From the looks of it the game looks amazing. At least the developers are attempting to do something with it. On a positive note, all the people who bought the game and are "playing" are helping to fix the game and make it better. I'll check it out again in 6 months, maybe they will have a trial island or something.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
Originally posted by Briansho From the looks of it the game looks amazing. At least the developers are attempting to do something with it. On a positive note, all the people who bought the game and are "playing" are helping to fix the game and make it better. I'll check it out again in 6 months, maybe they will have a trial island or something.
They are charging full price for a game that is in a closed beta state. Why would they give a free trial area for a game that is actually in a release state?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I have no interest in this game other than the entertainment the forums here provide me, but WOW remind me to never, ever take a review from this author seriously. Clearly, he is so desperate for a sandbox game, that he'll eat a turd sandwich and ask for seconds. How does "nearer to the state of close-beta than retail release" translate into a 6.9?
Listing potential as a pro? Seriously?!? What game would potential NOT be a pro?
"Now I must state that I do not like to judge an MMORPG on its launch and how bug-ridden it is at any point". LOL what? How bug ridden it is should be a major factor in judging any piece of software.
"we pay a subscription fee and we, eventually, get a polished product - sometimes it just takes a little more time". This attitude is exactly why we get beta state MMOs inflicted upon us.
"...perhaps this is something that will be remedied in future updates? We can surely hope." "...feeling of excitement and the desire for this game to succeed." Biased review is biased. I get the feeling he only grudgingly acknowledges negatives because the editors insisted. Protip to MMORPG com: don't let gushing fanboys write reviews. Why did this game get the benefit of being released for 6 months before seeing a review?
From the looks of it the game looks amazing. At least the developers are attempting to do something with it. On a positive note, all the people who bought the game and are "playing" are helping to fix the game and make it better. I'll check it out again in 6 months, maybe they will have a trial island or something.
They are charging full price for a game that is in a closed beta state. Why would they give a free trial area for a game that is actually in a release state?
Who knows, stranger things have happened. As long as people keep buying the game and subbing the developers will continue to try to fix it.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
...all the people who bought the game and are "playing" are helping to fix the game and make it better...
That's not a player's job in a released game, especially for which he or she pays a subscription. That's the role of a beta player. That's not to say that players for released games can't test content on a public test server, provide feedback, etc.., but that's not their primary role. As a customer, their role is to consume the product and be entertained.
I have no interest in this game other than the entertainment the forums here provide me, but WOW remind me to never, ever take a review from this author seriously. Clearly, he is so desperate for a sandbox game, that he'll eat a turd sandwich and ask for seconds. How does "nearer to the state of close-beta than retail release" translate into a 6.9?
The score doesn't show how bug free the game is. It also does not mean that you create a checklist, start ticking items one by one saying that nah, this is not implemented completely, it is only complete once this particular part is added or not.
Listing potential as a pro? Seriously?!? What game would potential NOT be a pro?
This can only be answered in an objective manner IMO. Call it the vision from the company about the game, the impression you get after playing a week or so, etc. I don't think that there's a global objective agreement on what defines a potential about a MMORPG game. It is sum of what you experience and see after playing a bit, comparing the game with the ones you have played, check what has been promised and what's there already, what are the missing part and what is the explanation about those missing parts, what's the global vision about the game and how the company is promising to further develop the game etc.
"Now I must state that I do not like to judge an MMORPG on its launch and how bug-ridden it is at any point". LOL what? How bug ridden it is should be a major factor in judging any piece of software.
I don't agree. What is most important for me is CTD (crash to desktop) issues. Having critical bugs causing you to die instantly (time to time you have these bugs in MO, one is patched recently for example). Some may say that how polished a UI is a major factor. Why should the author and I have to agree with you there?
"we pay a subscription fee and we, eventually, get a polished product - sometimes it just takes a little more time". This attitude is exactly why we get beta state MMOs inflicted upon us.
I think you're true and wrong there. If the author was trying to hide the fact that there are problems and bugs in MO, I would agree with you that MMORPG is trying to guide his community buying this game blindfolded. That's not the case. If you are following the official forums and what SV announces as features, you see that they are not very far away from what they are announcing. But I also agree that there are lots of things still missing from the game pulling the game being far from perfect.
