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.
Your biggest problem is that you assume M.E. 2 being fantastic is an "extreme and sudden" change from the first one. It isn't. The first one is spectacular as well. You not seeing this, or perhaps not evaluating it properly, already runs your prediction into the ground.
How do I put this? It's like a boxer performing wonderfully in his first match and you say you're "accurately predicting" his second match will be meh because you THOUGHT his first match wasn't that good but you're wrong.
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.
You can't, especially because you're off. Also, you later go on to say you're not committing an ad populum (or that you haven't) but here you are, weighing in on 2 and 3 based on how it was "widely considered." Your accurate prediction is based on what "everyone" thought, whether it be a critical consensus or otherwise.
Christ, in order to determine the accuracy of your prediction, you must first evaluate the result of that prediction. You cannot do this because you have not played the games.
Whether or not a consensus can be used to purchase a product or make a decision based on an approximation is irrelevant. This isn't what you're doing here. You're legitimately saying you have an accurate prediction/evaluation of 2 and 3 based on what lots of dude said. No, seriously. That's what you're genuinely trying to say.
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.
LOLNO? I played these games well after their releases. My first Xeno experience was "Xenogears" on the PS3 when I bought it as a classic.
So, perhaps you're totally off.
And I still don't see why we can't just compare Mass Effect 1 to the Xeno games.
You want this SO badly because it caters to your understanding. If you had any sort of real confidence in your amazing "accurate prediction" abilities, you'd want to compare a series to a series, not a single game to a series.
I'm not going to sit here and put one game against an entire series. Will I go game for game? Sure. I mean, not that I don't think M.E. 2 embarrasses every entry in the Xeno series but still.
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.
Yes, probably. I'm sorry, but "probably" doesn't come off as "accurate," unless the probability is high, which it isn't. You're like "it can do this" and it's "probably" decent. Critical reception is quite chaotic. Also, you're blending in using critical reception to check something out along with critical reception basically being used as a measuring tool to define a game's "quality."
You seem incapable of understanding that checking out critical reception or what people have said/recommended in order to make a purchase or check the game out is fine but using it to say, "Yeah, I understand the game pretty well and know it's quality" is NOT fine.
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.
You're assuming it will suffice. I'm telling you it really won't. Perhaps for you but not for me or this argument. It isn't substantial enough, not even for the sake of engagement. Are you seriously saying my judgment capabilities concerning quality is parallel to yours when I've fully experienced these games and you have not?
This has to be a twisted ass joke. Honestly, like the worst joke in history.
Saying that public perception serves as a good indicator of how I will probably rate a product =/= ad populum.
Yeah, it doesn't equal that. It does when you say public perception can reinforce an accurate prediction, which you did. You've basically said, "I get 2 and 3 and can talk about them like the individuals that have experienced the game first hand because lots of people said they weren't good or whatever. Also, let's only compare the first game to the entire Xeno series because I'm obviously displaying confidence in my uber powerful and hawkeye-like predictions."
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.
Sure, the latter portion is seemingly in jest but I don't see how that weighs in on the former, which you didn't mention for, erm, some reason.
Originally posted by Astor EbligisBelieving something to be similar in it's subjective inadequacy is understandable. Outright declaring you can predict said inadequacy with "accuracy" is a rather specious line of thought. It also smacks of arrogance in it's presumption.
I's pretty simple and I've already explained my thought process. When you're familiar with a certain person or team's existing performance, and you have evidence that would strongly suggest that subsequent performances haven't been vastly superior, you can use your personal assessment of their existing performances as an indicator of how their subsequent performances would have likely been, regardless of whether you are familiar with those subsequent performances or not.
Originally posted by Astor EbligisAnyone who says "you just don't understand" in regards to something that is purely subjective (in this case, perceived quality between games and the claimed ability to "accurately predict" said quality) is... I already said arrogant, so I'll say it's pigheaded.
