Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Mortal Online: The Official Review

124678

Comments

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Boca Raton, FLPosts: 4,504Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by choujiofkono

             Just reading the mmorpg review and then looking at the rating it was given is enough to make me chuckle.  Basically the review boils it down to the game is bad, the state of release was bad, the bugs are bad and the future grim.  But..  because it is "different" and "has potential" the score is decent.  That makes no sense at all.  Review the game on what is reality, not what is a fantasy of what it could turn out to be if several "if's" were to line up like magic. 

           

     I agree 1000%

     

    It's fine for a reviewer to put in a paragraph about what potential they see in a game.  IMHO a review has jumped the shark once it starts to factor in that "potential" as a major element... heck THE major element in a review.  And then to also use that potential when scoring a game just seems far fetched.

     

    A review is something that describes how a game exists at the time of the review.  The score should reflect that.  If you feel something in the future might potentially CHANGE that score.. feel free to include some text about that possibility.

     

    Otherwise... it's not a review.. it's a preview.

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

  • JeroKaneJeroKane OsloPosts: 5,353Member Uncommon

    They should remove this review. It makes this website look really bad.

    This review is not a review. You either review the game and score accordingly to what the game really is. Or you don't.

    Giving the game such a high score is an insult to our intelligence. And more importantly. Hurts the credibility of this site.

    You are doing no one here any favours by trying to sugar coat, twist and twist and twist some more, to come up with some kind of excuse of such a high score. All just because it's a poor poor little indie company?  Give me a break!

    Starvault had (and still haven't)  no clue about what they were getting into. Or what it involves into making a MMO.

    Not to mention that they licensed a very expensive game engine, that's an FPS engine at it's heart. And takes considerable amount of resources and very experienced developers with lots of expertise to mod and adjust for a MMO.

    There are plenty of other game engines out there, that are already optimised for MMO games. But no no. Starvault had to do it the hard way and failed miserably!

     

    Just have a look at the little indie studio that just released Perpetuum Online.  A very solid game that actually works!  Those guys really deserved to be praised. They actually knew what they were getting into and knew what it takes to make a MMO. And succeeded.

    Cheers

  • PalebanePalebane Tucson, AZPosts: 3,225Member

    Couple comments I'd like to make. First, about not having a map:  I like the idea that they are trying to make the game more free-form and using old-school games as a base. I enjoy a challenge and believe that many new MMO games have lost a lot of what made the older games so great. Having said that, I am absolutely horrible at navigation and direction. I always have been and probably always will be, both in video games and in real life.

     

    In EQ I had to print the maps out or have people show me the way. It would take 2-3 trips before I could get somewhere w/o getting lost. I don't need a detailed map with quest markers etc, but a basic layout map (such as EQ implemented around the time of the PoP expasion) is a very handy crutch for someone like me. It would even make sense to be able to "draw" the maps in-game. Not physically, but the the areas you explored would show up for future reference as you discovered them.

     

    Also, there was no mention in the review of the races beyond that you get certain benefits depending on which race you choose. I am going to have to go find out for myself what races are available and what they are all about. This information would have been very useful in the review, in my opinion, as race selection is a big factor for me in RPG games.

    Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.

  • RajCajRajCaj Lafayette, LAPosts: 706Member

    Originally posted by mindw0rk

    I wonder when journalists stop judging games by "potential". I mean WTF, review it in its current state, not what it could be if developers had some brains.

    Mortal Online is one of the worst MMORPGs of all time and a good example of how you can screw EVERYTHING. There is not a single part which is done right. Its so bad that makes Metin 2 look good

     Your missing the point of the article.  The writer is obviously a sandbox fan that (like the rest of the sandbox MMO audience) has been waiting for SOMEONE to do something other than the same theme park crap thats co-opted the MMORPG genere into nothing more than a glorified single player experience.

    As he states in his article.....fans of sandbox MMORPGs should be supporting things like what Adventurine or Star Vault has done.  Supporting doesn't mean you have to buy their product.....or even doesn't mean you cant critisize some of the things you feel its done wrong.  It can mean highlighting the good points, the intent, the spirit of the game and calling out the features and mechanics it failed on......which is exactly what I think the author did.

    On paper (aside from the FPV only), Mortal Online is the second coming of UO.....its a different story when you log in.  Much of it has to do with lack of funds to put together a solid graphics engine, resources to work on bugs, glitches, etc.....not game logic.

