First we have the game design released by the developers.
People didn't like their design and spoke up.
Others said "how can you not like the design before you play it"?
Then People start playing it in Beta.
Bad reviews come out despite the NDA.
Others said that "when the NDA is dropped the good reviews will come".
Then the NDA is dropped for the press for the first 15 levels.
The press say is isn't a great game.
Others say "they are only reviewing the first 15 levels, the rest of the game is great".
Anyone see a pattern here? Anyone want to guess what will happen when levels 16 and up are free of an NDA completely?
Honestly so far from ppl that actually enjoyed beta I've heard mostly that after level 15 game does not change so if someone does not enjoy the game this far they should drop it at this point.
Also I find it weird a bit:
- WAR mixed but I'd say generally in favour of the game
- Aion - same, possibly even more in favour of the game
- SWTOR - no comments here for obvious reason
- GW2 - same as above
- Rift - in general good, some claiming that refreshing and so on
- TESO - pretty much in every single review in past few days says all bad things. (I found exactly one where atuthor did admit that he enjoyed playing beta). Awful, boring, dusgusting, not immersive, shallow, just like any other - name it.
It's actually funny because getting player's reactions I find it that their reactions as a constrast are as always mixed - some hate it, some not decided and some loved betas so far - nothing different than in case of any other ne MMORPG on the market. No conspiration theory, just an observation.
Been on the MMO scene for a very long time, and I've seen companies like MMORPG.com and other review sites suck the **** of games that have been terrible, just because they have big names.
Age of Conan, Warhammer and Guild Wars 2 being the most notable. Anyone who was an MMO veteran when these games were releasing probably remembers thinking these games would be the next WoW, or the next Jesus Christ, etc. That's what the review companies were spouting.
And then you actually got to play the games... and yeah, we know the history.
My point is, why is it all of a sudden a game like ESO, which I thoroughly enjoy and think is so much better than anything that has released in years, is getting such terrible reviews, while games which almost no one enjoyed - received such AWESOME reviews?
Read all that is yellow. Read it a few times. Im talking specifically about GW2 here, not AoC and not Warhammer.
You are saying that almost no one enjoyed GW2, and at the same time you are saying that you personally enjoyed TESO, and you are comparing those two things. Everything is wrong with your comparison. GW2 servers are always heavy load, and full of people. Do i think TESO will be successful? if they fix it, yes. But stop writing this kind of stuff making it sound like your personal opinion and preference is bigger than the facts.
You think almost no one enjoyed GW2 because you read the people who dont like it and ignore anything about the people who do enjoy it because bad things always show up first. You gotta be more realistic. Its fine to dislike games, its not ok to make up stuff based on your own opinions to pass them as facts.
Originally posted by jpnz There is definitely a coordinate smear campaign that includes all mass media and all YouTube personalities. It spans thousands of people and countries. Thanks Obama!
Now where is my tin foil hat?
Ohhh, that would make me angry. Here I am disliking the game for free when I could get paid for it!
I have see so called press lie their asses off about a piece of shit game to get us to buy it, but this is the first time I've seen press lying their asses off about a great game to try and get us not to buy it.
Frankly I think it is time for game devs to start re-evaluating who truly deserves to be considered press.
I think Angry Joe really states the real issue here. The ENTITLED mentality.
Basically he states...
If ESO was a FREE game with this awesome engine, fantastic combat, superior graphics, and huge huge world, this would be the BEST game EVER!!
But because it's not FREE it sucks....
This whole entitled mentality that has become so prevalent really pisses me off.
ESO is costing them a rather sizable investment, to provide a quality staff, and NOT to pink slip the whole dev team right after launch like EVERY F2P game has done costs money.
If you do not like it then go play one of the 100's of F2P games that you are bored with in two weeks, or raising hell because they have no support staff and you have to wait weeks to get an email answered.
Tons of us are excited over ESO and even more excited to be getting back to a sub based model so we do not have to put up with gold spammers, botters, hackers, chat spamming idiots, and entitled kiddies.
Yep. Considered press. What they are reviewing the game against.
And what they are reviewing the game against is a subscription based mmo. And the bulk of them are coming up with - I wouldn't call them bad reviews but simply so-so reviews. As you say Angry Joe said it would be great as a F2P game.
