The question is why does a GW2 fan/SWToR hater seems to like reviews that are mostly negative? Why oh why?
Only the Rift fanbois missing, what could they be doing?
Why do you lump everyone into categories.
I like good games. I don't discriminate by labels and even if a certain type of game (RTS, for example) isn't my favorite - I can still recognize a really good RTS and enjoy it, too.
Having said that... I give the game a 6.5 or 7 out of 10..... 3 stars out of 5.... C+ rating. I'm also of the opinion that a sizeable majority of the players will have an opinion similar to mine and though the game will entertain them for a bit... it really hasn't done anything well enough to keep most people around beyond the appearance of 'the next best game' - and given that we have D3... maybe GW2... ME3... even Secret World... and I'm sure others... coming soon. I think this game will begin the typical sizeable subscriber dropoff at just about the same pace as other MMOs.
The review is incomplete, not entirely inaccurate though. The writer is a self-confessed WoW fanboi though, so it wasn't surprising that the review reads so negatively.
The score is accurate though, like WoW at launch, 8 out of 10 is fine for SWTOR. With some polish and improvements it could make it to 9, but in its current state there is just to many "user-friendly" features missing.
Originally posted by Loke666 Originally posted by Gomez757 The question is why does a GW2 fan/SWToR hater seems to like reviews that are mostly negative? Why oh why? Only the Rift fanbois missing, what could they be doing?
The reviewer whined a lot, that is true but 8 of 10 seems like a rather fair score (maybe it should get 8,5 or so but fine). Most reviewers seems to dish out 10 of 10 for surprisingly many game and that is a bit suspicious to me, last time I played a game I would give a 10 was Biowares Neverwinter nights, I think I could give maybe 5 games that score in the toime from when I got my C-64 in 1984 to today... No MMO have sadly been close to a 10, they don't have that kind of polish in my book so I can't give any of them better score than max 9. Good score, bad review.
I play also for long time games sinds 80s and i can say only few for me where worth 10 and got a 10 on many gamemags at the time or on famous famitsu a 40/40 Metal gear solid 1 PSX Zelda:OoT N64 and Soul Calibur Sega Dreamcast.
Sinds 1986 famitsu gave 17 games a 40/40 but i dont agree with Skyrim that got also a 40/40, all tho im a huge fan of the game, it don't deserves a 10/10 its more like 92/100 the score that magazine Gameplay gave from belgium with a very accurate review in my opinion.
But its all relative to taste and game experience the thinks its amazing game other hates it. Ratings are not 100% accurate that game is great or sucks.
Hope to build full AMD system RYZEN/VEGA/AM4!!!
MB:Asus V De Luxe z77 CPU:Intell Icore7 3770k GPU: AMD Fury X(waiting for BIG VEGA 10 or 11 HBM2?(bit unclear now)) MEMORY:Corsair PLAT.DDR3 1866MHZ 16GB PSU:Corsair AX1200i OS:Windows 10 64bit
The same guy gives Cataclysm full points at Eurogamer (10/10), which just does not fly with me. It was more op-ed piece than a review. His main assumption seems to be that nobody should be allowed to do a themepark MMO anymore because Blizzard did so stellar job at it seven years ago. Why then is not the same argument applied to other genres as well, like FPSs and real-time strategy games. It's not like Blizzard inveted the wheel in SC2 for example...
It is a relief these sort of reviews still can be found.
And Oli Welsh is more or less on the same line what I was thinking, all the way when I started following in 2008 about what Bioware is doing here. And what it has been doing with all the games: making good ( but ) standard games.
And as he points out, Bioware had no experience in making a MMO and it shows. Off course he has his personal view, I find it rather refreshingly more interesting then some. But it never gets postive to be positive or negative to be negative, there is a reason, an argument behind it. And I very much are in favor of a review who puts the game in light of the ongoing evolution of the business sector.
His comparison with WoW strikes me as a question marks behind the hyped "this is going to break Blizzards supremacy". But since WoW has become the unwritten standard you can't ignore it.,I'll leave his notice that its prime time is over on his account. I never really liked WoW myself anyway.
All in all he seems to acknowledge that BW missed out a chance to come up with an answer for a new elan for the mmorpg class of games. And he seems to think online rpg's are in need of such. Interesting view.
Anyway ... his questions on the end of the review are very much also my questions.
Ah, I feared all reason was gone with SWTOR. Thank you OP.
Rated M for Mature - May contain content inappropriate for children
To me, a launch score mainly addresses the leveling experience. WOW and SWTOR should score highly in that regard. They both had two factions full of content. SWTOR offers more than WOW did pvp wise as there were no pvp ranks or gear to get at launch. SWTOR offers a much more engaging leveling experience.
WOW offered two continents of questing which allowed you to level the same class to cap with almost no overlapping quests. I'm pretty sure you had to go to EPL to finish leveling until they released silithus.
Both games garner a 9.0/10 to 9.5/10 from me for the sheer amount of content on release. You can't cut the score for SWTOR because they had a bigger budget and you expected more. All MMOs are based on the same scale, with differentiation going to theme park and sandbox.
What themepark MMOs have had a better product at launch? Not AoC or Warhammer or LOTRO.
Iyts fun to see how the reviewer compares it to Typically WoW features (as he says himself) without realising that most of these where around long before WoW. That certainly makes him loose some credibillity in my book.
He introduces the article by stating why he draws comparisons to WoW (which he doesn't have to, it's kinda obvious), and he specifically points out that many of these MMO tropes existed before WoW. No credibility loss on his account.