"...perhaps this is something that will be remedied in future updates? We can surely hope." "...feeling of excitement and the desire for this game to succeed." Biased review is biased. I get the feeling he only grudgingly acknowledges negatives because the editors insisted. Protip to MMORPG com: don't let gushing fanboys write reviews.
Having a reviewer feeling sympathy for one type of style doesn't make him a fanboy. It is very obvious that the reviewer is an UO style player and he's looking for similar brand new games to enter the market. Do you think it would be a good idea to have a WoW playing style author will have good time reviewing the game and can find his way out on MO world?
Why did this game get the benefit of being released for 6 months before seeing a review?
You find it a benefit for not being beaten and smashed on release for a game? Why? The game was in a much more primitive state 6 months ago, and it is much better now. It shows the company is making progress on the game.
Writing all of these, don't think that I find the game great or perfect, it still has lots of things missing when I think about what features can be added to the game (taverns, why aren't there taverns? But the good think is that they are saying that they'll add it at least, or call it butchery, call it improvement on housing systems, eating, heat system blah blah). I know that it is easy to promise and hard to do, so everyone should think carefully before ordering the game, check what it is there, and what is missing, get informed before spending your money on it. Just as you do before buying a gaming console, a house, a car etc.
On the other hand, I don't understand the reason for people bashing the author for him giving a score higher than you expect because his priorities are not the same as yours, or you think the game is not that good. I would easily understand if you say that this is missing, that's not available, there are bugs like this and that, but everyone is focused on smashing something or blaming someone. Or we can discuss as much as we want here, you say what you think is true, I do the same, and we go on. Let each individual make their own decisions, I simply don't understand why everyone is fighting so hard to have their ideas being accepted by using colorful statements and remarks
On the other hand, I don't understand the reason for people bashing the author for him giving a score higher than you expect because his priorities are not the same as yours..
That's not why people are bashing him. It's because his score and it's definition, per mmorpg.com, does not match what he wrote. I think his written review is fine. A score should be based on the game the reviewer experienced, not potential it may or may not realize in the future. Based on his written review, the game--while fun for him--is a mess. His score should reflect that, but it doesn't.
yes i also belive this game has potential, but that in itself will not save the game. it takes an idea with potential AND a competent company to make a succesfull game ( like EvE). unfortunately wile MO has potential SV does not have competence. that simple.
CCP didn't had compenence back when EVE got launched 2003 either, they worked for free for months just to get the game stable, EVE was riddle with bugs.
EVE fanboys like myself stayed despite how crappy EVE was but we saw the potentials in the game so we stayed, look what EVE is today.
I'm not saying it will happen to SV but you have the trial and error period as a fresh developer with little experience when i'ts thier first game very much like CCP, So the fat lady haven't sung yet, I still have hopes for MO to crawl out of it's crib and stand on it's two feets and smell the roses.
btw did you know how CCP got thier money to start developing EVE?, they made boardgames
"Now I must state that I do not like to judge an MMORPG on its launch and how bug-ridden it is at any point". LOL what? How bug ridden it is should be a major factor in judging any piece of software.
I don't agree. What is most important for me is CTD (crash to desktop) issues. Having critical bugs causing you to die instantly (time to time you have these bugs in MO, one is patched recently for example). Some may say that how polished a UI is a major factor. Why should the author and I have to agree with you there?
Many people *do* consider sheer volume of bugs to be a major factor, which is why they wait for months after launch before getting any new software to give devs more time to iron them out. Many reviews *will* deduct a crappy UI from the final score. In most cases bad or good UI is a matter of taste (unless it's glitchy lol), so it's not a valid comparison to amount/severity of bugs.
"...perhaps this is something that will be remedied in future updates? We can surely hope." "...feeling of excitement and the desire for this game to succeed." Biased review is biased. I get the feeling he only grudgingly acknowledges negatives because the editors insisted. Protip to MMORPG com: don't let gushing fanboys write reviews.
Having a reviewer feeling sympathy for one type of style doesn't make him a fanboy. It is very obvious that the reviewer is an UO style player and he's looking for similar brand new games to enter the market. Do you think it would be a good idea to have a WoW playing style author will have good time reviewing the game and can find his way out on MO world?