It's pretty simple and not to be rude but if you disagree with that at this point you simply have a very poor grasp of statistics (not to mention are in all likelihood a hypocrite, as I'd imagine you make such projections and believe them with likelihood all the time).
I'll be wary, sure. I'll be uninterested, sure. I'll even make a prediction. But like hell will I claim it to be accurate prior to actually engaging the product. And I certainly won't dismiss or pre-judge a product based on pre-conceived sentiment, as you have. Choose your words with more care next time, since you're communicating your wariness and relatable lack of interest as presumption and unsympathetic obstinacy.
Originally posted by The Renegade
Your biggest problem is that you assume M.E. 2 being fantastic is an "extreme and sudden" change from the first one. It isn't. The first one is spectacular as well. You not seeing this, or perhaps not evaluating it properly, already runs your prediction into the ground.How do I put this? It's like a boxer performing wonderfully in his first match and you say you're "accurately predicting" his second match will be meh because you THOUGHT his first match wasn't that good but you're wrong.
So your argument is now that there isn't such a large gap between ME 1 and 2, and not that you can't make projections based on norms?
By all means, explain what exactly was so great about ME1, because as it stands I'm the only person that's made a particularly good case for their respective game. You've made lot of claims but neither you nor anyone else have in any way justified them.
You can't, especially because you're off. Also, you later go on to say you're not committing an ad populum (or that you haven't) but here you are, weighing in on 2 and 3 based on how it was "widely considered." Your accurate prediction is based on what "everyone" thought, whether it be a critical consensus or otherwise.Christ, in order to determine the accuracy of your prediction, you must first evaluate the result of that prediction. You cannot do this because you have not played the games.
Whether or not a consensus can be used to purchase a product or make a decision based on an approximation is irrelevant. This isn't what you're doing here. You're legitimately saying you have an accurate prediction/evaluation of 2 and 3 based on what lots of dude said. No, seriously. That's what you're genuinely trying to say.
An appeal to majority explicitly assumes something is the case because a certain quantity of people believe it. What I am saying is that something is probably the case because a certain quantity of people believe it, which is not the same thing. It doesn't matter whether I am using this prediction to influence my decision to purchase the sequels or whether I am using it to influence how I believe the entire series will likely compare to one I have fully played, it's based on the same principle. Furthermore, I am not basing my assessment entirely on the game's public or critical reception, but also my existing experience with the developers and the series, and fundamental elements that will have presumably shaped the sequels.
LOLNO? I played these games well after their releases. My first Xeno experience was "Xenogears" on the PS3 when I bought it as a classic.So, perhaps you're totally off.
1. If you say so, didn't say you definitely did, just that it wouldn't surprise me.
2. You have yet to establish that base familiarity with every entry in two different series is a determining factor in being able to compare them. Your claim was that your judgement was necessarily superior to mine simply because of that base familiarity.
You want this SO badly because it caters to your understanding. If you had any sort of real confidence in your amazing "accurate prediction" abilities, you'd want to compare a series to a series, not a single game to a series.
Hardly. It has more to do with the fact that I can't exactly have a meaningful discussion about ME 2 and 3 without knowing specifics, and any discussion involving their storytelling merits will inevitably result in a tonne of spoilers being revealed. It has very little to do with how confidant I am in my projections of how good the games likely are.
I'm not going to sit here and put one game against an entire series. Will I go game for game? Sure. I mean, not that I don't think M.E. 2 embarrasses every entry in the Xeno series but still.
As I've said, I'll happily limit the discussion to a comparison between Mass Effect 1 and Xenogears, which for the record, are the only two games I've actually made any specific comments about. Game for game, and both games that were intended to be followed up by a sequel, so it's largely fair.
Yes, probably. I'm sorry, but "probably" doesn't come off as "accurate," unless the probability is high, which it isn't. You're like "it can do this" and it's "probably" decent. Critical reception is quite chaotic. Also, you're blending in using critical reception to check something out along with critical reception basically being used as a measuring tool to define a game's "quality."
