pack scorpions in than otherwise - it'll save 'em a bit of money due to labor union agreements, and anyway their research shows that a large portion of their audience have pet scorpions anyway.
Once the scorpion rollout is complete, you can still have one of their old pizzas - just be aware that it'll be getting moldier and moldier over time. Plus, if this is successful, you can expect Little Caesars and Domino's to include scorpions in their boxes too.
And if you don't like it? You're a prissy, entitled bastard who needs to shut up and accept the way things are. After all, this won't hurt many other people, and it sure helps PJ's bottom line...

Wait...so the internet is... like scorpions?

Well, maybe this particular forum is, but apart from that your analogy is seriously weak.

This is more like a pizza parlor deciding that you can no longer just phone in an order, you have to place it via their website. It can be a minor inconvenience at worst, but I couldn't really care less as I've already got constant internet connection anyway.

Less an analogy, more a fable. The things blizzard introduced are good for them, ok for some consumers, but a considerable negative for others. Simply because I chose a humorous/absurdist subject for my fable does not make it weak.

Fact is, while you may not care, for some of us the latency, errors, lack of laptop-ability, etc. are nothing but a negative. They may not be deadly, but they sure do sting.

omicron1:

Less an analogy, more a fable. The things blizzard introduced are good for them, ok for some consumers, but a considerable negative for others. Simply because I chose a humorous/absurdist subject for my fable does not make it weak.

Fact is, while you may not care, for some of us the latency, errors, lack of laptop-ability, etc. are nothing but a negative. They may not be deadly, but they sure do sting.

Or may live in an area where a DSL connection does not mean high speed internet.

Yeah, places like that still exist in America. Most of Missouri does not have high speed internet access, regardless of the fact that it's on a dsl connection. So, yeah,want to play Diablo? Better hope your connection doesn't time out constantly like it does with the best providers out there.

Seriously, the moment I heard this was online only even though playing by myself was an option, I canceled my pre-order.

You know what I fucking love about lap-tops? Gaming anywhere. You know what I love about Diablo 2? Playing by myself, OR with friends. You know why I'm not buying Diablo 3? Because even if I want to play by myself, if I'm not at home or Starbucks, I can't play.

Wait, people actually look at the user scores on metacritic???

LiquidGrape:
Speaking as someone who doesn't have the game, I'm curious to know whether those who have actually played it would say this reaction is warranted; server issues, DRM and auction house aside?

Those are parts of the game that are perfectly legitimate to criticize. Especially, considering that this was a major feature in this iteration. This, according to Blizzard, was a feature added to make the game "better" and the central idea the entire game was designed around. Server issues, Problems with the DRM, and the auction house probably hold more weight than "Not enough weapons" in a review of this game.

Question: does this finally prove that gaming culture has a certain measure of entitlement issues, or is it merely the righteous indignation of customers and fans scorned?

Both, once again, entitlement isn't a bad word. People feel entitled to not have to put up with this because statistic show this type of thing doesn't help fight piracy. This type of thing isn't just stupid, but its dumb. Its essentially strong-arming your paying customers for a buck with an attempt to fight piracy. (which will fail) Its really a 2 in one package that rooks the customers. I don't really see anything that shows goodwill with this new DRM towards gamers. Diablo 3's is actually more of a disservice compared to what we have already experienced. Hell, they are spending money to make you jump through hoops to play their game.

A child walks into a candy store, and upon seeing the biggest lollipop his eyes have ever lay upon, he knows instantly that he must have it. He goes to the storekeeper and asks to purchase it, to which the man replies: "I'm sorry, but it's for display and is not for sale". The child is angered and demands to have it, and finally resorts to begging and whining. The storekeeper, realising how much owning it means to the child, sees a business opportunity. He hushes the child and says to him: "Very well, you can may buy it, but it will be expensive". The child, not caring for the cost of such a prize, hands him the money. The storekeeper then takes the lollipop and hands it to the smiling child, who promptly skips home to enjoy it. With bated breath he takes the first lick, only for his face to turn sour and his eyes leak tears. The lollipop is plastic, and what he imagined to be the amazing taste of sugar, was in fact, the un-taste of acrylic.