No, but openly rooting for a game to succeed *does* make it biased. This isn't his personal blog...this is *supposed* to be an unbiased MMO site. No one suggested that you should have someone that hates a genre or style of game review it.
Why did this game get the benefit of being released for 6 months before seeing a review?
You find it a benefit for not being beaten and smashed on release for a game? Why? The game was in a much more primitive state 6 months ago, and it is much better now. It shows the company is making progress on the game.
The minute a company is asking you for money, it is fair game to have its' product/service reviewed.
On the other hand, I don't understand the reason for people bashing the author for him giving a score higher than you expect because his priorities are not the same as yours, or you think the game is not that good.
If you don't understand, it's either because you don't want to, or you aren't reading peoples' posts. By MMORPG's own rating standards, the game does not rate a 6.9 based on the conceded to problems with the game. "Potential" should never, ever be a factor in a score.
They should use the same rating system they give to the site users...rate the game's 'Sound', 'Fun', 'Graphics', etc. Mortal already had a chance to be hyped, now it's time for it to be weighed and measured. I think this should be done with all the released games for that matter, but it seems more appropriate here.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
In the grand scheme of things, is the score really that important that a debate should rage for this long?
It is for a couple of reasons:
Since the score is so prominently displayed, not only at the top of the review, but on the game's overview page, it's an immediate glance into rating without needing to actually read the review. It's an inaccurate first impression.
Since the score and the definition of what it means, per mmorpg.com, doesn't seem to accurate reflect what you wrote, it undermines the credibility of not only the review, but of mmorpg.com, in general. It underscores a need for mmorpg.com to implement consistent guidelines for it's reviewers
Irrespective of that, the reason the debate rages on is because fans are accusing those who disagree with the score of simply being haters, which isn't necessarily the case. I think the written review is fine, the score just doesn't match it (and I'd be equally concerned if the written review was glowing, but the score seemed abnormally low).
I'd like to see mmorpg.com open up a discussion thread asking for input on specifically what factors need to be addressed, let the community vote on what they want to see in a review, and then publish guidelines based on those factors. If a score is given, what individual components were factored into the overall averaged score?
If MO gets a 6.9, DFO should easily pull off a 8 - 9
I do hope MO gets better over time but currently AV is doing a great job with DFO. MO has alot of work ahead of them if they want to steal the DFO gamers. My guess is sometime in 2011 the Darkfall population will at least double once a few more xpacks are released.
If MO gets a 6.9, DFO should easily pull off a 8 - 9
I do hope MO gets better over time but currently AV is doing a great job with DFO. MO has alot of work ahead of them if they want to steal the DFO gamers. My guess is sometime in 2011 the Darkfall population will at least double once a few more xpacks are released.
One game's ratings should have nothing to do with another's, except that they should follow the same guidelines for scoring. Each game's should be based on its own merits and detriments based on the game at the time of review.
One game's ratings should have nothing to do with another's, except that they should follow the same guidelines for scoring. Each game's should be based on its own merits and detriments based on the game at the time of review.
~Ripper
I think what has happened here is that the review rating system itself may need to be adjusted. In the context of all the other reviews done on this site in 2010 the rating doesn't seem to be too far off. It's 6.9 score ranks it at the bottom 25th percentile of all games reviewed this year. The only games which scored lower were Alganon (which went F2P), 2Moons (3 year old F2P game), Soul of the Ultimate Nation (F2P) and All Points Bulletin (which was cancelled on arrival). That's it. Every other game reviewed this year including titles such as FallenEarth, PoTBS, Global Agenda, STO, and even Football Manager Online were rated higher. So.. I guess... first impression looking at the score and the text seems to be a mismatch, but if you take it in context of all the other reviews which were done in 2010.. it probably was appropriately ranked. It just seems that maybe MMORPG.COM needs to do a revamp of the scoring system.
So.. to the review author... while I still believe that "potential" is more appropriate for a preview than an official review, when looking at the way the review system is applied I guess I actually do support your final rating which puts it squarely in the bottom 25% of games reviewed this year.
Here's the list of reviews to support my statements:
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
i dont think that the review system needs reworking to be honest. I think the score is accurate. it MO is in a better state when it was reviewed than darkfall was. Thats why darkfall scored much lower if they were to revist darkfall and review it im sure it would get higher.
there are 2 types of mmo, imitators and innovaters.
