Originally posted by The Renegade
You really cannot. Consistently can be sharp in it's operation, as opposed to steady. You cannot say, or even REMOTELY "accurately project" because you have nothing.
Can you not make an accurate prediction on the event of a boxing match, simply because of the possibility that one of the boxers could have drastically improved since you last saw him, regardless of how unlikely it is?
Of course not. Extreme and sudden changes are not the norm and do not prevent you from making an accurate projection based on norms.
I've played them all, including the Xeno series. My perspectives, judgment, analysis, and opinion are more valuable and accurate than yours right out of the gate. You cannot make comparisons due to a staunch lack of experience with one of the series that you're making comparisons to.
Perhaps if base familiarity with all titles involved was the only factor or a determining one. As it stands, I maintain I can make somewhat of an accurate prediction as to the quality of Mass Effect 2 and 3; I'm familiar with the first game which was made by largely the same people and put into place certain fundamental elements that would remain throughout the series, I can see that ME 1 was received in a comparably favourable manner to 2 and that 3 was widely considered disappointing.
On the other hand, it wouldn't surprise me if you hadn't played the Xeno games the number of times I have or researched them to the extent I have (which is practically required for a complete understanding of the games), nor would it surprise me if it had been years since you played them, perhaps when you were a lot younger, closer to when they were first released. Or any number of relevant factors that would colour our perceptions of the games.
And I still don't see why we can't just compare Mass Effect 1 to the Xeno games.
What people "largely hate" or what "critical reception" something receives doesn't change the composition and/or quality of a said work, especially not the former (ad populum much?) so you need to rethink how you, well, think.
Please. I'm not claiming that the critical or public reception is a perfect indication of the game's quality, but it is an indication that can inform the game's quality. You hear great things about something, it motivates you to check it out because you determine that it's probably something great, vice versa with something you hear bad things about. It doesn't make something definitively good or bad, but it is a good indication of it.
Neither of us is in a position to do anything other than offer a limited judgement on the quality of these respective games, so that a method I'm using doesn't tell me definitively how good it is doesn't matter when something that simply gives me a good indication of probably how great it is will suffice.
Especially when I am simply comparing public and critical reception among different entries of the same series (which will possess a number of constants across the board that would not influence subjective ratings, such as the fundamental aspects of the series that underlie each entry).
Saying that public perception serves as a good indicator of how I will probably rate a product =/= ad populum.
Oh, in jest? I'd say that's a bad case of backpedalingitis. Get a prescription, yo!
Please, I think it's fairly obvious that comments like these were clearly made in jest:
"Xenogears, Xenosaga Episodes I-III and Xenoblade >>> anything Bioware or Obsidian have ever done, and you'll be able to add the upcoming Wii U game to that list soon enough. Mass Effect might just about be on par with the Xenosaga cell phone humour based Japanese exclusive spinoff game Xenosaga Freaks. Might be."
I'm sure you can take my word for it that I don't really think a silly random spinoff game that was released exclusively on cell phones in Japan is on par with Mass Effect.