1. It absolutely is. Given my existing experience with the developers and the series, my assessment that ME1 or any Bioware/Obsidian game that I've played doesn't even approach the brilliance of something like Xenogears, and the fact that all available evidence would suggest that there wasn't a drastic increase in quality between entries, it is clearly far more probable that ME 2 and 3 don't hold a candle to the likes of Xenogears either. For a drastic increase in quality to not be reflected in any indication I have available regarding the games' quality would heavily suggest that no such drastic increase exists.
2. It's the same principle. It doesn't matter if I use my projection of the game's quality to either decide whether or not to purchase the game, or share my thoughts on how good I think it will likely be.
You seem incapable of understanding that checking out critical reception or what people have said/recommended in order to make a purchase or check the game out is fine but using it to say, "Yeah, I understand the game pretty well and know it's quality" is NOT fine.
Which is hardly what I'm saying.
You're assuming it will suffice. I'm telling you it really won't. Perhaps for you but not for me or this argument. It isn't substantial enough, not even for the sake of engagement. Are you seriously saying my judgment capabilities concerning quality is parallel to yours when I've fully experienced these games and you have not?This has to be a twisted ass joke. Honestly, like the worst joke in history.
By the same logic, I can be familiar with all the works of Shakespeare, but not have read any of the Twilight books. Would somebody who's read both, and believes Twilight to be superior, be in a better position to make that judgement, simply because they have a base level of familiarity with all titles involved and I don't? Absolutely not. I can stand by my assessment that it's almost a certainty that the works of Shakespeare >>>>> the entire Twilight series based on my experience with Shakespeare alone and other indications of Twilight quality that don't involve personal familiarity with it, and some fangirl telling me otherwise doesn't really do anything to change my assessment.
Yeah, it doesn't equal that. It does when you say public perception can reinforce an accurate prediction, which you did. You've basically said, "I get 2 and 3 and can talk about them like the individuals that have experienced the game first hand because lots of people said they weren't good or whatever. Also, let's only compare the first game to the entire Xeno series because I'm obviously displaying confidence in my uber powerful and hawkeye-like predictions."
I obviously cannot talk about them in a meaningful way, and if you don't wish to engage in such a discussion that's your every right, I don't particularly wish to either, but I absolutely can stand by my claims that ME 2 and 3 in all likelihood are not on the same level of quality as Xenogears based on the evidence I have, and your arguments that I can't make that claim with a high degree of probability simply demonstrate a very poor understanding of statistics.
Sure, the latter portion is seemingly in jest but I don't see how that weighs in on the former, which you didn't mention for, erm, some reason.
It certainly helps inform the context of my entire post, though of course far more relevant is Stealth's post prior to that which is what I had been responding to in the first place.
"Also, ME >>>>> Xeno anything."
Stealth Moose has not presumably played every single game in the series based on my interactions with him and I was effectively mirroring his post, which was clearly not entirely serious and made in jest.
The idea that I had to back peddle from some kind of claim I made in error is not compatible with the evidence at hand.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Believing something to be similar in it's subjective inadequacy is understandable. Outright declaring you can predict said inadequacy with "accuracy" is a rather specious line of thought. It also smacks of arrogance in it's presumption.Anyone who says "you just don't understand" in regards to something that is purely subjective (in this case, perceived quality between games and the claimed ability to "accurately predict" said quality) is... I already said arrogant, so I'll say it's pigheaded.
I'll be wary, sure. I'll be uninterested, sure. I'll even make a prediction. But like hell will I claim it to be accurate prior to actually engaging the product. And I certainly won't dismiss or pre-judge a product based on pre-conceived sentiment, as you have. Choose your words with more care next time, since you're communicating your wariness and relatable lack of interest as presumption and unsympathetic obstinacy.
Lucien, I like you but it's clear that you're either blatantly trolling and/or simply have a very poor grasp of statistics/probability.
So your argument is now that there isn't such a large gap between ME 1 and 2, and not that you can't make projections based on norms?
