Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Aion: Review
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
I think it quite likely that the environment texture issue in Aion will get addressed. And that is a bad reflection on what their priorities are. The game already looks great, a texture upgrade is hardly needed, but players and MMO’s are obsessed with graphics. The paucity of non standard quests and the random middle level pvp are far bigger issues, just look at the posts on them. But yes, quite likely a texture patch will be seen as a priority!
Everyone complaining about graphics needs to remember the fact that part of the reason some other MMOs that claimed they would be WoW killers flopped (besides sucking) was because the graphics requirements were too high for most computers, so a lot of people couldn't run them, losing a lot of potential customers. The casual gamer doesn't make sure he always has a ton of ram, or the newest graphics card, but MMO companies still want to reach out to them, because they generate revenue, and stylized graphics and low system requirements are two such ways of accomplishing this.
Yeah #20 for Aion is about right. I would put Atlantica Online somewhere same with Runes of Magic - in the end of the list. While AO has some nice innovations like mercenaries and tactical combat system - the game still remains grind after all. Have to agree though that its better than Runes of Magic. Played almost all the games in the list and this is about right where they should be on the list.
I was actually stupid enough to subscribe to Aion for a year. Yeah I got a better deal, cheaper monthly sub overall but I am already struggling to stay in the game for longer than 1 hour.
Aion does have some nice landscapes and if you turn it all up and add some x4 Antialiasing - in some places game is quite pretty. But its all about the taste. I personally like landscapes graphics in say Risen or LOTRO much better. They look realistic comparing to cartoonish WoW style of Aion landscapes. Then again some people they are not that picky.
Its enough for them to have some pretty flowers here and there and green trees with blue water to make all the difference. I am one of the picky ones and landscape graphics throw me off in Aion. I am trying to ignore it though but some unpolished places like couple of pictures that other people posted they are really ugly. Overall game is ok, but Aion still has a lot of issues to treat it as a good game overall. Trust me after you get to 50 - there will be little left to say positive about the game. Grind, lack of GM in game support, channels are all full of goldseller adds, goldsellers sit in Pondemonium - central city of Aion on scripted personal houses and nobody does ANYTHING about that. Daily messages about hacked web sites and stolen accounts - this all just serves as a huge discouragement.
I am waiting for games to come out for Xbox 360 and PS3. That will be so much more fun than boring Aion. Too much hype and simply very little result. I don't give Aion much chance. As more people will hit 25 as more of them realize that Aion is just another Asian grind cookie cutter nothing special and in some places ugly and poorly supported game. And then like in puff of smoke Aion will become one of the games that will be talked about as didn't hold up to expectations.
This article sounds like either the writer didn't play the game long enough to see the boring and ugly side of the game or he just likes the whole concept and excited about the Aion like some other people. This game didn't really do it for me. I still consider LOTRO - the best MMORPG out there and I don't really care about what WoW, WAR or Aion can offer for PvP as RvR or PvPvE or whatever.
I've played several characters up to level 12-14 so far and even though I really wanted to like Aion, I just got bored after awhile, I know some people would say , " Yeah but you have play to X level before it gets good etc" but if a game has'nt hooked me in in some way after 10 to 15 levels well I dont think it ever will.
That being said I do hope Aion is a succes and maybe I'll jump back in at some point to give it another shot when I dont have anything else to play.
I dont really disaggree with the score really, because I know tons of peeps will love Aion, guess its just not for me is all .
I agree that if a MMO has not hooked you into playing it in the first fifteen or twenty levels then it is not a MMO for you.
Actually the most fun are first 20-25 levels. After that you get to grind a lot. So if game didn't do it for you during first 15 levels on multiple classes - it won't be any better later on. After 25 you can do Abyss PvP, but its all group based. Usually when people go to Abyss or Rift they go as raid and it all ends up raid versus 1, because thats the fastest way to kill. Thats how people usually farm Abyss points. There are other things like fortresses and artifacts. But those are really big scale PvP battles. It still ends up being raid versus 1.