I have never, in my life, contacted my credit card company to receive a refund for ANYTHING I've ever purchased. Until MO. I have never seen a company take the credit card information you used to purchase the game and automatically enroll you into a subscription one year later on that same credit card, without your permission.
I take it you didn't read the e-mail they sent out telling everyone that had purchased the game that it was about to go live, and how to cancel the subscription.
[Mod Edit]
Sure, they sent an e-mail just before release. It happened to go into my spam folder, just like every newsletter they've ever sent me. Gmail puts it there by default, despite me never telling it to do that. I'm not one of the people that got ninja-billed, since I actually followed the game, hoping it might get better. But it's the PRINCIPLE of what they did that makes me so angry. People pre-purchased the game to get into beta, never set up a subscription, get auto-enrolled one year later, and that's okay with you because they sent an e-mail out a year after the fact? I really want an answer, so I can decide whether or not to take you seriously in the future. Can your brain conceive of the fact that, after so much time, some people might have changed their e-mail addresses? Or just started ignoring or auto-spamming anything having to do with Mortal Online due to a dislike of the game? Can you honestly fault them for not divining from the heavens that they would be auto-enrolled into a subscription one year after they bought the game?
SV could have easily (well, okay -- maybe not easily. This is SV, after all) done what every MMO company I've ever seen does. You know, have you manually enable your subscription and billing plan if you want to continue after the free 30 days. They could've done it. But they knew there would be people out there that would be billed, maybe not notice right away, and probably wouldn't bother with the hassle of calling their CC company for a chargeback. People like that exist. I have a RL friend that would've been autobilled if I didn't tell him. I encouraged him to get his money for the game back too, but he's one of those people that doesn't like ordering Chinese on the phone, let alone contact his bank for fraud.
Do you seriously think it's even vaguely ethical? If you do, just wow. With that logic, SV can send me an e-mail right now, saying they're going to auto-subscribe me so I can check out their game six months after release. Because if they send me an e-mail right before it happens, surely it's okay?
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.]
lesson learnt, always check your spam mail. I always check mine just incase something ends up there. Also you recieved exactly what you paid for so i dont see how you were entitled to your money back really.
Absolutely incredible. You're a very special person, Death.
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.]
If it is this buggy 6 months in then it is a prime example of the launch soon and be damned mentality. I think the game as gone beyond the point where the bugs will be fixed, like Vanguard they were trying to put in new content when basic bugs were not fixed. Though I have to say from what people are saying MO seems even worse bug wise.
"Now I must state that I do not like to judge an MMORPG on its launch and how bug-ridden it is at any point". LOL what? How bug ridden it is should be a major factor in judging any piece of software.
I don't agree. What is most important for me is CTD (crash to desktop) issues. Having critical bugs causing you to die instantly (time to time you have these bugs in MO, one is patched recently for example). Some may say that how polished a UI is a major factor. Why should the author and I have to agree with you there?
Many people *do* consider sheer volume of bugs to be a major factor, which is why they wait for months after launch before getting any new software to give devs more time to iron them out. Many reviews *will* deduct a crappy UI from the final score. In most cases bad or good UI is a matter of taste (unless it's glitchy lol), so it's not a valid comparison to amount/severity of bugs.
OK, many people may care what you are saying there, but many also do not care. For me, it is about the general feeling about the game I feel, it is not about the flashy buttons I click to perform actions, or dragging a pile of resource to target area, and it fails, I say OK, I redrag again if it fails. I think uninspiring UI is one of the reasons for the low score also.
"...perhaps this is something that will be remedied in future updates? We can surely hope." "...feeling of excitement and the desire for this game to succeed." Biased review is biased. I get the feeling he only grudgingly acknowledges negatives because the editors insisted. Protip to MMORPG com: don't let gushing fanboys write reviews.
Having a reviewer feeling sympathy for one type of style doesn't make him a fanboy. It is very obvious that the reviewer is an UO style player and he's looking for similar brand new games to enter the market. Do you think it would be a good idea to have a WoW playing style author will have good time reviewing the game and can find his way out on MO world?