    Games like Darkfall and Mortal Online are in the right direction...they just need to pull the "hardcore" reigns in a bit so that it appeals to more fans in the sandbox genere.

  • choujiofkonochoujiofkono no, OHPosts: 852Member

    Originally posted by Lahuzer

    Sifting through community posts would tell a different story at times but I think people are not really taking the game in the spirit of how it is meant".

    Amen.

           >>>>>  LoL @ You're doing it wrong

         I have not played the game and have no opinion on it personally but this excuse used by perma-fans, particularly people that are supposed to be professionals, is insane. 

         There is no right or wrong in player perception.  Reality is reality.  If the majority of players say the game is broken, buggy, and the developer is not trustworthy or follows through with anything he says then that is the reality.  You can sprinkle sugar all over it and it won't change the facts no matter how much you hold your breath or squint your eyes. 

        The intelligent way to defend a game is to debate the critics rationally and provide your own counter-proof to prove your point.  That is not being done.  Fans agree with critics but "like" the game anyway for reasons that are usually not provable with data from reality. 

       It's a seriously disturbing trend that points to the industry itself contributing to players purchasing every game from the genre they like just to find out if it's worth spending money on or not. 

    "I'm not cheap I'm incredibly subconsciously financially optimized"
    "The worst part of censorship is ------------------"
    image

  • ange10ange10 LondonPosts: 307Member

    You know what makes most of these negative comments pointless is that..........

    Mortal online can only get better.

  • linksalulinksalu Par, NJPosts: 38Member

    Originally posted by choujiofkono

    Originally posted by Lahuzer

    Sifting through community posts would tell a different story at times but I think people are not really taking the game in the spirit of how it is meant".

    Amen.

           >>>>>  LoL @ You're doing it wrong

         I have not played the game and have no opinion on it personally but this excuse used by perma-fans, particularly people that are supposed to be professionals, is insane. 

         There is no right or wrong in player perception.  Reality is reality.  If the majority of players say the game is broken, buggy, and the developer is not trustworthy or follows through with anything he says then that is the reality.  You can sprinkle sugar all over it and it won't change the facts no matter how much you hold your breath or squint your eyes. 

        The intelligent way to defend a game is to debate the critics rationally and provide your own counter-proof to prove your point.  That is not being done.  Fans agree with critics but "like" the game anyway for reasons that are usually not provable with data from reality. 

       It's a seriously disturbing trend that points to the industry itself contributing to players purchasing every game from the genre they like just to find out if it's worth spending money on or not. 

    Spot on. I was literally just thinking this in my head. Honestly, there are people here that are perma-fans, no matter what. And people here that take their hatred of MO to unhealthy levels, nitpicking and taking everything to extremes -- they're just as bad as the fanboys. But if you look at the area in the middle, at the actual facts, at the way this game is being handled...

    Well, it speaks for itself.

    Originally posted by geldonyetich

    Wow, I knew you guys were pretty desparate to slam the game, but hacking the web page of a major game site so a user review masquarades as an official one? Pretty impressive.

    [Edit: no, after seeing there's an actual video associated with it, I guess not, despite the wierd way GameSpot distributes its content making it looks like the reviewer didn't even write this.]

  • LahuzerLahuzer BorPosts: 666Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by choujiofkono



    Originally posted by Lahuzer

    Sifting through community posts would tell a different story at times but I think people are not really taking the game in the spirit of how it is meant".

    Amen.

           >>>>>  LoL @ You're doing it wrong

         I have not played the game and have no opinion on it personally but this excuse used by perma-fans, particularly people that are supposed to be professionals, is insane. 

         There is no right or wrong in player perception.  Reality is reality.  If the majority of players say the game is broken, buggy, and the developer is not trustworthy or follows through with anything he says then that is the reality.  You can sprinkle sugar all over it and it won't change the facts no matter how much you hold your breath or squint your eyes. 

        The intelligent way to defend a game is to debate the critics rationally and provide your own counter-proof to prove your point.  That is not being done.  Fans agree with critics but "like" the game anyway for reasons that are usually not provable with data from reality. 

       It's a seriously disturbing trend that points to the industry itself contributing to players purchasing every game from the genre they like just to find out if it's worth spending money on or not. 