Really nice and informative review which addresses alot of aspects of the game. Personally I would give it 7/10 as the MMORPG part of this game is somewhat weak with too much focus on instanced storylines. But as a 1-2 month PvE game it is quite alright.
PvP on the other hand feels like something tacked on without much depth but that is normal for Themeparks, unfourtunately.
Comments
Why do you lump everyone into categories.
I like good games. I don't discriminate by labels and even if a certain type of game (RTS, for example) isn't my favorite - I can still recognize a really good RTS and enjoy it, too.
Having said that... I give the game a 6.5 or 7 out of 10..... 3 stars out of 5.... C+ rating. I'm also of the opinion that a sizeable majority of the players will have an opinion similar to mine and though the game will entertain them for a bit... it really hasn't done anything well enough to keep most people around beyond the appearance of 'the next best game' - and given that we have D3... maybe GW2... ME3... even Secret World... and I'm sure others... coming soon. I think this game will begin the typical sizeable subscriber dropoff at just about the same pace as other MMOs.
The review is incomplete, not entirely inaccurate though. The writer is a self-confessed WoW fanboi though, so it wasn't surprising that the review reads so negatively.
The score is accurate though, like WoW at launch, 8 out of 10 is fine for SWTOR. With some polish and improvements it could make it to 9, but in its current state there is just to many "user-friendly" features missing.
Most reviewers seems to dish out 10 of 10 for surprisingly many game and that is a bit suspicious to me, last time I played a game I would give a 10 was Biowares Neverwinter nights, I think I could give maybe 5 games that score in the toime from when I got my C-64 in 1984 to today... No MMO have sadly been close to a 10, they don't have that kind of polish in my book so I can't give any of them better score than max 9.
Good score, bad review.
I play also for long time games sinds 80s and i can say only few for me where worth 10 and got a 10 on many gamemags at the time or on famous famitsu a 40/40 Metal gear solid 1 PSX Zelda:OoT N64 and Soul Calibur Sega Dreamcast.
Sinds 1986 famitsu gave 17 games a 40/40 but i dont agree with Skyrim that got also a 40/40, all tho im a huge fan of the game, it don't deserves a 10/10 its more like 92/100 the score that magazine Gameplay gave from belgium with a very accurate review in my opinion.
But its all relative to taste and game experience the thinks its amazing game other hates it. Ratings are not 100% accurate that game is great or sucks.
Hope to build full AMD system RYZEN/VEGA/AM4!!!
MB:Asus V De Luxe z77
CPU:Intell Icore7 3770k
GPU: AMD Fury X(waiting for BIG VEGA 10 or 11 HBM2?(bit unclear now))
MEMORY:Corsair PLAT.DDR3 1866MHZ 16GB
PSU:Corsair AX1200i
OS:Windows 10 64bit
The same guy gives Cataclysm full points at Eurogamer (10/10), which just does not fly with me. It was more op-ed piece than a review. His main assumption seems to be that nobody should be allowed to do a themepark MMO anymore because Blizzard did so stellar job at it seven years ago. Why then is not the same argument applied to other genres as well, like FPSs and real-time strategy games. It's not like Blizzard inveted the wheel in SC2 for example...
Here is his glowing Cataclysm review:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-12-24-world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-review
But to be totally fair:
EG did give WoW 8/10 at start as well:
http://www .eurogamer.net/articles/r_wow_pc
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
It is a relief these sort of reviews still can be found.
And Oli Welsh is more or less on the same line what I was thinking, all the way when I started following in 2008 about what Bioware is doing here. And what it has been doing with all the games: making good ( but ) standard games.
And as he points out, Bioware had no experience in making a MMO and it shows. Off course he has his personal view, I find it rather refreshingly more interesting then some. But it never gets postive to be positive or negative to be negative, there is a reason, an argument behind it. And I very much are in favor of a review who puts the game in light of the ongoing evolution of the business sector.
His comparison with WoW strikes me as a question marks behind the hyped "this is going to break Blizzards supremacy". But since WoW has become the unwritten standard you can't ignore it.,I'll leave his notice that its prime time is over on his account. I never really liked WoW myself anyway.
All in all he seems to acknowledge that BW missed out a chance to come up with an answer for a new elan for the mmorpg class of games. And he seems to think online rpg's are in need of such. Interesting view.
Anyway ... his questions on the end of the review are very much also my questions.
Ah, I feared all reason was gone with SWTOR. Thank you OP.
Rated M for Mature - May contain content inappropriate for children
To me, a launch score mainly addresses the leveling experience. WOW and SWTOR should score highly in that regard. They both had two factions full of content. SWTOR offers more than WOW did pvp wise as there were no pvp ranks or gear to get at launch. SWTOR offers a much more engaging leveling experience.
WOW offered two continents of questing which allowed you to level the same class to cap with almost no overlapping quests. I'm pretty sure you had to go to EPL to finish leveling until they released silithus.
Both games garner a 9.0/10 to 9.5/10 from me for the sheer amount of content on release. You can't cut the score for SWTOR because they had a bigger budget and you expected more. All MMOs are based on the same scale, with differentiation going to theme park and sandbox.
What themepark MMOs have had a better product at launch? Not AoC or Warhammer or LOTRO.
He introduces the article by stating why he draws comparisons to WoW (which he doesn't have to, it's kinda obvious), and he specifically points out that many of these MMO tropes existed before WoW. No credibility loss on his account.
Really nice and informative review which addresses alot of aspects of the game. Personally I would give it 7/10 as the MMORPG part of this game is somewhat weak with too much focus on instanced storylines. But as a 1-2 month PvE game it is quite alright.
PvP on the other hand feels like something tacked on without much depth but that is normal for Themeparks, unfourtunately.
My gaming blog