No, but openly rooting for a game to succeed *does* make it biased. This isn't his personal blog...this is *supposed* to be an unbiased MMO site. No one suggested that you should have someone that hates a genre or style of game review it.
I don't think that author has given a good score without enjoying the game, having a good feeling about it, and has spent some great time by playing it. I did not mean that the author should try to support to game by handing out a high score. You just think that the game is crappy because it doesn't meet your standards, and it certainly meets the author's, and I don't think that the score is high, so he's not alone there, and I think it is more than me. But as long as you don't say that the author should pack and go because of his crappy and one sided opinions and having a hidden agenda of supporting a company and a game, well you're welcome to state your opinion.
Why did this game get the benefit of being released for 6 months before seeing a review?
You find it a benefit for not being beaten and smashed on release for a game? Why? The game was in a much more primitive state 6 months ago, and it is much better now. It shows the company is making progress on the game.
The minute a company is asking you for money, it is fair game to have its' product/service reviewed.
You missed the context about the question and the answer I guess, please reread, of course a game can be reviewed when released, but it can be reviewed after 6 months instead of immediately, complaining since the game is reviewed after release instead of 6 months (so that it would get a lower score since OP is using the word "benefit") is weird to me.
On the other hand, I don't understand the reason for people bashing the author for him giving a score higher than you expect because his priorities are not the same as yours, or you think the game is not that good.
If you don't understand, it's either because you don't want to, or you aren't reading peoples' posts. By MMORPG's own rating standards, the game does not rate a 6.9 based on the conceded to problems with the game. "Potential" should never, ever be a factor in a score.
First of all, I did not read MMORPG's checklist or motto about the score system. If there's one, I can comment about it in a more objective manner (I appreciate if someone can post the link here, or I'll search for it after I return back). For now, what I can say is that, when you play a game, the final impression about a game you get is the combination of many things, positive and negative, like a taste in the mouth after having a dinner in a restaurant, and the final impression can be different than the initial impression about the individual parts that constructs the game. You can find this or that broken, but finally, you can enjoy the game in a great way, it may be the immersion you feel, or whatsoever.
And also, that's the habit of personalizing the discussions on these forums, it's not about me trying to "not willing to understand" or reading other's posts. I do read quite a lot of them, and what I see is that everyone has an idea and priority list (which is completely normal and healthy for a community), and they get mad when others do not agree with those priorities, and start attacking each other personally.
"Now I must state that I do not like to judge an MMORPG on its launch and by how bug-ridden it is at any point. The very advantage of this beautiful genre is that the developer toils and slaves over their projects like none of their game studio peers; we pay a subscription fee and we, eventually, get a polished product – sometimes it just takes a little time."
I stopped reading after this little innane quip. It's this sort of enabling attitude that causes studios to deliver us craptastic games. Nobody gives a fly's ass how much work the devs put in, or how much they're 'slaving' over their projects. When you go to a movie, and it's gawd awful, do you give it a pass because the producer ran out of money in post-production, or that the directer couldn't get the actors he really wanted so had to settle for a bunch of commercial has-beens.
Yeah, I thought not...
As seen over and over and over and over now in this "genre". It's sad when games that are 6 years old destroy "newer" games that have been released after all the experience and struggles of the previous generation have been public for years.
"I'm not cheap I'm incredibly subconsciously financially optimized" "The worst part of censorship is ------------------"
In the grand scheme of things, is the score really that important that a debate should rage for this long?
It is for a couple of reasons:
Since the score is so prominently displayed, not only at the top of the review, but on the game's overview page, it's an immediate glance into rating without needing to actually read the review. It's an inaccurate first impression.
Since the score and the definition of what it means, per mmorpg.com, doesn't seem to accurate reflect what you wrote, it undermines the credibility of not only the review, but of mmorpg.com, in general. It underscores a need for mmorpg.com to implement consistent guidelines for it's reviewers
Irrespective of that, the reason the debate rages on is because fans are accusing those who disagree with the score of simply being haters, which isn't necessarily the case. I think the written review is fine, the score just doesn't match it (and I'd be equally concerned if the written review was glowing, but the score seemed abnormally low).
I'd like to see mmorpg.com open up a discussion thread asking for input on specifically what factors need to be addressed, let the community vote on what they want to see in a review, and then publish guidelines based on those factors. If a score is given, what individual components were factored into the overall averaged score?