Seriously though: Another game fell flat in the face of massive hype, and everyone is surprised? It happened with Mass Effect 3, it happened with Duke Nukem: Forever. It has happened many times before, and will continue to happen.

Daniel Allsopp:
A child walks into a candy store, and upon seeing the biggest lollipop his eyes have ever lay upon, he knows instantly that he must have it. He goes to the storekeeper and asks to purchase it, to which the man replies: "I'm sorry, but it's for display and is not for sale". The child is angered and demands to have it, and finally resorts to begging and whining. The storekeeper, realising how much owning it means to the child, sees a business opportunity. He hushes the child and says to him: "Very well, you can may buy it, but it will be expensive". The child, not caring for the cost of such a prize, hands him the money. The storekeeper then takes the lollipop and hands it to the smiling child, who promptly skips home to enjoy it. With bated breath he takes the first lick, only for his face to turn sour and his eyes leak tears. The lollipop is plastic, and what he imagined to be the amazing taste of sugar, was in fact, the un-taste of acrylic.


Seriously though: Another game fell flat in the face of massive hype, and everyone is surprised? It happened with Mass Effect 3, it happened with Duke Nukem: Forever. It has happened many times before, and will continue to happen.

How horrendously pessimistic. I LIKE IT! :P seriously, though... I'd like to think this isn't true. Though, for the most part, it has been the case recently. And it is an unsettling pattern.

Honestly, I entertained the possibility even though I didn't want to entertain the thought at the time that ME3 was gonna turn out poorly. I could never have guessed just how poorly it would turn out. When it comes to Diablo 3, well, let's just say I hate being right sometimes.

Problem seems to be a combination of greed, laziness, and reliance on sequels and fan service to drive products. The sooner publishers and developers buck this trend the better off everyone will be. Or the state of video games will spiral out of control in flames.

I'm actually surprised when a high profile game DOESN'T get Amazon/Metacritic bombed.

Online requirements for single player games? Piracy.

'nuff said.

Journalists and critics didn't put any pressure on Blizzard for needlessly inconveniencing their players, so gamers feel they need to take matters in their own hands.

It's a form of consumer protest, nothing shocking about it. Metacritic's a good target, since most fans don't give a crap about it, but publishers/developers like to tout it.

Just curious, does anyone go purely by the score on metacritic, glance at a game they've never heard of, see 'metacritic - 88' and lay down fifty bucks?

Or do most people actually look a bit further, read the reviews, realise it's past the launch day now, disregard all those complaints, and look for a review that actually mentions the gameplay?

I'm personally not actively pleased with the DRM, but as a WOW player, I'm used to it, and I can't understand all the people saying it's not as good as D2, I think they're blinded by their own rage. To me, in every way, they've improved on D2 (which I'd hope for, considering how long it's been, but still...)

To say it's worse in every way than D2 suggests you've not actually played it, just read an article about DRM and are raging about a game you'll never play.

There's a consumer review thing called reevoo I think, where you actually have to have purchased something to post a review on that item, and I think perhaps metacritic could do with something like that. Not sure if Amazon is limited to only people who've bought it from there, I'm guessing not judging by past events like the Jordan and Peter Andrea reviews.

Hell, I can't stand Simon Cowell and what he's done to the music industry, but I think it's futile to just write reviews for everyone he manages saying they're shit, it won't achieve anything.

Game is incredible fun.

Must......contain.....laughter

Good, now maybe Blizzard won't pull such ridiculous BS again

zombieshark6666:
I think it's sad that the zeroes will probably be deleted even though people have a right to be angry about not being able to play a single-player game offline. They warned about this before release! I don't care, people should be able to use whatever they purchased.

They haven't deleted the unfair and/or paid-for-by-EA and/or BF3-fanboy-bitching-against-a-good-game zeros from the rating of MW3 yet... Why should they start deleting legitimate zeros from ratings now?