Is now that? That was never not my opinion. Also, there doesn’t have to be a massive and/or fundamental change for your evaluations to be poor or even misses.
“Oh, the first one was in space and, like, the reapers are still enemies. Oh, and the Joker is still voiced by Seth Green. Is that all the same? Great, so I can make assessments that people who have experienced/played the games can with the same precision.”
You’re a silly dude, Astor. A silly dude.
By all means, explain what exactly was so great about ME1, because as it stands I'm the only person that's made a particularly good case for their respective game. You've made lot of claims but neither you nor anyone else have in any way justified them.
You think you’ve made a good case, which is problematic. I don’t think your case is so fantastic. You think because you’re the only one that’s basically stepped forward, it’s some badge of merit. Do you want a cookie?
I haven’t justified them because I’m on the task at hand, which is your craptastic evaluation method for video games that you claim is as sound as someone who has directly played and fully experienced them.
An appeal to majority explicitly assumes something is the case because a certain quantity of people believe it.
Yes, it does. Like, for example, basing M.E.’s quality off of the belief of a consensus, which is otherwise known as “lots of people.”
What I am saying is that something is probably the case because a certain quantity of people believe it, which is not the same thing. It doesn't matter whether I am using this prediction to influence my decision to purchase the sequels or whether I am using it to influence how I believe the entire series will likely compare to one I have fully played, it's based on the same principle. Furthermore, I am not basing my assessment entirely on the game's public or critical reception, but also my existing experience with the developers and the series, and fundamental elements that will have presumably shaped the sequels.
This can be the case for a scientific consensus, sure, or one that holds reliable data but critical reviews from journalists, or otherwise, do not uphold the same type of reliability. It’s completely based on individual perspective and there’s realistically no standard.
Yeah, you’re basing your assessment on what came before, which is idiotic. Developers can make changes. A series wouldn’t be needed otherwise. You’re implying there’s this super secret, ultra hidden “closeness” that totally requires you to not experience the other entries, it’s so damn overpowering and excellent in it’s super ultra secret clandestine way.
Also, how does a previous entry influencing the next even hold up as an argument for you being able to evaluate the one you haven’t experience or played to the same level as someone who has?
“Well, Nirvana influenced the Foo Fighters. Don’t have to listen to that band to know it’s overrated.”
1. If you say so, didn't say you definitely did, just that it wouldn't surprise me.2. You have yet to establish that base familiarity with every entry in two different series is a determining factor in being able to compare them. Your claim was that your judgement was necessarily superior to mine simply because of that base familiarity.
My claim is that my judgment is superior because I’ve evaluated, and experience, the products themselves. You’ve evaluated the perspectives of others. Also, critical reception and “everyone” (LOL) are subject to change. Look at Blade Runner, Pulp Fiction, and other media. They first received poor reception but are now consider great.
Does the composition of the story, the level of quality, etc., change when the reception does? With this type of evaluation method, you’re saying your judgment would be as sound as mine? If I watched Blade Runner and evaluated it, determining it was good, that would be consistent. If you never experience it and go on to follow a consensus, and it then changes like they do, your evaluation alters.
A judgment produced in such a manner can never be as reliable and/or as precise as a direct one. Individual opinion is subject to alteration as well, sure, but this would be based on even more frivolous examination, not because a “whole lot” of dudes changed their shit later due to things like popularity, poor evaluations, etc.
As I've said, I'll happily limit the discussion to a comparison between Mass Effect 1 and Xenogears, which for the record, are the only two games I've actually made any specific comments about. Game for game, and both games that were intended to be followed up by a sequel, so it's largely fair.
Are they? I’d say “accurate predictions” are pretty specific. I’d also say that you proclaiming your judgments, based on reviews and not actually playing the goddamn game, are the same as mine is pretty specific. This is what I mean, though. Why wouldn’t you feel comfortable engaging me regarding M.E. 2 and/or M.E. 3 if you actually bought how you feel regarding your assessment being as sound as mine? It shouldn’t be a problem.