So basically AJs problem - and maybe some of the other reviewers as well - is the payment method. Now you talk about an entitled mentality. Well I think people should pay for games but they should also get what they pay for.
Zenimax - like lots of devs before them - are saying the sub is to provide new content. Yet it won't work out that way. The sub will hurt initial sales big time - no one expects TESO to sell tens of millions. Yet because of the investment it probably needs to sell high millions at least and then more still to make a profit.
Pick your own numbers. If the game cost $150M and they make $30 from every sale that means they need 5M sales just to recover the cost. Ouch. Yes the base game costs c. $60 but in most countries 20% of that is tax and then there are retail or online costs e.g. Amazon's share, Visa / Paypal etc. Pick your own numbers but they need big sales. And a sub hurts sales.
And when it doesn't sell 5M+ - because of the sub - what happens? Pink slips as you say. Your posts are probably helping to doom the long term future of the game. It will survive for sure with a loyal fanbase but not as it should.
The alternative. Doesn't have to be F2P. B2P + regular DLC. And if they don't have the DLC drops on day 1 reduce the size of the base game. cut 50% and simply sell a huge game rather than a gigantic one; sell the rest as 4 or 5 DLC drops at $15 or whatever. Doubles the price of the game in essence!
The history of all recent sub-based launches - going back years now - have ended with devs being moved. Maybe to a different game or given a pink slip.
And if it was B2P I think the reviews would be much more positive. And Skyrim like sales would be possible.
First off thank you for the well thought out intelligently constructed rejoinder.
You have some very good points, that truly do come down to box sales numbers. Hopefully those numbers are better than projected.
If not, I do see exactly what you are saying. I do not really see the dlc option being feasible considering the size and scope of the base game they are giving us with the initial purchase.
They very well may have to supplement revenue with a cash shop addition.
I really would not be happy about it, but I would understand it and probably support it as well.
to put it simply, you can NEVER please the people on these forms. They will always complain about every single game, even if it's amazing. I don't regret my CE pre-order either.
I also decided today to get the imperial addition,its not necessary you get racial skills not class skills that are only for the imperial so that's not a big difference.
only thing I am not happy about and if people knew about this 6moths ago like when they went in a uproar about first and 3rd person view is that you cant swim underwater and that is just stuped all games have that so that is going to make the game feel a little cheapish but all and all I loved it.
its not a mmo its like skyrim online whish is mush better.
Been on the MMO scene for a very long time, and I've seen companies like MMORPG.com and other review sites suck the **** of games that have been terrible, just because they have big names.
Age of Conan, Warhammer and Guild Wars 2 being the most notable. Anyone who was an MMO veteran when these games were releasing probably remembers thinking these games would be the next WoW, or the next Jesus Christ, etc. That's what the review companies were spouting.
And then you actually got to play the games... and yeah, we know the history.
My point is, why is it all of a sudden a game like ESO, which I thoroughly enjoy and think is so much better than anything that has released in years, is getting such terrible reviews, while games which almost no one enjoyed - received such AWESOME reviews?
Read all that is yellow. Read it a few times. Im talking specifically about GW2 here, not AoC and not Warhammer.
You are saying that almost no one enjoyed GW2, and at the same time you are saying that you personally enjoyed TESO, and you are comparing those two things. Everything is wrong with your comparison. GW2 servers are always heavy load, and full of people. Do i think TESO will be successful? if they fix it, yes. But stop writing this kind of stuff making it sound like your personal opinion and preference is bigger than the facts.
You think almost no one enjoyed GW2 because you read the people who dont like it and ignore anything about the people who do enjoy it because bad things always show up first. You gotta be more realistic. Its fine to dislike games, its not ok to make up stuff based on your own opinions to pass them as facts.
and what exactly does heavy load in gw2 means? since you can still log in to a server while its labled as "full", obviously the meaning of words might be different between us and the devs.