     

    You missed the "Regardless of the bugs and slight unfinished feel, Mortal Online is supremely enjoyable. There are enough developed class-types to keep you occupied while more updates roll out and the game is more than stable enough to play"-part...  And if you read what I´ve written before you can see some of my points on it. I don´t wanna repeat myself every single time.

  • seabeastseabeast Bellevue, NEPosts: 748Member

    A good review and one that could have been extended on for pages. I like the "group up with this game" deal where feeling as if the game is coming out of beta and growing with is reminds me of Eve when it first came out.

    On the postive side, Patches come out often sometimes leading to the negative side, patches create new problems. However, those problems are addressed fastly. It is a give and  take game that has me afixed with the direction it is going. The political status of the map can and is changed by power  and by diplomacy...I like that.

  • shakermaker0shakermaker0 SheffieldPosts: 194Member

    Originally posted by choujiofkono



    Originally posted by Lahuzer

    Sifting through community posts would tell a different story at times but I think people are not really taking the game in the spirit of how it is meant".

    Amen.

           >>>>>  LoL @ You're doing it wrong

         I have not played the game and have no opinion on it personally but this excuse used by perma-fans, particularly people that are supposed to be professionals, is insane. 

         There is no right or wrong in player perception.  Reality is reality.  If the majority of players say the game is broken, buggy, and the developer is not trustworthy or follows through with anything he says then that is the reality.  You can sprinkle sugar all over it and it won't change the facts no matter how much you hold your breath or squint your eyes. 

     

    I'm not saying that there is a wrong or right way to play a game. What I'm saying is, with sandbox MMOs, if you don't take the adventure and excitement from the little things, then the genre is not for you. If you throw yourself into the experience and take everything in the spirit and context of the setting you will get more enjoyment out of it. You don't play something like Call of Duty and pick out every single inaccurate point and gameplay element. Anyway...thats what I meant.

  • mindw0rkmindw0rk St-petersburgPosts: 1,351Member

    Please dont call MO a sandbox game. UO is sandbox, EVE is sandbox. MO is an empty ugly looking world where you can do nothing except mine ore from dawn to dusk and PK noobs in boring and buggy combat. Sometimes you can meet 2 headed NPCs staring at walls all days long. Thats about it.

  • choujiofkonochoujiofkono no, OHPosts: 852Member

    Originally posted by Lahuzer

    Originally posted by choujiofkono



    Originally posted by Lahuzer

     

     

    You missed the "Regardless of the bugs and slight unfinished feel, Mortal Online is supremely enjoyable. There are enough developed class-types to keep you occupied while more updates roll out and the game is more than stable enough to play"-part...  And if you read what I´ve written before you can see some of my points on it. I don´t wanna repeat myself every single time.

        I didn't "miss" anything.  I have become an expert at "disregarding" things that are nonsense. 

       

    re·gard·less/ri?gärdl?s/

    Adverb: Without paying attention to the present situation; despite the prevailing circumstances

       

      It is clear the review ignores reality in favor of magic rainbows and roses land but I don't need to hear fandom in a review, I just read it for the facts of what the game actually is.

        Facts:   Bugs  and  unfinished  feel.  

                      Game has been released almost 6 months and players continually make lists of serious issues. 

                      I don't blindly support any game with the label "sandbox" or "themepark" or anything else on it because that's ridiculous. 

    "I'm not cheap I'm incredibly subconsciously financially optimized"
    "The worst part of censorship is ------------------"
    image

  • LahuzerLahuzer BorPosts: 666Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by choujiofkono

    Originally posted by Lahuzer


    Originally posted by choujiofkono



    Originally posted by Lahuzer

     

     

    You missed the "Regardless of the bugs and slight unfinished feel, Mortal Online is supremely enjoyable. There are enough developed class-types to keep you occupied while more updates roll out and the game is more than stable enough to play"-part...  And if you read what I´ve written before you can see some of my points on it. I don´t wanna repeat myself every single time.

        I didn't "miss" anything.  I have become an expert at "disregarding" things that are nonsense. 

       

    re·gard·less/ri?gärdl?s/

    Adverb: Without paying attention to the present situation; despite the prevailing circumstances

       

      It is clear the review ignores reality in favor of magic rainbows and roses land but I don't need to hear fandom in a review, I just read it for the facts of what the game actually is.