Metacritic is useless. Gamers complain too much. Diablo 3 is a joke.

There you go, I summed everything up.

Gee-wiz Batman, you mean Metacritic is being used to bomb the user review score of a recently released popular game?

It sure is Robin, who could be behind such an original and dastardly trend?

Bombing Metacritic is a childish reaction but one that stems from real disappointment with D3 and Blizzard. You don't bomb games you don't care about and Blizzard just gave a huge middle finger to everybody that cared about this franchise by going the Ubi AC2 route, always online SINGLEPLAYER.

Think about these three words "always online singleplayer". If someone had said these to me in the mid 90's, I would have thought it a huge joke. Nowadays it's apparently a business practice and guess what, the sheeple are supporting this(just look at how many copies were bought in the first few hours even though people knew what Blizzard were up to) so much that it will become more common in the future of gaming.

It's one thing when a bunch of wankers like Ubi do always online single because everybody knows what huge a-holes they are. But when a respectable company like Blizzard, that doesn't have Ubi's "track record", supports a stupid policy like this in one of its biggest releases ever, it's basically validating it and inadvertedly sending a message to the industry.

A sad day for the industry IMO, no matter how much this game sells.

pure.Wasted:

zombieshark6666:
I think it's sad that the zeroes will probably be deleted even though people have a right to be angry about not being able to play a single-player game offline. They warned about this before release! I don't care, people should be able to use whatever they purchased.

And if I buy a Halo title without owning an Xbox, I should give it a zero for not being able to play it on a PS3, because there's really no reason I shouldn't be able to play it on a PS3 except for the fact that they didn't make the game that way and I knew ahead of time?

Get real.

zombieshark6666:

TheKasp:

This does not justify a zero score. Especially since it is NOT news. Especially since D3 is obviously NOT an offline game.

Game doesn't work = 0

I don't have a problem with the score, honestly. I do wonder if all the real issues about the actual game are real too. I've never been very clicky, so I don't know much about the legacy.

How much gaming culture has changed in just 8 years. You know the same thing happened when WoW went live? Exact same thing.

Except it didn't get review bombed, because gamers weren't so militarized that they were already waiting, pitchforks in hand, to pounce on the game for ANY inconvenience, however minor.

And it is minor. You're going to have this game forever. You can play it for years. One day's worth of server crashes is beyond miniscule in comparison.

you dont have it for years
you have it for as long as the servers are there, as soon as you lose the servers or a connection to them the disc is a frisbe

irani_che:
you dont have it for years
you have it for as long as the servers are there, as soon as you lose the servers or a connection to them the disc is a frisbe

Diablo 1 and 2s servers are still up, i'd say chances are high this will stay for a long time as well. Not that it makes the always online okay in any way :/

lacktheknack:

zombieshark6666:
I think it's sad that the zeroes will probably be deleted even though people have a right to be angry about not being able to play a single-player game offline. They warned about this before release! I don't care, people should be able to use whatever they purchased.

That's dumb. They told them that it would be online-only, end of. YOU DO NOT GET to buy it and then complain about it being online only.

That's like me buying an electronic device that uses AA batteries (clearly marked on the box) and then giving it a zero because all I have is 9V.

"Developers should all bend to my will." No, developers get to do whatever the hell they want, and then you get to choose if you want to buy it. That's how it works in every other industry, that's how it works here.

"But other industries bend to the majority's will!" Yep. However, you're not the majority.

You don't void your right to criticism when you buy a game. It may give you a weaker case, but if you don't voice your problems with a product, how are they gonna learn from it?

Eh hey, they deserve it.

lapan:

lacktheknack:

zombieshark6666:
I think it's sad that the zeroes will probably be deleted even though people have a right to be angry about not being able to play a single-player game offline. They warned about this before release! I don't care, people should be able to use whatever they purchased.

That's dumb. They told them that it would be online-only, end of. YOU DO NOT GET to buy it and then complain about it being online only.

That's like me buying an electronic device that uses AA batteries (clearly marked on the box) and then giving it a zero because all I have is 9V.