A lot of deaths out there and lag because there are hundreds of people fighting against each other, just a crazy chaos. It may be fun for a while. But its not thought through content. So it just ends up as a mass PvP slaughter. There are some siege weapons, you have to buy them I think for a lot of money, then attack fortress and go in and kill people inside. But again, I tell you that its just not working the way devs thought it will. Its not DaOC. Also little by little people will drop off, cause game is hardly fun after 25. It is fun for a few more levels but after that you realize that all you have in this game is grind and PvP. When SWTOR is out this game will most likely die.
Granted at tewenty-nine the group aspect does kick in big time but at that level you have Eracus Temple, at thirty to thirty-five there is the Fire Temple, at thirty-five to forty there is the Aether lab. In the forties i'm sure there are two or three instance just to play in that level and when you reach near forty-five to fifty there are the Dark Poeta and dregion instances as well as the upper abyss fortresses with their instances too. There are the crafting recipes that you get from them also.
Can't deny that there is a grind after level thrity, but it's not that bad, it follows what most MMO's do when your nearing end game level.
Your kidding right? Let me guess some WoW person wrote this. Really? Runes of Magic and Ryzom...more importantly Requiem? The same Requiem that got horrible reviews? 6.5 at N4G, 6.2 Gamespot, Gamezone 6.5, PC Gamer 70....Give me a break. What "players" made this decision? What is the source for these review scores you posted?
Your kidding right? Let me guess some WoW person wrote this. Really? Runes of Magic and Ryzom...more importantly Requiem? The same Requiem that got horrible reviews? 6.5 at N4G, 6.2 Gamespot, Gamezone 6.5, PC Gamer 70....Give me a break. What "players" made this decision? What is the source for these review scores you posted?
This is why you guys aren't reviewers.
And he posted about the USER ratings. Not official ones. The users of Requiem, must like requiem. That's why it's rated so high. THAT'S why they play the game!
you're hilarious.
1 instance for every 5 levels... And you're saying thats fun?
Come on... Asian developers - nothing else needs to be added. I wish Aion was developed by Turbine or Bioware. Game would be so MUCH more fun... Game even has a FEEL of Asian grind fest. I don't know what is it about Asian games. Its like they have very little creativity.
/sarcasm on
/sarcasm offActually...let me do better than that.
Boomtown 10/14/09 Review 8 out of 10
1UP 10/13/09 Review C
GameFocus 10/13/09 Review 9.3 out of 10
ImpulseGamer 10/12/09 Review 9.1 out of 10
AceGamez 10/09/09 Review 7 out of 10
IGN 10/08/09 Review 8.5 out of 10
Gameplanet 10/08/09 Review 9 out of 10
Gamer Limit 10/08/09 Review 8.5 out of 10
Cheat Code Central 10/02/09 Review 3.7 out of 5
NZGamer 09/30/09 Review 8.8 out of 10
Megacritic Review 81 out of 100
RPGFan Review 90 out of 100
Gamespot Review 8.5 out of 10
I could go all day. The overall point here is out of all the reviews I've looked at (which is alot more than what's even posted here) 1UP gave it a "C".
Your kidding right? Let me guess some WoW person wrote this. Really? Runes of Magic and Ryzom...more importantly Requiem? The same Requiem that got horrible reviews? 6.5 at N4G, 6.2 Gamespot, Gamezone 6.5, PC Gamer 70....Give me a break. What "players" made this decision? What is the source for these review scores you posted?
This is why you guys aren't reviewers.
And he posted about the USER ratings. Not official ones. The users of Requiem, must like requiem. That's why it's rated so high. THAT'S why they play the game!
you're hilarious.
No you're hilarious. I asked where the "users" scores came from? Did they come from a review? Did he go through each games forums and do a poll? Where did the information come from?
Granted at tewenty-nine the group aspect does kick in big time but at that level you have Eracus Temple, at thirty to thirty-five there is the Fire Temple, at thirty-five to forty there is the Aether lab. In the forties i'm sure there are two or three instance just to play in that level and when you reach near forty-five to fifty there are the Dark Poeta and dregion instances as well as the upper abyss fortresses with their instances too. There are the crafting recipes that you get from them also.
Can't deny that there is a grind after level thrity, but it's not that bad, it follows what most MMO's do when your nearing end game level.
1 instance for every 5 levels... And you're saying thats fun?
Come on... Asian developers - nothing else needs to be added.
Can you name several games that had more before their first expansion?
Seems to me that I can't recall a game that had more per level or 2?
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Granted at tewenty-nine the group aspect does kick in big time but at that level you have Eracus Temple, at thirty to thirty-five there is the Fire Temple, at thirty-five to forty there is the Aether lab. In the forties i'm sure there are two or three instance just to play in that level and when you reach near forty-five to fifty there are the Dark Poeta and dregion instances as well as the upper abyss fortresses with their instances too. There are the crafting recipes that you get from them also.
Can't deny that there is a grind after level thrity, but it's not that bad, it follows what most MMO's do when your nearing end game level.
1 instance for every 5 levels... And you're saying thats fun?
Come on... Asian developers - nothing else needs to be added.
Can you name several games that had more before their first expansion?
Seems to me that I can't recall a game that had more per level or 2?
You raise a good point but then so does the poster that you are replying to. On one hand I can't recall too many games that had a ton of instances before they put out an expansion. On the other hand you would expect more from a game that is competing in today's environment. I'd expect a new game coming into the scene to already have thought ahead and created several instances even before their first expansion.
Considering it's only been out for a year, yes as do a few other that find it fun enough. Flight combat is a creative design and so is so is the gathering of aether, then there are the unique transformations in game, and the title uses with stats imbedded.
Don't think either company would have done better than it is now, fun is still subjective to each and every person out there and only they can say what is fun and what is not, so far all the servers seem to have a healthy population of players and no major decreases in population yet.
I don't mind that there's a steep leveling curve tbh. I try to view a game as a game rather than as a job to do. I'll just continue to play casually and enjoy it while I do it.
The point is not that other review sites gave it good reviews at times. The point is that this site gave it the best review it has ever given an MMO. And this MMO is quite simply not even close to that good.
For instance:
RPGFan gave Aion a 90. They gave World of Warcraft a 95.
IGN gave Aion an 85. They gave EQ2 an 85. They gave 9+ for WoW and expasions. They gave LotRO an 8.6. They gave Guild Wars a 9. They gave WAR a 9.
Metacritic ended up with an 8.1 overall for Aion. They gave EQ2 an 8.3. They gave LotRO an 8.6. WoW is over 9. Guild Wars 8.9.
You can go to every single site and do this. And you can find more games on these sites that are above Aion. This site is the only one that is saying that Aion is the best MMO ever made through it's overall "official" score. And it's embarrassing. Unless of course they come out and say that Aion is the finest MMO to ever be produced. But then they would lose even more credibility.
The point is not that other review sites gave it good reviews at times. The point is that this site gave it the best review it has ever given an MMO. And this MMO is quite simply not even close to that good.
For instance:
RPGFan gave Aion a 90. They gave World of Warcraft a 95.
IGN gave Aion an 85. They gave EQ2 an 85. They gave 9+ for WoW and expasions. They gave LotRO an 8.6. They gave Guild Wars a 9. They gave WAR a 9.
Metacritic ended up with an 8.1 overall for Aion. They gave EQ2 an 8.3. They gave LotRO an 8.6. WoW is over 9. Guild Wars 8.9.
You can go to every single site and do this. And you can find more games on these sites that are above Aion. This site is the only one that is saying that Aion is the best MMO ever made through it's overall "official" score. And it's embarrassing. Unless of course they come out and say that Aion is the finest MMO to ever be produced. But then they would lose even more credibility.
No this site is saying that aion had one of the best polished launches.
MMORPG.com review a game when it's launched it's probably if they made a re-review of wow and lotro with their new expansions the rate would be higher but here the rating means most how was the game launched when released.
The point is not that other review sites gave it good reviews at times. The point is that this site gave it the best review it has ever given an MMO. And this MMO is quite simply not even close to that good.