There is a difference between saying a particular game isn't worth a subscription, and saying no game is worth a subscription. Any reviewer who is categorically opposed to subscriptions is probably going to give any game that has one a bad review, no matter how good it is. And let's not kid ourselves, that is a category a fair number of reviewers seem to fall into.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
It would benefit a company to hire some guys, lets call them "Viral marketing consultants" to say good things about their product and do a hatchet job on any and all naysayers. It is very easy to see how it would work. A couple of guys with a bunch of sock puppets could give the illusion of a positive consensus. This works better with "professionals" who are also paid shills and give some semblance of credibility and authority.
Now on the flip side. Where is the pay off to doing a hatchet job on a game? Getting people NOT to buy ESO doesn't mean they will rush out and buy a different game and there is no way to get them to go to a specific game(ie the one that would benefit the reviewer).
More likely than not the bad reviews, that weren't that bad, are an attempt by industry journalists to regain their lost credibility for years of prostituting themselves out to game companies.
If there is any doubt, wait a month AFTER launch to buy the game, by that point you will know for sure who is a shill and who is not:)
It would benefit a company to hire some guys, lets call them "Viral marketing consultants" to say good things about their product and do a hatchet job on any and all naysayers. It is very easy to see how it would work. A couple of guys with a bunch of sock puppets could give the illusion of a positive consensus. This works better with "professionals" who are also paid shills and give some semblance of credibility and authority.
Now on the flip side. Where is the pay off to doing a hatchet job on a game? Getting people NOT to buy ESO doesn't mean they will rush out and buy a different game and there is no way to get them to go to a specific game(ie the one that would benefit the reviewer).
More likely than not the bad reviews, that weren't that bad, are an attempt by industry journalists to regain their lost credibility for years of prostituting themselves out to game companies.
If there is any doubt, wait a month AFTER launch to buy the game, by that point you will know for sure who is a shill and who is not:)
Or, even better, ignore all the reviewers and play the game yourself when it does an open beta. All a review can tell you is what somebody else thinks, and how is that remotely useful unless you have some reason to believe they think just like you do?
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
I have noticed a commonality. Most of the trolling threads seem to touch upon the monthly payment, claiming "It would be ok if it were free to play".
You'll most likely find most of the posters are hoping that if they bicker or complain enough about the game, somehow Zen will let them have it for free lol.
Not happening. They will have to find something else to play and moan about ;op
I reckon half the bad mouthing of the game stems from a lot of people who can't afford to play it on release. They haven' tested it but read crap from other haters who haven't tested and pass it on as gospel.
Personally I'm fine with the cost and sub, have beta'd the last couple of weekends and find it well worth it so will be pre-ordering. Least we won't have to deal with the FTP entitlement crowd on release.
I'm looking forward to gaming with mature MMO fans.
The reason why we aren't thrilled about ESO is because it is a purely content driven game which we feel is reminiscent of SWTOR's game play model, which while we enjoyed, did not last past the first month or two. Many of us feel let down in this having hoped that future games would avoid that trap. Many of us want a game we can consistently log into month after month, year after year and are beyond frustrated in seeing, to our eyes is a worse attempt at a content driven MMORPG than SWTOR was.
I reckon half the bad mouthing of the game stems from a lot of people who can't afford to play it on release. They haven' tested it but read crap from other haters who haven't tested and pass it on as gospel.
Personally I'm fine with the cost and sub, have beta'd the last couple of weekends and find it well worth it so will be pre-ordering. Least we won't have to deal with the FTP entitlement crowd on release.
I'm looking forward to gaming with mature MMO fans.
/toodle-pip
WoW must be full of mature players then. A sub does not guarantee a "mature" set of players.
Zenimax should dump the freeloading entitlement minded subscribers who think $15 should give them everything - and a stack of new content as well. Which I might add is a problem of developers own making. You get hundreds of hours in the core game for $60; the sub will give you lots of new content. Really? It never scales. Content costs money.
And no I am not suggesting that the game F2P + cash shop but B2P + DLC. And if they need to hold back content to ensure they have several DLC drops good to go so be it. With the price of the core game broadly aligned to the price of the xpacs.
People "understood" the need for subs when servers, database software were expensive - the base price of the game wouldn't support the extra cost. Expensive servers, expensive database software, lots of techs were needed to turn the handles. That was 10+ years ago. Today it doesn't wash. As a result mmos that have launched in the last several years have floundered. Sold millions maybe but not tens of millions. And hence the sub ends up trying to cover the shortfall.
People "understood" the need for subs when servers, database software were expensive - the base price of the game wouldn't support the extra cost. Expensive servers, expensive database software, lots of techs were needed to turn the handles. That was 10+ years ago. Today it doesn't wash. As a result mmos that have launched in the last several years have floundered. Sold millions maybe but not tens of millions. And hence the sub ends up trying to cover the shortfall.
I gather from this sentence that you have no experience working in a modern IT environment at an enterprise level
Like so many others Dulu your picking the reviews you like and dislike. Most dont review a mmo based on if you like it or not.
Been in allot of the betas and most of what they say is true. It has nothing new to it. You can watch any video of game play and see quests are kiddish, crafting is easy, npc's just stand there waiting to die. Its not worth a monthly fee.
I reckon half the bad mouthing of the game stems from a lot of people who can't afford to play it on release. They haven' tested it but read crap from other haters who haven't tested and pass it on as gospel.
Personally I'm fine with the cost and sub, have beta'd the last couple of weekends and find it well worth it so will be pre-ordering. Least we won't have to deal with the FTP entitlement crowd on release.
I'm looking forward to gaming with mature MMO fans.
/toodle-pip
I would have to agree. There does seem to be an underlying reference to monthly subscriptions in every case. Perhaps they don't want to admit to finding it hard to afford. I would have to agree though - very much looking forward to this one. It seems like the VAST majority in the betas are saying good things - there's only been a couple of whiners in the betas that I'm aware of, and despite their evident complaints, they have been there right up to the end... That should tell you something.
Originally posted by Lyrian
The reason why we aren't thrilled about ESO is because it is a purely content driven game which we feel is reminiscent of SWTOR's game play model, which while we enjoyed, did not last past the first month or two. Many of us feel let down in this having hoped that future games would avoid that trap. Many of us want a game we can consistently log into month after month, year after year and are beyond frustrated in seeing, to our eyes is a worse attempt at a content driven MMORPG than SWTOR was.
Is that the royal "we"? It's good to speak to the elected spokesman. Personally I didn't buy SWToR. It's one of the few I didn't bother with, on the basis I thought it wouldn't keep my interest for long. It's good to see confirmation this would have been the case. ESO on the other hand, I'm confident will keep my interest longer. Like I'd said before though, people look for different things in games. For me, and many beta testers, there seems to be a general consensus it's checked all our boxes. For yourself, who knows. Hang out for a game that fits your own needs then.
Originally posted by Zeblade
Like so many others Dulu your picking the reviews you like and dislike. Most dont review a mmo based on if you like it or not.
Been in allot of the betas and most of what they say is true. It has nothing new to it. You can watch any video of game play and see quests are kiddish, crafting is easy, npc's just stand there waiting to die. Its not worth a monthly fee.
Despite the general negativity, I'd have to agree with the first statement. My best advice would be as a rule - IGNORE reviews. I would hope the vast majority of us simply use reviews to get a peek at screenshots, and in most cases spend some time on the game sites after that, reading everything about the classes, abilities, game mechanics, how it plays, watching footage etc. All reviews do for me are tip me off about games I want to look into. Some of the best games get bad reviews, and lots of rubbish games get good reviews. You just have to keep an open mind, and consider what it is you individually like in a game.
Besides the gimmick of being bale to use whatever weapons/armor ya wanna use, what does this game do that others havent?
Most gaming sites are giving ESO negative reviews due to a lack of innovation, clunky controls, a simplified combat system (Console sacrifice ) and boring questing. If this games your thing cool, no ones gonna change your mind and i hope ya have fun. But, for most people this game is a let down.
GW2 made people ask " whats worth 15 dollars a month?" and so far the content in this game doesnt justify it to themn And i think thats fair to be honest with you. The only MMO i think was worth 15 dollars a month was Asherons call, which they did fantastic world changing updates updates, seasonal updates (snow in the winter etc), and just made you feel you really paid into new content.
Or maybe the lizard people running the banks and the NWO want this game to fail because it exposes the truth about 9/11.