1. It absolutely is. Given my existing experience with the developers and the series, my assessment that ME1 or any Bioware/Obsidian game that I've played doesn't even approach the brilliance of something like Xenogears, and the fact that all available evidence would suggest that there wasn't a drastic increase in quality between entries, it is clearly far more probable that ME 2 and 3 don't hold a candle to the likes of Xenogears either. For a drastic increase in quality to not be reflected in any indication I have available regarding the games' quality would heavily suggest that no such drastic increase exists.
You keep on saying your experience with the “developers and the series.” What “series” experience do you have having only experience thirty three percent of it? What available evidence? The “available evidence” you haven’t examined?
I mean, all of this time. If I want to find out if a book series, a film series, etc., is good, I just have to google the critical reception or see what “everyone” is saying? Shit, that’s easy. Hell, I can look up the plot too because knowing the plot would totally outline everything the experiences these types of media can offer me.
No.
No.
2. It's the same principle. It doesn't matter if I use my projection of the game's quality to either decide whether or not to purchase the game, or share my thoughts on how good I think it will likely be.
It does. It’s not the same. One is based off of a decision to experience it, which is within reason. The other proclaims that, due to the perspectives of others and a consensus, you can have a PARALLEL understanding to that of someone who has directly evaluated, analyzed, and experienced it. You cannot.
By the same logic, I can be familiar with all the works of Shakespeare, but not have read any of the Twilight books. Would somebody who's read both, and believes Twilight to be superior, be in a better position to make that judgement, simply because they have a base level of familiarity with all titles involved and I don't? Absolutely not. I can stand by my assessment that it's almost a certainty that the works of Shakespeare >>>>> the entire Twilight series based on my experience with Shakespeare alone and other indications of Twilight quality that don't involve personal familiarity with it, and some fangirl telling me otherwise doesn't really do anything to change my assessment.
They would be in a better position to make the judgment, yes. The judgment itself might not be better but yours is literally based on a guess. One you might called informed but one I’d dismiss. “Oh, lots of people don’t like it and young girls love it so it’s bad” doesn’t hold up against actually reading the material. You cannot make accurate assessments until you’ve evaluated the material itself, just like you cannot “accurately predict” where a bullet has landed after a gun was shot until you look at the target.
I obviously cannot talk about them in a meaningful way, and if you don't wish to engage in such a discussion that's your every right, I don't particularly wish to either, but I absolutely can stand by my claims that ME 2 and 3 in all likelihood are not on the same level of quality as Xenogears based on the evidence I have, and your arguments that I can't make that claim with a high degree of probability simply demonstrate a very poor understanding of statistics.
You’ve said this already and how is there any implication I have a poor understanding of statistics because I defy you? There’s no argument here, just attacks based on nothing. You’re going to have to do better than regurgitating your emptily patronizing “statistics” garbage, if you want to get fucking anywhere.
It certainly helps inform the context of my entire post, though of course far more relevant is Stealth's post prior to that which is what I had been responding to in the first place."Also, ME >>>>> Xeno anything."
Stealth Moose has not presumably played every single game in the series based on my interactions with him and I was effectively mirroring his post, which was clearly not entirely serious and made in jest.
The idea that I had to back peddle from some kind of claim I made in error is not compatible with the evidence at hand.
This is the claim, yeah. You saying that you “mirrored” it, which perhaps you partially had done. With you saying you have the same knowledge regarding people who have played the series and your position that Xeno is better than M.E.? It wouldn’t be difficult to pick that post up as balls-in-the-air serious.
You’ve said this already and how is there any implication I have a poor understanding of statistics because I defy you? There’s no argument here, just attacks based on nothing. You’re going to have to do better than regurgitating your emptily patronizing “statistics” garbage, if you want to get ****ing anywhere.
Originally posted by Astor Ebligis
Lucien, I like you but it's clear that you're either blatantly trolling and/or simply have a very poor grasp of statistics/probability.