        Facts:   Bugs  and  unfinished  feel.  

                      Game has been released almost 6 months and players continually make lists of serious issues. 

                      I don't blindly support any game with the label "sandbox" or "themepark" or anything else on it because that's ridiculous. 

    For being a guy that "have not played the game and have no opinion on it personally" you sure know alot of what about whats wrong and don´t work with MO... You seem to be completly blind to the good things people have to say about it. Test it out yourself and ACTUALLY get a REAL opinion on it.... Or just move on.

  • username509username509 beverly hills, CAPosts: 635Member

    No the game has not been released for 6 months yet!

    The game will be 6 months old on Dec 9th.

    Considering this review was made based off of game play from just before the last patch you can only assume that the game is EVEN BETTER now then it was for the reviewer.

    Never trust a screenshot or a youtube video without a version stamp!

  • WSIMikeWSIMike Catskill, NYPosts: 5,564Member

    First...

    Great review. Informative, fair and equally praising and critical.  Enjoyable read.

     

    That said...

    I think after reading the (all too predictable) responses, two things are absolutely clear:

    1. Statements of how "you should give a MMO at least a few months before you can fairly review it" are meaningless. Regardless of how long you wait, the reaction from the community is going to be exactly the same as any other time. When it's reviewed has absolutely no bearing.

    2. People were complaining that the Survivor Guy series about MO wasn't leveling enough criticism toward the game.

    Here we are with a review that is quite harsh and critical of the game... Yet, people still aaren't satisfied. Why? Because the reviewer had the *nerve* to say positive things about it as well.

    Not at all surprising 'round these parts, though.

    "If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road,
    and the cash shop selling asphalt..."
    - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops

    image

  • rhinokrhinok Anonymous, UTPosts: 1,798Member

    Originally posted by Lahuzer

    Originally posted by choujiofkono



    Originally posted by Lahuzer

    Sifting through community posts would tell a different story at times but I think people are not really taking the game in the spirit of how it is meant".

    Amen.

           >>>>>  LoL @ You're doing it wrong

         I have not played the game and have no opinion on it personally but this excuse used by perma-fans, particularly people that are supposed to be professionals, is insane. 

         There is no right or wrong in player perception.  Reality is reality.  If the majority of players say the game is broken, buggy, and the developer is not trustworthy or follows through with anything he says then that is the reality.  You can sprinkle sugar all over it and it won't change the facts no matter how much you hold your breath or squint your eyes. 

        The intelligent way to defend a game is to debate the critics rationally and provide your own counter-proof to prove your point.  That is not being done.  Fans agree with critics but "like" the game anyway for reasons that are usually not provable with data from reality. 

       It's a seriously disturbing trend that points to the industry itself contributing to players purchasing every game from the genre they like just to find out if it's worth spending money on or not. 


     

    You missed the "Regardless of the bugs and slight unfinished feel, Mortal Online is supremely enjoyable. There are enough developed class-types to keep you occupied while more updates roll out and the game is more than stable enough to play"-part...  And if you read what I´ve written before you can see some of my points on it. I don´t wanna repeat myself every single time.

    "riddled to the core with bugs and is woefully unfinished to the point that is really hard to defend and shield it from criticism"

    Fun? Maybe, if you're a fan of the game and genre and have an inhuman tolerance for bugs, desync, lag, and an unfinished beta game.  Fun is only one component of the game's rating, though and there's no arguing the game--as a whole--is a mess.

    ~Ripper

  • LiquidWolfLiquidWolf Laramie, WYPosts: 516Member Common

    The spirit of this review was simply this: Bugs-a-plenty... but show me something else that fits my needs and the needs of those that want a sandbox... Show me something that is trying to be more like UO than this game. Show me something better.

    Be honest... you can't. How could you know what I want or like? Sure there are some games coming out in the future, other indie projects, but... what? Stop playing this game until those come out?

    Or perhaps I should demand perfection... Supporting games that do not meet a certain standard only encourage developers to make crappy games... Right?

    With all the patches and fixes this team is trying to do, they certainly seem to be trying to avoid a crappy game...besides... waiting for a future game, or demanding a high level of quality means only one thing:

    I don't get to play.

    We don't get together to elect winners. We all want more games, we want different types of games, and we want to encourage improvements in the games we play.

    UO-Everquest-DAoC-WoW-LotRO-WAR... and so many in-between and around... Look what the industry has progressed to. A certain level of quality is expected, but then we don't really get anything different.

    When someone says a game is good, yet buggy, and writes fairly detailed review about it... why call them liars, or try to discredit them? What is the problem? What is your goal?

    Is one game the right game? or... if one does not match up to certain expectations... does that make it wrong? Are we supposed to protect people from that? Are we supposed to condemn those that say differently?

    Are we extremists here?

    Zealotry for a game is one thing, but when zealots attack others for simply having a different perspective and belief, nothing good can come from it.

  • LahuzerLahuzer BorPosts: 666Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by rhinok

    Originally posted by Lahuzer


    Originally posted by choujiofkono



    Originally posted by Lahuzer

    Sifting through community posts would tell a different story at times but I think people are not really taking the game in the spirit of how it is meant".

    Amen.

           >>>>>  LoL @ You're doing it wrong

         I have not played the game and have no opinion on it personally but this excuse used by perma-fans, particularly people that are supposed to be professionals, is insane. 

         There is no right or wrong in player perception.  Reality is reality.  If the majority of players say the game is broken, buggy, and the developer is not trustworthy or follows through with anything he says then that is the reality.  You can sprinkle sugar all over it and it won't change the facts no matter how much you hold your breath or squint your eyes. 

        The intelligent way to defend a game is to debate the critics rationally and provide your own counter-proof to prove your point.  That is not being done.  Fans agree with critics but "like" the game anyway for reasons that are usually not provable with data from reality. 

       It's a seriously disturbing trend that points to the industry itself contributing to players purchasing every game from the genre they like just to find out if it's worth spending money on or not. 


     

    You missed the "Regardless of the bugs and slight unfinished feel, Mortal Online is supremely enjoyable. There are enough developed class-types to keep you occupied while more updates roll out and the game is more than stable enough to play"-part...  And if you read what I´ve written before you can see some of my points on it. I don´t wanna repeat myself every single time.

    "riddled to the core with bugs and is woefully unfinished to the point that is really hard to defend and shield it from criticism"

    Fun? Maybe, if you're a fan of the game and genre and have an inhuman tolerance for bugs, desync, lag, and an unfinished beta game.  Fun is only one component of the game's rating, though and there's no arguing the game--as a whole--is a mess.

    ~Ripper

    Well you apperantly haven´t played the game then. Cause the bugs aren´t making the game unplayable. Me and my fellow clanmates are having a blast together. Ofc we run into bugs, but it´s not as bad as it would make any of us quit, or bring down the experiencce of it. Also the bugs gets fixed. And I can say that the desync has improved ALOT with yesterdays patch. Just read up on it on the MO forums. I´m not making this up. And having fun, at least to me, is the most important part with playing a MMO or any videogame for that matter.

  • LahuzerLahuzer BorPosts: 666Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by LiquidWolf

    The spirit of this review was simply this: Bugs-a-plenty... but show me something else that fits my needs and the needs of those that want a sandbox... Show me something that is trying to be more like UO than this game. Show me something better.

    Be honest... you can't. How could you know what I want or like? Sure there are some games coming out in the future, other indie projects, but... what? Stop playing this game until those come out?

    Or perhaps I should demand perfection... Supporting games that do not meet a certain standard only encourage developers to make crappy games... Right?

    With all the patches and fixes this team is trying to do, they certainly seem to be trying to avoid a crappy game...besides... waiting for a future game, or demanding a high level of quality means only one thing:

    I don't get to play.

    We don't get together to elect winners. We all want more games, we want different types of games, and we want to encourage improvements in the games we play.

    UO-Everquest-DAoC-WoW-LotRO-WAR... and so many in-between and around... Look what the industry has progressed to. A certain level of quality is expected, but then we don't really get anything different.

    When someone says a game is good, yet buggy, and writes fairly detailed review about it... why call them liars, or try to discredit them? What is the problem? What is your goal?

    Is one game the right game? or... if one does not match up to certain expectations... does that make it wrong? Are we supposed to protect people from that? Are we supposed to condemn those that say differently?

    Are we extremists here?

    Zealotry for a game is one thing, but when zealots attack others for simply having a different perspective and belief, nothing good can come from it.

    Amen. Couldn´t have said it better myslef. That actually was so good, that I won´t write more on this topic, cause I can´t top that argument.

  • skeaserskeaser Wichita Falls, TXPosts: 3,847Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by DLangley

    Hey guys, just a little advice. If you have a lot to say please try and edit it into a previous post instead of posting right after yourself continuously.  It keeps everything that you want to say in one spot :).

    Can we get a multi-quote option? Pretty please?

  • thorppesthorppes nottinghamshirePosts: 452Member

    The review looks fair to me and accurate.

    I myself do not play until they add the PvE and social features I've been waiting for. The game is fun for a 3-4 months with the current content but I understand the game needed major fixing and now needs content.

  • rhinokrhinok Anonymous, UTPosts: 1,798Member

    Originally posted by WSIMike

    First...

    Great review. Informative, fair and equally praising and critical.  Enjoyable read.

     

    That said...

    I think after reading the (all too predictable) responses, two things are absolutely clear:

    1. Statements of how "you should give a MMO at least a few months before you can fairly review it" are meaningless. Regardless of how long you wait, the reaction from the community is going to be exactly the same as any other time. When it's reviewed has absolutely no bearing.

    2. People were complaining that the Survivor Guy series about MO wasn't leveling enough criticism toward the game.

    Here we are with a review that is quite harsh and critical of the game... Yet, people still aaren't satisfied. Why? Because the reviewer had the *nerve* to say positive things about it as well.

    Not at all surprising 'round these parts, though.

    Readers aren't dissatisfied with the overall review.  It's that the overall score doesn't accurately reflect the written word.  It seems arbitrary and artificially skewed high based on nebulous concepts like potential and overall preference for the genre, despite the game's many glaring technical and design issues. As I said in my other post, the tooltip for the Mediocre rating states "has a few stand-out features with few, if any, glaring detractors". That seems perfectly reasonable, except that the definition is totally contrary to the state of the actual game, per the reviewer's own words, which is "woefully unfinished", "Star Vault’s creation is riddled with bugs, glitches, errors, misjudgements and everything in-between", " riddled to the core with bugs", "buggy as all hell", "the game falls flat in many directions" and  "this game is nearer to state of closed-beta rather than retail release".  

    You're right, the review was "quite harsh and critical of the game", but the score didn't reflect that. That's what people are upset about.

    ~Ripper

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Boca Raton, FLPosts: 4,504Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by LiquidWolf

    When someone says a game is good, yet buggy, and writes fairly detailed review about it... why call them liars, or try to discredit them? What is the problem? What is your goal?

     My problem with the review is a philosophical one.  I strongly believe that reviews should be based on the product that exists when being reviewed.  If a reviewer has high hopes for future changes in a game.. those should be factored in seperately and not listed as a key factor in the rating.  Again.. that is simply MY opinion.   If the review simply stated, "The game is currently rated as X... but I think it has the potential to get a rating of Y down the road if they can fulfill all this potential"... I would have no issues with it.

     

    Just look at the title.. it's called  "Six Month Review".  But that's not actually true, as the vast majority of the positives relate to something it could be later on.

     

    As I said perviously... every MMO game in existance has had the potential (no matter how small) to eventually turn into a "10".  

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

  • DLangleyDLangley Beaumont, TXPosts: 1,407Member

    Hey guys, lets not attack or bait other users into personal arguements. Discuss the review and express your opinion. Please also remember to respect other's opinions.

  • username509username509 beverly hills, CAPosts: 635Member

    There are some major flaws with this review.

    1.  The game is not yet 6 months old.

    2.  A new patch came out just after the review but before the 6 month mark.

    3.  Most if not all of the 21 bugs the reviewer claims to have encountered have already been patched.

    4.  There is no mention of nudity or the extremely "adult" content in the game.  Probably to ensure a pg13 review that's suitable for mmorpg.com

    5.  So called desync issues players were experiancing have disappeared in this newest patch.

     

    With all these things considered I'm sure the reviewer would have rewarded Mortal Online a 9+ if he based his review off the current patch instead of older versions of the client.

     

    If your into openword open pvp sandbox MMO's you can't go wrong with Mortal Online.

    Never trust a screenshot or a youtube video without a version stamp!

Sign In or Register to comment.