Comments
From the looks of it the game looks amazing. At least the developers are attempting to do something with it. On a positive note, all the people who bought the game and are "playing" are helping to fix the game and make it better. I'll check it out again in 6 months, maybe they will have a trial island or something.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
They are charging full price for a game that is in a closed beta state. Why would they give a free trial area for a game that is actually in a release state?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I have no interest in this game other than the entertainment the forums here provide me, but WOW remind me to never, ever take a review from this author seriously. Clearly, he is so desperate for a sandbox game, that he'll eat a turd sandwich and ask for seconds. How does "nearer to the state of close-beta than retail release" translate into a 6.9?
Listing potential as a pro? Seriously?!? What game would potential NOT be a pro?
"Now I must state that I do not like to judge an MMORPG on its launch and how bug-ridden it is at any point". LOL what? How bug ridden it is should be a major factor in judging any piece of software.
"we pay a subscription fee and we, eventually, get a polished product - sometimes it just takes a little more time". This attitude is exactly why we get beta state MMOs inflicted upon us.
"...perhaps this is something that will be remedied in future updates? We can surely hope." "...feeling of excitement and the desire for this game to succeed." Biased review is biased. I get the feeling he only grudgingly acknowledges negatives because the editors insisted. Protip to MMORPG com: don't let gushing fanboys write reviews. Why did this game get the benefit of being released for 6 months before seeing a review?
Who knows, stranger things have happened. As long as people keep buying the game and subbing the developers will continue to try to fix it.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
That's not a player's job in a released game, especially for which he or she pays a subscription. That's the role of a beta player. That's not to say that players for released games can't test content on a public test server, provide feedback, etc.., but that's not their primary role. As a customer, their role is to consume the product and be entertained.
~Ripper
That's not why people are bashing him. It's because his score and it's definition, per mmorpg.com, does not match what he wrote. I think his written review is fine. A score should be based on the game the reviewer experienced, not potential it may or may not realize in the future. Based on his written review, the game--while fun for him--is a mess. His score should reflect that, but it doesn't.
~Ripper
In the grand scheme of things, is the score really that important that a debate should rage for this long?
CCP didn't had compenence back when EVE got launched 2003 either, they worked for free for months just to get the game stable, EVE was riddle with bugs.
EVE fanboys like myself stayed despite how crappy EVE was but we saw the potentials in the game so we stayed, look what EVE is today.
I'm not saying it will happen to SV but you have the trial and error period as a fresh developer with little experience when i'ts thier first game very much like CCP, So the fat lady haven't sung yet, I still have hopes for MO to crawl out of it's crib and stand on it's two feets and smell the roses.
btw did you know how CCP got thier money to start developing EVE?, they made boardgames
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
They should use the same rating system they give to the site users...rate the game's 'Sound', 'Fun', 'Graphics', etc. Mortal already had a chance to be hyped, now it's time for it to be weighed and measured. I think this should be done with all the released games for that matter, but it seems more appropriate here.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
It is for a couple of reasons:
Since the score is so prominently displayed, not only at the top of the review, but on the game's overview page, it's an immediate glance into rating without needing to actually read the review. It's an inaccurate first impression.
Since the score and the definition of what it means, per mmorpg.com, doesn't seem to accurate reflect what you wrote, it undermines the credibility of not only the review, but of mmorpg.com, in general. It underscores a need for mmorpg.com to implement consistent guidelines for it's reviewers
Irrespective of that, the reason the debate rages on is because fans are accusing those who disagree with the score of simply being haters, which isn't necessarily the case. I think the written review is fine, the score just doesn't match it (and I'd be equally concerned if the written review was glowing, but the score seemed abnormally low).
I'd like to see mmorpg.com open up a discussion thread asking for input on specifically what factors need to be addressed, let the community vote on what they want to see in a review, and then publish guidelines based on those factors. If a score is given, what individual components were factored into the overall averaged score?
~Ripper
If MO gets a 6.9, DFO should easily pull off a 8 - 9
I do hope MO gets better over time but currently AV is doing a great job with DFO. MO has alot of work ahead of them if they want to steal the DFO gamers. My guess is sometime in 2011 the Darkfall population will at least double once a few more xpacks are released.