"Developers should all bend to my will." No, developers get to do whatever the hell they want, and then you get to choose if you want to buy it. That's how it works in every other industry, that's how it works here.

"But other industries bend to the majority's will!" Yep. However, you're not the majority.

You don't void your right to criticism when you buy a game. It may give you a weaker case, but if you don't voice your problems with a product, how are they gonna learn from it?

I'll tell you how they WON'T learn from it... getting money for doing it "wrong".

It goes beyond weakening your case, it destroys it outright, because buying the game with pre-announced problems says "I may or may not have problems with this product, but it's nothing I can't live with." When a AAA developer looks for criticism, it's for the sole purpose of "How can I make more people buy my next product?" AAA devs do not do it for the art, or because of goodwill, they do it for money. Thus, they'll ignore people who buy the product in spite of pre-announced "features"/problems, because clearly they'll buy another product with the same features (why wouldn't they? They demonstrate no willpower). If they're fishing for new customers, they'll ask people who DIDN'T buy the product why they didn't. That's who they listen to.

Obviously, a fan uprising is the exception to this, but guess what "hot topic" never gets a fan uprising? (Hint: Ubisoft didn't suffer fan uprisings, only boycotts.)

EDIT: I should clarify that unforseen issues (like bugs or Ubisoft's infamous bait-and-switch) is a completely different matter entirely. I'm speaking in terms of pre-announced things. ie. Blizzard announced publicly that Diablo 3 would be online-only.

What's stopping me from getting it is not the poor reception or the always on DRM. What's stopping me is that all my interest in the franchise went away about 2004.

Had Diablo III come out in 2007, I would have snapped it up. But the company chose to make their cash cow WoW better and neglected other series.

Not so very long ago I would put nearly as much stock in user reviews as I would the gaming press. This was before I had found a couple of writers whose opinions matched mine at a rare few websites with proper integrity.

All the Metacritic user score is good for is seeing which game is the most controversial which is not the same as knowing if it is good. If these children keep it up then Metacritic will simply pull the user review out altogether for the useless piece of flamewar tripe it has become.

Honestly folks, people can decide for themselves whether they like certain DRM schemes. I don't need their help with that. Hate the DRM? Write the publisher, tell them they lost a sale and why. Don't forget to actually have the stones to not buy their product though. A boycott that is not followed up on is toothless.

lacktheknack:

I'll tell you how they WON'T learn from it... getting money for doing it "wrong".

It goes beyond weakening your case, it destroys it outright, because buying the game with pre-announced problems says "I may or may not have problems with this product, but it's nothing I can't live with." When a AAA developer looks for criticism, it's for the sole purpose of "How can I make more people buy my next product?" AAA devs do not do it for the art, or because of goodwill, they do it for money. Thus, they'll ignore people who buy the product in spite of pre-announced "features"/problems, because clearly they'll buy another product with the same features (why wouldn't they? They demonstrate no willpower). If they're fishing for new customers, they'll ask people who DIDN'T buy the product why they didn't. That's who they listen to.

Obviously, a fan uprising is the exception to this, but guess what "hot topic" never gets a fan uprising? (Hint: Ubisoft didn't suffer fan uprisings, only boycotts.)

EDIT: I should clarify that unforseen issues (like bugs or Ubisoft's infamous bait-and-switch) is a completely different matter entirely. I'm speaking in terms of pre-announced things. ie. Blizzard announced publicly that Diablo 3 would be online-only.

Still, even that crticism is better than none at all. And at least a part (probably a small one in comparison) of those complaining about it really hasn't bought the game.

Love reading all the D3 hate, and how angry people get over a login server not handling 4 million logins at the same time :D

Makes me feel like the calmest person in the world, cause it didnt bother me at all! Just did some chores, played some dark souls, chatted with some friends and BOOM! Game works again!

Thanks all, for making me feel great!

Its a 5/10 game at best.
In such an "entitled" society, its bizarre how quickly people will praise something purely because of its creator or title.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked