I read well over 50 of those review comments on Meta, and every low rating there was pissed off because the game was too Story centric for them, too much and RPG, and too little a combat MMO. Hmm, after 5 years of putting up with the stat junkie, group centric, gear twinkin fools from all these MMOs out there I say its ABOUT DAMN TIME SOMEONE CAME OUT WITH AN RPG MMO THAT ACTUALLY HAS A STORY WORTH PLAYING!!
All I wanted to say on this topic.
I'm sorry but this is just disgusting... you credit the story of TOR?... have you played Lotro?...
Turbine is a million times better at telling a story than what Bioware has done with TOR.
Opinion
I'm sorry but some things go past "opinion" and into common logic and being able of the simplest analytical thought.
It doesn't matter which day of release it is, especially in MMOs where open/closed betas have taken place.
Frankly, after months of complete bullshit being posted on these forums by sandbox whiners who just can't stand the fact that Bioware didn't create Pre-CU, Pre-NGE SWG 2.0, I'm about sick of the bitter, jaded gamers on this site. This site is hardly a reflection of the gaming market as a whole.
I don't give a good goddamn what site you want to use as an argument. It's stupid to call the game a failure on its first full day of official release when people are finally able to buy it for real. By that standard, World of Warcraft is a total failure because Blizzard pulled the game from store shelves and was beseiged with a variety of problems in their launch. Oh, wait. They're the biggest MMO on the market right now.
Also, if low ratings numbers and high sales mean that people aren't going to buy your game next time, then how the hell is it that Modern Warfare 3 outsold Modern Warfare 2 by such a wide margin, considering the poor numbers on Metacritic for both games?
I read well over 50 of those review comments on Meta, and every low rating there was pissed off because the game was too Story centric for them, too much and RPG, and too little a combat MMO. Hmm, after 5 years of putting up with the stat junkie, group centric, gear twinkin fools from all these MMOs out there I say its ABOUT DAMN TIME SOMEONE CAME OUT WITH AN RPG MMO THAT ACTUALLY HAS A STORY WORTH PLAYING!!
All I wanted to say on this topic.
I'm sorry but this is just disgusting... you credit the story of TOR?... have you played Lotro?...
Turbine is a million times better at telling a story than what Bioware has done with TOR.
Opinion
I'm sorry but some things go past "opinion" and into common logic and being able of the simplest analytical thought.
Frankly, after months of complete bullshit being posted on these forums by sandbox whiners who just can't stand the fact that Bioware didn't create Pre-CU, Pre-NGE SWG 2.0, I'm about sick of the bitter, jaded gamers on this site. This site is hardly a reflection of the gaming market as a whole.
Just putting it out there, but it goes both ways. The "sandbox whiners" are pretty tired of hearing how an average game is the next coming of Jesus in the MMO space. Granted, I'm exaggerating, but so are you. Also, I'm not sure what you're trying to do by bringing MMORPG.com's reflection upon the market into this dicussion. Are you simply suggesting that our opinions are invalid because they're not what you will find on other gaming sites (when actually, this same opinion is being shared in a myriad of places)?
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
"Pretty accurate" implies some understanding of shades of grey, and margin of error. Anyone who thinks Metacritic is 100% accurate would be a fool, but it is pretty accurate. It gives some indication of quality and popularity, to be taken with a grain of salt. If you choose to call it completely meaningless, you'd be just as foolish as the person calling it 100% accurate.
When it comes to games like TOR, COD and the WoW X-pacs, yeah its pretty meaningless.
Fact is TOR, COD and a plethera of other games that the users on metacritic hammered with 0s and 1s deserve a much higher score.
Being a critic and having an opinion are two different things, for instance In my opinion RIFT was a pretty poor game 7ish if you will, my critique of the game however would be much more positive, its a well polished game that has plenty of features to offer, about an 8.
Higher than 0s and 1s, yeah.. but how much higher? Isn't that what the average score is about? People give them 9s and 10s, too. Why isn't that good enough, in some cases? If the game is so good, why doesn't it have more fans to balance out the haters?
Do you really think its just haters that give extreme scores? Fans do the same thing. Normally, it averages out to something pretty close to being reasonable.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
I was reading some of the reviews. Do journalist really sometimes get paid to give positive reviews for products? How is the best way to tell when this is being done for a product?
Also, if low ratings numbers and high sales mean that people aren't going to buy your game next time, then how the hell is it that Modern Warfare 3 outsold Modern Warfare 2 by such a wide margin, considering the poor numbers on Metacritic for both games?
MW3 was hyped so much really any piece of garbage could come out with the stamp modern warfare and sell millions of units. MW3 much like this game is not much differ'nt than anything else that was released before.. MW3 is an even worse example cause it really is so similar to MW2..
OOPs wrong link, not sure why it went too KOTOR's score on that article. My bad.
Might be because it's a bit soon for real reviews. Anything prior to launch is going to be heavily biased by hype, and some sites are quicker to open the floodgates than others. and some will just let people start rating, as soon as they've preordered, way before release (e.g. Amazon?)
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
"Pretty accurate" implies some understanding of shades of grey, and margin of error. Anyone who thinks Metacritic is 100% accurate would be a fool, but it is pretty accurate. It gives some indication of quality and popularity, to be taken with a grain of salt. If you choose to call it completely meaningless, you'd be just as foolish as the person calling it 100% accurate.
When it comes to games like TOR, COD and the WoW X-pacs, yeah its pretty meaningless.
Fact is TOR, COD and a plethera of other games that the users on metacritic hammered with 0s and 1s deserve a much higher score.
Being a critic and having an opinion are two different things, for instance In my opinion RIFT was a pretty poor game 7ish if you will, my critique of the game however would be much more positive, its a well polished game that has plenty of features to offer, about an 8.
Higher than 0s and 1s, yeah.. but how much higher? Isn't that what the average score is about? People give them 9s and 10s, too. Why isn't that good enough, in some cases? If the game is so good, why doesn't it have more fans to balance out the haters?
Do you really think its just haters that give extreme scores? Fans do the same thing. Normally, it averages out to something pretty close to being reasonable.
This is why I listen to professional reviewers, not just the rantings of an unpleasable fanbase. IGN is taking the right approach by waiting well after the release date to give a numerical review, though it's pretty clear from most players that I've seen that if you come in expecting a Star Wars based themepark with high production values you're going to get exactly what you want.
Originally posted by Lawlmonster Originally posted by Distopia So to those saying this means something does a 9.2 user rating based on 3000+ votes at IGN? Still meaningless too me... Looks like IGN's score is in too. 9.0 http://pc.ign.com/articles/441/441810p1.html
They're all valid. This is highly individualized: just pick which score you like.
This WOULD be valid if it wasn't a review of a totally separate game, from eight years ago. :-P
the best part is how the negative reviews talk about the game, while most of the positive reviews are reviewing the negative reviews. I dont know if there is any significance to that; I just thought it was a funny observation.
This is why I listen to professional reviewers, not just the rantings of an unpleasable fanbase. IGN is taking the right approach by waiting well after the release date to give a numerical review, though it's pretty clear from most players that I've seen that if you come in expecting a Star Wars based themepark with high production values you're going to get exactly what you want.
Originally posted by Lawlmonster
Originally posted by Distopia
So to those saying this means something does a 9.2 user rating based on 3000+ votes at IGN? Still meaningless too me...
They're all valid. This is highly individualized: just pick which score you like.
This WOULD be valid if it wasn't a review of a totally separate game, from eight years ago. :-P
That's entirely beside the point, which is "pick which score you like, from whatever source you like". We're already doing that anyway, lets just be up front about it.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
That's entirely beside the point, which is "pick which score you like, from whatever source you like". We're already doing that anyway, lets just be up front about it.
I'll wait for a 7-7.5 to pop up.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I was reading some of the reviews. Do journalist really sometimes get paid to give positive reviews for products? How is the best way to tell when this is being done for a product?
A hint: Take all professional reviews with a grain of salt.
No, they do not get "paid" for good reviews but they will get fired, or at least silently demoted, if they write a too scathing review of a product that is advertised on their site.
I recall a recent preview of TOR which was savaged by readers for being "too sparkly-shiny" but the author did a quite clever thing: He would start his sentence as (quote from memory) "While the graphic design might seem bland, soulless and uninspired, surprisingly it works quite well!" and "While some might say that the combat is clunky and a direct ripoff of WoW, for some reason I find it enjoyable." Basically that is as much as he could safely say without getting the boot.
As for folks saying that all the negative user reviews are paid shills by the competition... oh come on, how paranoid can you get? I can accept the notion of self-censorship in a corporate environment but Bliz or ANet going and PAYING hundreds of average Joes to go 0 a competitor is just ridiculous.
I've been working in entertainment and I know how "review journalism" works. It's just intellectual prostitution. And as in any prostitution business, you have your expensive whores, madames and you've got your street-walkers and crack-hoes and whores with a heart of gold etc etc... But they are all prostitutes. Read Hunter S. Tompson and understand.
Word on the street, as always, is as close as you can get to an accurate review, and objectivity is a word without a meaning when dealing with entertainment (or art if you will.)
That's entirely beside the point, which is "pick which score you like, from whatever source you like". We're already doing that anyway, lets just be up front about it.
I'll wait for a 7-7.5 to pop up.
Lawlmonstering, I like your style.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
They're all valid. This is highly individualized: just pick which score you like.
Actually I'm I wrong there, that was KOTOR not sure why they have TOR articles linked to that score.
even still when IGNs review does come out I expect A 9 or so.. EA has some deep pockets
Yes because users that review games have absolutly no agenda.
Yeah, they do have an agenda: like or dislike of a certain game. Thinking that the competition can pay hundreds of users to write reviews dissing a game without anyone squealing is just plain ridiculous. Don't be silly.
They're all valid. This is highly individualized: just pick which score you like.
Actually I'm I wrong there, that was KOTOR not sure why they have TOR articles linked to that score.
even still when IGNs review does come out I expect A 9 or so.. EA has some deep pockets
Yes because users that review games have absolutly no agenda.
Yeah, they do have an agenda: like or dislike of a certain game. Thinking that the competition can pay hundreds of users to write reviews dissing a game without anyone squealing is just plain ridiculous. Don't be silly.
Comments
I'm sorry but some things go past "opinion" and into common logic and being able of the simplest analytical thought.
..Cake..
Frankly, after months of complete bullshit being posted on these forums by sandbox whiners who just can't stand the fact that Bioware didn't create Pre-CU, Pre-NGE SWG 2.0, I'm about sick of the bitter, jaded gamers on this site. This site is hardly a reflection of the gaming market as a whole.
I don't give a good goddamn what site you want to use as an argument. It's stupid to call the game a failure on its first full day of official release when people are finally able to buy it for real. By that standard, World of Warcraft is a total failure because Blizzard pulled the game from store shelves and was beseiged with a variety of problems in their launch. Oh, wait. They're the biggest MMO on the market right now.
Also, if low ratings numbers and high sales mean that people aren't going to buy your game next time, then how the hell is it that Modern Warfare 3 outsold Modern Warfare 2 by such a wide margin, considering the poor numbers on Metacritic for both games?
Tolken>Bioware>Turbine
Thats my opinion
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Just putting it out there, but it goes both ways. The "sandbox whiners" are pretty tired of hearing how an average game is the next coming of Jesus in the MMO space. Granted, I'm exaggerating, but so are you. Also, I'm not sure what you're trying to do by bringing MMORPG.com's reflection upon the market into this dicussion. Are you simply suggesting that our opinions are invalid because they're not what you will find on other gaming sites (when actually, this same opinion is being shared in a myriad of places)?
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
OOPs wrong link, not sure why it went too KOTOR's score on that article. My bad.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Higher than 0s and 1s, yeah.. but how much higher? Isn't that what the average score is about? People give them 9s and 10s, too. Why isn't that good enough, in some cases? If the game is so good, why doesn't it have more fans to balance out the haters?