"I play Tera for the gameplay"
One game's ratings should have nothing to do with another's, except that they should follow the same guidelines for scoring. Each game's should be based on its own merits and detriments based on the game at the time of review.
~Ripper
I think what has happened here is that the review rating system itself may need to be adjusted. In the context of all the other reviews done on this site in 2010 the rating doesn't seem to be too far off. It's 6.9 score ranks it at the bottom 25th percentile of all games reviewed this year. The only games which scored lower were Alganon (which went F2P), 2Moons (3 year old F2P game), Soul of the Ultimate Nation (F2P) and All Points Bulletin (which was cancelled on arrival). That's it. Every other game reviewed this year including titles such as FallenEarth, PoTBS, Global Agenda, STO, and even Football Manager Online were rated higher. So.. I guess... first impression looking at the score and the text seems to be a mismatch, but if you take it in context of all the other reviews which were done in 2010.. it probably was appropriately ranked. It just seems that maybe MMORPG.COM needs to do a revamp of the scoring system.
So.. to the review author... while I still believe that "potential" is more appropriate for a preview than an official review, when looking at the way the review system is applied I guess I actually do support your final rating which puts it squarely in the bottom 25% of games reviewed this year.
Here's the list of reviews to support my statements:
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
i dont think that the review system needs reworking to be honest. I think the score is accurate. it MO is in a better state when it was reviewed than darkfall was. Thats why darkfall scored much lower if they were to revist darkfall and review it im sure it would get higher.
there are 2 types of mmo, imitators and innovaters.
[Mod Edit]
Sure, they sent an e-mail just before release. It happened to go into my spam folder, just like every newsletter they've ever sent me. Gmail puts it there by default, despite me never telling it to do that. I'm not one of the people that got ninja-billed, since I actually followed the game, hoping it might get better. But it's the PRINCIPLE of what they did that makes me so angry. People pre-purchased the game to get into beta, never set up a subscription, get auto-enrolled one year later, and that's okay with you because they sent an e-mail out a year after the fact? I really want an answer, so I can decide whether or not to take you seriously in the future. Can your brain conceive of the fact that, after so much time, some people might have changed their e-mail addresses? Or just started ignoring or auto-spamming anything having to do with Mortal Online due to a dislike of the game? Can you honestly fault them for not divining from the heavens that they would be auto-enrolled into a subscription one year after they bought the game?
SV could have easily (well, okay -- maybe not easily. This is SV, after all) done what every MMO company I've ever seen does. You know, have you manually enable your subscription and billing plan if you want to continue after the free 30 days. They could've done it. But they knew there would be people out there that would be billed, maybe not notice right away, and probably wouldn't bother with the hassle of calling their CC company for a chargeback. People like that exist. I have a RL friend that would've been autobilled if I didn't tell him. I encouraged him to get his money for the game back too, but he's one of those people that doesn't like ordering Chinese on the phone, let alone contact his bank for fraud.
Do you seriously think it's even vaguely ethical? If you do, just wow. With that logic, SV can send me an e-mail right now, saying they're going to auto-subscribe me so I can check out their game six months after release. Because if they send me an e-mail right before it happens, surely it's okay?
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.]
Just a reminder, lets stay on the topic of the thread. Thanks!
Absolutely incredible. You're a very special person, Death.
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.]
I did not realise the game was already out.
If it is this buggy 6 months in then it is a prime example of the launch soon and be damned mentality. I think the game as gone beyond the point where the bugs will be fixed, like Vanguard they were trying to put in new content when basic bugs were not fixed. Though I have to say from what people are saying MO seems even worse bug wise.
As seen over and over and over and over now in this "genre". It's sad when games that are 6 years old destroy "newer" games that have been released after all the experience and struggles of the previous generation have been public for years.
"I'm not cheap I'm incredibly subconsciously financially optimized"
"The worst part of censorship is ------------------"
http://gamejournos.tumblr.com/post/2069188731/not-shit-journalism-gamrfeed-vgchartz-joseph
Be happy mmorpg.com wasn't listed... yet.
I win!!! LOL@U
This reviewer comes off as being a bit new to the MMO genre with some of the things he says