For instance:
RPGFan gave Aion a 90. They gave World of Warcraft a 95.
IGN gave Aion an 85. They gave EQ2 an 85. They gave 9+ for WoW and expasions. They gave LotRO an 8.6. They gave Guild Wars a 9. They gave WAR a 9.
Metacritic ended up with an 8.1 overall for Aion. They gave EQ2 an 8.3. They gave LotRO an 8.6. WoW is over 9. Guild Wars 8.9.
You can go to every single site and do this. And you can find more games on these sites that are above Aion. This site is the only one that is saying that Aion is the best MMO ever made through it's overall "official" score. And it's embarrassing. Unless of course they come out and say that Aion is the finest MMO to ever be produced. But then they would lose even more credibility.
No this site is saying that aion had one of the best polished launches.
MMORPG.com review a game when it's launched it's probably if they made a re-review of wow and lotro with their new expansions the rate would be higher but here the rating means most how was the game launched when released.
A smooth launch is all it takes to be tops?
You are not thinking clearly.
A smooth launch is all it takes to be tops?
You are not thinking clearly.
Aion had a smooth launch and what it promised was already there working, yes there were small stuff here and there to fix and they still need to fix bots and gold spam problem but you could play normally if you could get pass the queue time.
While some other games (better not name them or some could QQ) didn't work well and took weeks to fix before people could play the game well.
For me if you can launch a game that has very few bugs/glitches at launch it already deserves a higher rate then one that took weeks or a month to fix before it could be playable.
A smooth launch is all it takes to be tops?
You are not thinking clearly.
Aion had a smooth launch and what it promised was already there working, yes there were small stuff here and there to fix and they still need to fix bots and gold spam problem but you could play normally if you could get pass the queue time.
While some other games (better not name them or some could QQ) didn't work well and took weeks to fix before people could play the game well.
For me if you can launch a game that has very few bugs/glitches at launch it already deserves a higher rate then one that took weeks or a month to fix before it could be playable.
To me, in order to hold the #1 spot anywhere you need to have a lot more than a smooth launch. Actually, a smooth launch should in my opinion have absolutely nothing to do with the rating on a game.
Even if a reviewer was giving a review and wanted to include LAUNCH as one of his categories, the other categories would bring the overall number down. There really is nothing #1 about this game at all. Not even graphics.
kind of surprised by the rating, 8.7 seems pretty high for this game. Felt more like a 7 to me, the graphics are great, the classes are kind of interesting but the grinding later on is a huge detraction for me. Its basically the cap that I hit and then stop playing because grinding on mobs is dull without some kind of shade of questing.
Got that right
A smooth launch is rather easy when the game was already out for a year in the east.
I wonder if anyone could tell us how well the original launch went?
As a matter of fact, I even had to re-read through mmorpg.com's review of World of Warcraft to figure out the reason for the score they gave. The overall review marks are high, most notably factors such as "fun" and "graphics" get 10 from the reviewer. But. There are two categories that makes the game plummet: service and performance. The main gripes of the reviewer are queues to most popular servers, occassional crashes and poor service, as illustrated by the quotes below.
"Another way Blizzard could improve greatly is in the area of customer service."
"Beyond that, there are just some bad decisions, like the recent banning of a number of people because of speed hacks and gold dupes. No doubt there were many cheaters in that group, but several innocent players were caught in the guilty-until-proven-innocent approach Blizzard took, including one player banned for having too much gold."
These were actually very much true at the time of the WoW review and made the review a well-balanced one. The decisions Blizzard made with the game at its early stages are imitated by NCSoft almost to the letter. You could end up being randomly disconnected and looking at your desktop picture, there is next to no customer service and the mass bannings done were using rather grotesque means to alleviate the botting problem. These same actions did affect the score of WoW, and most rightly so. Hence, the only review that needs to be re-done is that of Aion for the reviewer really can't give better score to graphics and fun than his WoW-reviewing comrade.
Edit: Typos, those poor bastards.