Xenogears also has the following:
YouTube video
YouTube video
YouTube video
YouTube video
YouTube video
YouTube video
YouTube video
Xenogears' music > all. The absolute best soundtrack in videogame history by a long shot.
It's hilarious that you think that generic JRPG soundtrack even compares to the majesty of the Persona games. Most of those sounded like I was playing FF7 again. The Beginning and the End and Small Two Pieces are quite good, but it's still no Kimi no Kioku or Nevermore.
Xenogears might have a good soundtrack, but Persona 3 and 4 transcend being a mere gaming soundtrack.
Originally posted by The Renegade
Is now that? That was never not my opinion.
Now as in at this specific moment, not only now. You seemed to be arguing that trends cannot be accurately predicted simply because of the possibility of sharp deviations.
You think you’ve made a good case, which is problematic. I don’t think your case is so fantastic. You think because you’re the only one that’s basically stepped forward, it’s some badge of merit. Do you want a cookie?
I have made as good case, that I have done so has little to do with me and everything to do with Xenogears, and that it is a good case remains to be so regardless of what you might have to say about that. I quite clearly establish that Xenogears successfully incorporates a number of interesting themes into the very structure of the story itself in a number of interesting and imaginative ways, which is very rare for a videogame to pull off and something the formulaic Mass Effect 1 could only ever dream of.
Yes, it does. Like, for example, basing M.E.’s quality off of the belief of a consensus, which is otherwise known as “lots of people.”
Except that I wasn't explicitly assuming a level of quality of Mass Effect based on its reception, but rather was partially basing what I believed in all likelihood it's quality would be on its reception.
At this point you're blatantly strawmanning.
This can be the case for a scientific consensus, sure, or one that holds reliable data but critical reviews from journalists, or otherwise, do not uphold the same type of reliability. It’s completely based on individual perspective and there’s realistically no standard.
The fact remains that in my experience (and the experiences of most), there is a strong correlation between how I personally rate games and the reception they receive, certainly a strong enough correlation that it serves as a good indicator of how I will find something. I find absolutely no problem with using the reception of a game as a good general indication of how I will find it.
Yeah, you’re basing your assessment on what came before, which is idiotic. Developers can make changes. A series wouldn’t be needed otherwise. You’re implying there’s this super secret, ultra hidden “closeness” that totally requires you to not experience the other entries, it’s so damn overpowering and excellent in it’s super ultra secret clandestine way.
As I said, it's based on both my experience with the first game, and what I've heard from a number of people and reviewers (that claim some improvements and differences but have described the game as mostly being the same sort of thing and not expressed an astronomic increase in quality) and the critical and public reception about the games (roughly the same). And given how vastly superior Xenogears is to Mass Effect 1, I feel safe in making the estimation that the second and third aren't on its level either. Just like I would with a random Twilight movie (I've seen the first) and Citizen Kane.
My claim is that my judgment is superior because I’ve evaluated, and experience, the products themselves. You’ve evaluated the perspectives of others.
And you have still failed to establish how that is a determining factor. Again, is some 13 year girl's judgement superior to mine when she tells me that the latest Twilight movie is superior to Citizen Kane and I disagree with near certainty, simply because I haven't seen it and she has?
Also, critical reception and “everyone” (LOL) are subject to change. Look at Blade Runner, Pulp Fiction, and other media. They first received poor reception but are now consider great.Does the composition of the story, the level of quality, etc., change when the reception does? With this type of evaluation method, you’re saying your judgment would be as sound as mine? If I watched Blade Runner and evaluated it, determining it was good, that would be consistent. If you never experience it and go on to follow a consensus, and it then changes like they do, your evaluation alters.
This would be a major problem if I had been claiming that reception perfectly correlates with how I would personally find it to be, when the only claim I made, is that more often than not, it does. Posting examples of the rare occasions when reception drastically changes or might differ from how I would personally find something, doesn't change the fact that for the most part there is a correlation.