I don't want to play backseat reviewer or anything but I think that where a lot of them got twisted up was on what they chose to review about the game. It's a common mistake. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE in the public eye is prone to fall prey to their own celebrity and so it's like when you are a little kid and you do something and people laugh at it, and so you do it again and again until someone eventually has to tell you to stop.
Almost every review is focused on how fun the reviewer thinks the game is or how it looks etc... Very generic, very subjective statements that are also very easy to disagree with. Meanwhile what a lot of people might also like to know is "Can I run it?", "What will it look like on my machine", "What does it look like on a better or worse machine?" "What are the pros and cons of this or that", and questions like that.
I could have stood with watching at least one guy try to create a character that looked as close to himself as he could get it, something that would have been completely testable with the amount of time and the product given. Maybe another guy could have switched between video modes to let me see what the different modes looked like or ran it on the lowest spec machine allowable to give us that experience.
There were a whole LOT of things that could have been talked about and yet the majority of what we got was "was it fun", which is an entirely subjective opinion based almost entirely on the way that the reviewer chose to play the game, and "should you buy it", which, again, was entirely subjective and based on the reviewers opinions about the cost and value of things that are, once again, based on the way the reviewer chose to play the game.
I understand that not every guy with a youtube channel can afford to have 4 or 5 different rigs set up in their place at the same time but some of these so-called pro's really don't have any excuse as usually they are buying so much crap to try to keep their pc's on the cutting edge that they could probably build a better rig than most of us have from the droppings.
So anyway, yeah. I don't hold it completely against the reviewer, I just think they got thrown a curve ball and when tested, a lot of them failed the pop quiz.
I mean there is really nothing that says you HAVE to judge the fun of game at all is there? That's just one kind of review.
Beside the whole 'Imp / CE' issue, since I don't know if something is 'fun' until I pay the $60, I rather ask someone who has similar gaming taste on how it is. That can be my RL friend, a guy on Youtube or even a reviewer on Gamespot / IGN.
Issue with ESO is that every single channel that I go to see if a game would be fun for me is saying 'don't buy it at launch'.
Maybe this game would be the one where 10 of my RL friends hate but I like. Maybe.
Is the chance greater than 20%? No, so why waste $60?
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
I bet half the negative "reviewers" are kids who can't afford subscription on their pocket money.
Besides, in all fairness if $15 is more than they could afford, what point would there be in having those players present in a free game with cash shops? They couldn't afford to buy anything anyway. Commercially the game has to be cost effective, and provide an income for improvement.
Back to the ESO forum for me ;o)
Even with the bugs during testing, the game, personally I think is brilliant. The designers and developers really look like they know their stuff, and as an MMO it's really looking like it's working. The real key bit is what they do next.
Been on the MMO scene for a very long time, and I've seen companies like MMORPG.com and other review sites suck the **** of games that have been terrible, just because they have big names.
Age of Conan, Warhammer and Guild Wars 2 being the most notable. Anyone who was an MMO veteran when these games were releasing probably remembers thinking these games would be the next WoW, or the next Jesus Christ, etc. That's what the review companies were spouting.
And then you actually got to play the games... and yeah, we know the history.
My point is, why is it all of a sudden a game like ESO, which I thoroughly enjoy and think is so much better than anything that has released in years, is getting such terrible reviews, while games which almost no one enjoyed - received such AWESOME reviews?
What's going on? Did Zenimax not pay someone? Is this an organized plot by a competitor? I hate to be the conspiracy theory guy, but I don't understand. Or, is this just some sort of meme which has spread across the internet like wildfire, or doge? "ESO sucks, not worth $15, armor painted on, blah blah blah" (Anyone else notice the reviews all use the exact same terminology? I had never heard anyone say "armor painted on" before ESO, yet I've heard it in EVERY-SINGLE-REVIEW!)
I think it's pretty simple. A lot of games have come and gone on the mmo market these past years. A couple of them have left their mark and have given us a few standards on which we rate new games.
Then out of the blue, big company A comes along and tries to sell us a game stating it wil bring a revolution on the market. And furthermore claiming it has a huge mountain worth of stuff, content and what more. People all around the world get exited and the promised mountain slowly turns into an even bigger mountain, maybe even an entire mountain range. Everyone is happy and can't wait to try the game. And yes somewhere in the back of our mind we all know that Company A can't possibly put all this content and features into one single game, but we simply want to believe they can.