Do you really think its just haters that give extreme scores? Fans do the same thing. Normally, it averages out to something pretty close to being reasonable.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
They're all valid. This is highly individualized: just pick which score you like.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
MW3 was hyped so much really any piece of garbage could come out with the stamp modern warfare and sell millions of units. MW3 much like this game is not much differ'nt than anything else that was released before.. MW3 is an even worse example cause it really is so similar to MW2..
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/339443/Video-FollowUp-Guide-For-Enhancing-Graphics-and-Performance-in-SWTORSorry-still-Nvidia-Only.html
Actually I'm I wrong there, that was KOTOR not sure why they have TOR articles linked to that score.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Might be because it's a bit soon for real reviews. Anything prior to launch is going to be heavily biased by hype, and some sites are quicker to open the floodgates than others. and some will just let people start rating, as soon as they've preordered, way before release (e.g. Amazon?)
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
5.2 isn't reasonable for TOR and you know it.
FFS http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/vanguard-saga-of-heroes Vanguard is better then TOR apperantly.
And IMO 9 isn't all that out there for a game like TOR anymore then a 6 is.
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
even still when IGNs review does come out I expect A 9 or so.. EA has some deep pockets
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/339443/Video-FollowUp-Guide-For-Enhancing-Graphics-and-Performance-in-SWTORSorry-still-Nvidia-Only.html
Yes because users that review games have absolutly no agenda.
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
This is why I listen to professional reviewers, not just the rantings of an unpleasable fanbase. IGN is taking the right approach by waiting well after the release date to give a numerical review, though it's pretty clear from most players that I've seen that if you come in expecting a Star Wars based themepark with high production values you're going to get exactly what you want.
They're all valid. This is highly individualized: just pick which score you like.This WOULD be valid if it wasn't a review of a totally separate game, from eight years ago. :-P
True, I'm sure it will be 8.5 or 9. I think IGN has those scores in a MMO review macro.
Plus in his review thus far the IGN writer has been a little fanboish even by my standards.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Any example?Philosophy of MMO Game Design
That's entirely beside the point, which is "pick which score you like, from whatever source you like". We're already doing that anyway, lets just be up front about it.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
ha.. it would seem that way
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/339443/Video-FollowUp-Guide-For-Enhancing-Graphics-and-Performance-in-SWTORSorry-still-Nvidia-Only.html
I'll wait for a 7-7.5 to pop up.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
A hint: Take all professional reviews with a grain of salt.
No, they do not get "paid" for good reviews but they will get fired, or at least silently demoted, if they write a too scathing review of a product that is advertised on their site.
I recall a recent preview of TOR which was savaged by readers for being "too sparkly-shiny" but the author did a quite clever thing: He would start his sentence as (quote from memory) "While the graphic design might seem bland, soulless and uninspired, surprisingly it works quite well!" and "While some might say that the combat is clunky and a direct ripoff of WoW, for some reason I find it enjoyable." Basically that is as much as he could safely say without getting the boot.
As for folks saying that all the negative user reviews are paid shills by the competition... oh come on, how paranoid can you get? I can accept the notion of self-censorship in a corporate environment but Bliz or ANet going and PAYING hundreds of average Joes to go 0 a competitor is just ridiculous.
I've been working in entertainment and I know how "review journalism" works. It's just intellectual prostitution. And as in any prostitution business, you have your expensive whores, madames and you've got your street-walkers and crack-hoes and whores with a heart of gold etc etc... But they are all prostitutes. Read Hunter S. Tompson and understand.
Word on the street, as always, is as close as you can get to an accurate review, and objectivity is a word without a meaning when dealing with entertainment (or art if you will.)
Lawlmonstering, I like your style.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Yeah, they do have an agenda: like or dislike of a certain game. Thinking that the competition can pay hundreds of users to write reviews dissing a game without anyone squealing is just plain ridiculous. Don't be silly.
Everyone's a professional reviewer.
Do I need to spell it out?
Wait someone already did.
http://games.ign.com/articles/121/1212865p1.html
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.