A judgment produced in such a manner can never be as reliable and/or as precise as a direct one.
Any such judgement is always going to be largely subjective no matter whether you base it on personal experience or other means. There will be people who played ME2 who liked it more than I expect, and some that liked it less than I expect to. Similarly, there will be people who haven't played it, who expect to like it more than I do, and some who will expect to like it less. There is no distinct range of opinions between people who have personal experience with something and people who have an expectation of something.
Are they? I’d say “accurate predictions” are pretty specific. I’d also say that you proclaiming your judgments, based on reviews and not actually playing the goddamn game, are the same as mine is pretty specific. This is what I mean, though. Why wouldn’t you feel comfortable engaging me regarding M.E. 2 and/or M.E. 3 if you actually bought how you feel regarding your assessment being as sound as mine? It shouldn’t be a problem.
That's exactly what we're doing. I believe my judgement is superior to yours for whatever reasons, that Xenogears is almost definitely vastly superior to ME 2 and 3, this is largely what we're discussing right now. What I'm saying is that this is where that discussion ends. Any meaningful comparison between Xenogears and Mass Effect will have to be restricted to Mass Effect 1, for the reasons I provided.
They would be in a better position to make the judgment, yes. The judgment itself might not be better but yours is literally based on a guess. One you might called informed but one I’d dismiss. “Oh, lots of people don’t like it and young girls love it so it’s bad” doesn’t hold up against actually reading the material. You cannot make accurate assessments until you’ve evaluated the material itself, just like you cannot “accurately predict” where a bullet has landed after a gun was shot until you look at the target.
So you've read the first book in the series and have come to the conclusion that it's pretty shallow, juvenile, light drama that doesn't really reach any real depth or intellectual heights and isn't exactly amazingly well written. You don't read the other books, but every indication there is, from the marketing, reception, the same writer etc. would all suggest that it would be pretty similar in quality and general tone and style to the first book. You really think some 11 year old girl is in a better position to judge how the second book will be according to your own personal standards, and be in a better position to say that it's superior to say, Macbeth, again according to your own personal standards, simply because you haven't read both books and she has? Regardless of all other factors?
In my opinion, Xenogears is an absolute work of art whereas Mass Effect is simply a very formulaic and generic game. Why would I trust your opinion as a better indication of how great the game is according to my standards, when it contrasts with the high probability that ME 2 and 3 really don't do all that much in the grand scheme of things to bridge the vast gap there is between random game and work of art?
Originally posted by The Renegade
Oh, we agree there. I love Xenogears' music. I don't think it's the BEST music in "videogame history" but I love it and I love Xenogears.All of this Xenogears talk makes me want to play it again.
What's your favourite out of curiosity?
Honestly, at this point it probably sounds like I really dislike ME or something lol when that really is the furthest thing from the truth and I am actually genuinely looking forward to playing the other games.
Yeah, but my point was that the soundtrack doesn't really standout, while Persona has the most creative, vibrant, eclectic soundtracks ever put to game.
ME2 is a much better game than ME1. It improves in soooo many areas and is such a great character piece. The only reason to prefer the first is simple personal taste.
On the surface maybe, in the same way a death metal soundtrack might stand out more.
Xenogears' soundtrack stands out to me and a number of other people to the point where as I said, I'd consider it by far the best videogame soundtrack ever. My appreciation for it was probably enhanced by the game and certain scenes that the music was being played to, but I definitely wouldn't call it generic. Its better if you really sit down and listen to it, and as I said, if you experienced it originally from the game (and not from some silly Let's Play Noobthys - wouldn't be surprised if you muted the whole thing for bloody sake!).
Just like Xenogears is philosophical in the same way Mein Kampf is. 😉
That sounds like you pretty much just admitted that the soundtrack by itself isn't actually that standout, you're just enough of a fanboy for the game call it the best anyway. I could use your reasoning about any soundtrack. The Persona one is also used in emotional scenes that enhance it. Also no I listened to it.