But when the beta arrives and people can clearly see that this huge big old mountain has actually turned into a small but lovely hill snd there is no revolution in sight, only some good old copy paste from other mmo's covered in a new design with a new gimmick here and there we kinda feel like we've been pissed on. And for some odd reason people don't like that and will judge the game because of it.
Now Some people don't care about all of this and judge the game by how much fun they have playing it and that's ok. Others will start a witch hunt because they feel betrayed by the company and want to burn everything game related to the ground
Comments
Honestly so far from ppl that actually enjoyed beta I've heard mostly that after level 15 game does not change so if someone does not enjoy the game this far they should drop it at this point.
Also I find it weird a bit:
- WAR mixed but I'd say generally in favour of the game
- Aion - same, possibly even more in favour of the game
- SWTOR - no comments here for obvious reason
- GW2 - same as above
- Rift - in general good, some claiming that refreshing and so on
- TESO - pretty much in every single review in past few days says all bad things. (I found exactly one where atuthor did admit that he enjoyed playing beta). Awful, boring, dusgusting, not immersive, shallow, just like any other - name it.
It's actually funny because getting player's reactions I find it that their reactions as a constrast are as always mixed - some hate it, some not decided and some loved betas so far - nothing different than in case of any other ne MMORPG on the market. No conspiration theory, just an observation.
Read all that is yellow. Read it a few times. Im talking specifically about GW2 here, not AoC and not Warhammer.
You are saying that almost no one enjoyed GW2, and at the same time you are saying that you personally enjoyed TESO, and you are comparing those two things. Everything is wrong with your comparison. GW2 servers are always heavy load, and full of people. Do i think TESO will be successful? if they fix it, yes. But stop writing this kind of stuff making it sound like your personal opinion and preference is bigger than the facts.
You think almost no one enjoyed GW2 because you read the people who dont like it and ignore anything about the people who do enjoy it because bad things always show up first. You gotta be more realistic. Its fine to dislike games, its not ok to make up stuff based on your own opinions to pass them as facts.
Ohhh, that would make me angry. Here I am disliking the game for free when I could get paid for it!
First off thank you for the well thought out intelligently constructed rejoinder.
You have some very good points, that truly do come down to box sales numbers. Hopefully those numbers are better than projected.
If not, I do see exactly what you are saying. I do not really see the dlc option being feasible considering the size and scope of the base game they are giving us with the initial purchase.
They very well may have to supplement revenue with a cash shop addition.
I really would not be happy about it, but I would understand it and probably support it as well.
I also decided today to get the imperial addition,its not necessary you get racial skills not class skills that are only for the imperial so that's not a big difference.
only thing I am not happy about and if people knew about this 6moths ago like when they went in a uproar about first and 3rd person view is that you cant swim underwater and that is just stuped all games have that so that is going to make the game feel a little cheapish but all and all I loved it.
its not a mmo its like skyrim online whish is mush better.
and what exactly does heavy load in gw2 means? since you can still log in to a server while its labled as "full", obviously the meaning of words might be different between us and the devs.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
It would benefit a company to hire some guys, lets call them "Viral marketing consultants" to say good things about their product and do a hatchet job on any and all naysayers. It is very easy to see how it would work. A couple of guys with a bunch of sock puppets could give the illusion of a positive consensus. This works better with "professionals" who are also paid shills and give some semblance of credibility and authority.
Now on the flip side. Where is the pay off to doing a hatchet job on a game? Getting people NOT to buy ESO doesn't mean they will rush out and buy a different game and there is no way to get them to go to a specific game(ie the one that would benefit the reviewer).
More likely than not the bad reviews, that weren't that bad, are an attempt by industry journalists to regain their lost credibility for years of prostituting themselves out to game companies.
If there is any doubt, wait a month AFTER launch to buy the game, by that point you will know for sure who is a shill and who is not:)
Or, even better, ignore all the reviewers and play the game yourself when it does an open beta. All a review can tell you is what somebody else thinks, and how is that remotely useful unless you have some reason to believe they think just like you do?
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
I have noticed a commonality. Most of the trolling threads seem to touch upon the monthly payment, claiming "It would be ok if it were free to play".
You'll most likely find most of the posters are hoping that if they bicker or complain enough about the game, somehow Zen will let them have it for free lol.
Not happening. They will have to find something else to play and moan about ;op
I reckon half the bad mouthing of the game stems from a lot of people who can't afford to play it on release. They haven' tested it but read crap from other haters who haven't tested and pass it on as gospel.
Personally I'm fine with the cost and sub, have beta'd the last couple of weekends and find it well worth it so will be pre-ordering. Least we won't have to deal with the FTP entitlement crowd on release.
I'm looking forward to gaming with mature MMO fans.
/toodle-pip
The reason why we aren't thrilled about ESO is because it is a purely content driven game which we feel is reminiscent of SWTOR's game play model, which while we enjoyed, did not last past the first month or two. Many of us feel let down in this having hoped that future games would avoid that trap. Many of us want a game we can consistently log into month after month, year after year and are beyond frustrated in seeing, to our eyes is a worse attempt at a content driven MMORPG than SWTOR was.
WoW must be full of mature players then. A sub does not guarantee a "mature" set of players.
Zenimax should dump the freeloading entitlement minded subscribers who think $15 should give them everything - and a stack of new content as well. Which I might add is a problem of developers own making. You get hundreds of hours in the core game for $60; the sub will give you lots of new content. Really? It never scales. Content costs money.
And no I am not suggesting that the game F2P + cash shop but B2P + DLC. And if they need to hold back content to ensure they have several DLC drops good to go so be it. With the price of the core game broadly aligned to the price of the xpacs.
People "understood" the need for subs when servers, database software were expensive - the base price of the game wouldn't support the extra cost. Expensive servers, expensive database software, lots of techs were needed to turn the handles. That was 10+ years ago. Today it doesn't wash. As a result mmos that have launched in the last several years have floundered. Sold millions maybe but not tens of millions. And hence the sub ends up trying to cover the shortfall.
I gather from this sentence that you have no experience working in a modern IT environment at an enterprise level
Like so many others Dulu your picking the reviews you like and dislike. Most dont review a mmo based on if you like it or not.
Been in allot of the betas and most of what they say is true. It has nothing new to it. You can watch any video of game play and see quests are kiddish, crafting is easy, npc's just stand there waiting to die. Its not worth a monthly fee.
I would have to agree. There does seem to be an underlying reference to monthly subscriptions in every case. Perhaps they don't want to admit to finding it hard to afford. I would have to agree though - very much looking forward to this one. It seems like the VAST majority in the betas are saying good things - there's only been a couple of whiners in the betas that I'm aware of, and despite their evident complaints, they have been there right up to the end... That should tell you something.
Is that the royal "we"? It's good to speak to the elected spokesman. Personally I didn't buy SWToR. It's one of the few I didn't bother with, on the basis I thought it wouldn't keep my interest for long. It's good to see confirmation this would have been the case. ESO on the other hand, I'm confident will keep my interest longer. Like I'd said before though, people look for different things in games. For me, and many beta testers, there seems to be a general consensus it's checked all our boxes. For yourself, who knows. Hang out for a game that fits your own needs then.
Despite the general negativity, I'd have to agree with the first statement. My best advice would be as a rule - IGNORE reviews. I would hope the vast majority of us simply use reviews to get a peek at screenshots, and in most cases spend some time on the game sites after that, reading everything about the classes, abilities, game mechanics, how it plays, watching footage etc. All reviews do for me are tip me off about games I want to look into. Some of the best games get bad reviews, and lots of rubbish games get good reviews. You just have to keep an open mind, and consider what it is you individually like in a game.
Besides the gimmick of being bale to use whatever weapons/armor ya wanna use, what does this game do that others havent?
Most gaming sites are giving ESO negative reviews due to a lack of innovation, clunky controls, a simplified combat system (Console sacrifice ) and boring questing. If this games your thing cool, no ones gonna change your mind and i hope ya have fun. But, for most people this game is a let down.
GW2 made people ask " whats worth 15 dollars a month?" and so far the content in this game doesnt justify it to themn And i think thats fair to be honest with you. The only MMO i think was worth 15 dollars a month was Asherons call, which they did fantastic world changing updates updates, seasonal updates (snow in the winter etc), and just made you feel you really paid into new content.
Or maybe the lizard people running the banks and the NWO want this game to fail because it exposes the truth about 9/11.
I don't want to play backseat reviewer or anything but I think that where a lot of them got twisted up was on what they chose to review about the game. It's a common mistake. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE in the public eye is prone to fall prey to their own celebrity and so it's like when you are a little kid and you do something and people laugh at it, and so you do it again and again until someone eventually has to tell you to stop.
Almost every review is focused on how fun the reviewer thinks the game is or how it looks etc... Very generic, very subjective statements that are also very easy to disagree with. Meanwhile what a lot of people might also like to know is "Can I run it?", "What will it look like on my machine", "What does it look like on a better or worse machine?" "What are the pros and cons of this or that", and questions like that.
I could have stood with watching at least one guy try to create a character that looked as close to himself as he could get it, something that would have been completely testable with the amount of time and the product given. Maybe another guy could have switched between video modes to let me see what the different modes looked like or ran it on the lowest spec machine allowable to give us that experience.
There were a whole LOT of things that could have been talked about and yet the majority of what we got was "was it fun", which is an entirely subjective opinion based almost entirely on the way that the reviewer chose to play the game, and "should you buy it", which, again, was entirely subjective and based on the reviewers opinions about the cost and value of things that are, once again, based on the way the reviewer chose to play the game.
I understand that not every guy with a youtube channel can afford to have 4 or 5 different rigs set up in their place at the same time but some of these so-called pro's really don't have any excuse as usually they are buying so much crap to try to keep their pc's on the cutting edge that they could probably build a better rig than most of us have from the droppings.
So anyway, yeah. I don't hold it completely against the reviewer, I just think they got thrown a curve ball and when tested, a lot of them failed the pop quiz.
I mean there is really nothing that says you HAVE to judge the fun of game at all is there? That's just one kind of review.
Beside the whole 'Imp / CE' issue, since I don't know if something is 'fun' until I pay the $60, I rather ask someone who has similar gaming taste on how it is. That can be my RL friend, a guy on Youtube or even a reviewer on Gamespot / IGN.
Issue with ESO is that every single channel that I go to see if a game would be fun for me is saying 'don't buy it at launch'.
Maybe this game would be the one where 10 of my RL friends hate but I like. Maybe.
Is the chance greater than 20%? No, so why waste $60?
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
I bet half the negative "reviewers" are kids who can't afford subscription on their pocket money.
Besides, in all fairness if $15 is more than they could afford, what point would there be in having those players present in a free game with cash shops? They couldn't afford to buy anything anyway. Commercially the game has to be cost effective, and provide an income for improvement.
Back to the ESO forum for me ;o)
Even with the bugs during testing, the game, personally I think is brilliant. The designers and developers really look like they know their stuff, and as an MMO it's really looking like it's working. The real key bit is what they do next.
No it really is that bad....
I think it's pretty simple. A lot of games have come and gone on the mmo market these past years. A couple of them have left their mark and have given us a few standards on which we rate new games.
Then out of the blue, big company A comes along and tries to sell us a game stating it wil bring a revolution on the market. And furthermore claiming it has a huge mountain worth of stuff, content and what more. People all around the world get exited and the promised mountain slowly turns into an even bigger mountain, maybe even an entire mountain range. Everyone is happy and can't wait to try the game. And yes somewhere in the back of our mind we all know that Company A can't possibly put all this content and features into one single game, but we simply want to believe they can.
But when the beta arrives and people can clearly see that this huge big old mountain has actually turned into a small but lovely hill snd there is no revolution in sight, only some good old copy paste from other mmo's covered in a new design with a new gimmick here and there we kinda feel like we've been pissed on. And for some odd reason people don't like that and will judge the game because of it.
Now Some people don't care about all of this and judge the game by how much fun they have playing it and that's ok. Others will start a witch hunt because they feel betrayed by the company and want to burn everything game related to the ground