This is about what I expected from user reviews.. for critic reviews you will probably see lots of 7 and 8s which I feel is fair... this game is in no way a 2 but also in no way a 10 in my opinion
im 90% sure, we will get 10/10 reviews from these sites:
It is funny, go read the negative reviews compared to the positive reviews. Many of the negative reviews talk about the game(some really good ones I might add) while most of the positive reviews are people attacking the negative reviewers while giving the game a 10.
I find Metacritic's user reviews are useful. Granted, most of them are spammed as either over-exagerrated 0-1s or 9-10s, but there's the occasional reasonably written review that actually outlines the real positives or negatives.
It's also great for spotting games that have been overhyped. Take Rage for example, average 79% from critics, 43% from users. Why? Because Rage was terribly overhyped. The reality of the game was that it was too shallow, generic, short, and plagued with technical issues.
Not saying that it's the exact same with SWTOR, but I have a feeling it's largely to do with backlash from all of the over-hyping people have been doing.
<--- read my quote.
Come on, no rating under 5 is really justified, nor a 10. That makes 90% of all so called reviews there highly irrelevant IMHO. Rasting SWTOR 10 or 2 or even 0 is just bullcrap, no matter if the game is your pair of shoes. A review has to take all possible customers into account not only your personal preferrence. For example, if you are a sandbox fan, for YOU the game might be 1 or 0, but such a rating would not be a review, as a reviewer has to be a neutral as possible and judge a product from the view of the possible target audience.
Contrary to public opinion here, a REAL review is NOT just "some dudes personal opinion".
User reviews are personal reviews, take them as they are. The haters and fanboys tend to balance each other out because they both give exagerated "like" or "dislike" scores. However, there's the occasional user review that is actually a good reveiew that gives a more realistic picture of the game than any of the critics do. Either way, don't take user reviews at face value, you have to see why people are giving good or negative reviews, and you'll get a better idea than the often half-baked or paid off critic reviews.
Besides, If you disagree with what all the "haters" that are posting negative reviews, then add your own. Otherwise, deal with it.
Metacritic has been a gong show for some time. As someone else already said, it's always 10's or 1's for user reviews. Hard to take it seriously. The critic reviews are just as bad since most gaming sites are paid for by EAbucks or whoever the publisher happens to be paying for the ads on the site.
At the end of the day it's best to just play a trial or buddy key or full game cost and figure things out for yourself.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
having looked at the reviews there are a lot that say its a good game..my point i suppose i am trying to make is that are we not to beleive all the negative and beleive all the positive reviews.and why are all the negative classed as wow or gw2 fanbois..seems kind of strange to me..best way to find out i suppose is try it for yourself,then you will find out..trust noone not even reviews because these sites are paid to advertise the game.
I don't think that being open with your plans should be a free ticket out of criticism. For example, if I told my art teacher that my painting was going to be a blatant rip-off of a Picasso piece, would she be wrong for criticizing it as being derivative?
EXACTLY HOW I FEEL....why do all these fanboy's keep saying that we should have EXPECTED the game to be a mediocre theme park mirrored after WOW?
Sorry guys, that just doesn't cut it....I've given 2 reviews already so I wont go too far into this, but the game really is not that great. Bioware should stick with single player RPG's....
99% of the negative reviews are complete nonsense, I've been reading several of them. They haven't played at all but are just there to trash the game. I don't take user reviews serious at all over there when its so obivious that they are trolling all over the place.
I like how TOR fanboys cannot possibly justify in their mind how anyone might dislike their game enough to post a negative review about it... but a 10/10 is completely justified because TOR is the best game ever ever ever.
I mean sure.. you can like it.. but you can OBVIOUSLY see that it's not perfect... and for some people it's not good at all.
I gave it a 5/10 on Metacritic... and most of the negative reviews make more sense to me than the positive ones
I'd give SWTOR a 2. Archaic pricing model for a WoW clone? Even with the Star Wars setting the lack of content doesn't justify so many poor decisions in crafting this game. EA went to its roots of just trying to cash in on a genre done better elsewhere (which has worked for them in the past granted) but they haven't had the leadership in a good decade to make it work. Hope people enjoy it now. Have fun with the new shiny game, cuz that's what it was built to be. Shiny. Then in 6 months we'll wait for a real contender in the MMORPG genre to stand up.
This game was not even half designed to be "it".
But hopefully it'll serve some fans some good and make BioWare concentrate more on what they're actually good at.
I used to play MMOs like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
It is funny, go read the negative reviews compared to the positive reviews. Many of the negative reviews talk about the game(some really good ones I might add) while most of the positive reviews are people attacking the negative reviewers while giving the game a 10.
MWF3...
That is all.
After reading a bit from metacritic, the the game is popular but has a low score then its more then likely a good game.
Reading some of the negative comments, the ones I read have obviously played the game and just don't like it. People are allowed to not like a game and I find user ratings are generally right and reflect the views of the community on the whole. That user score will probably go up to a 7 and I think that is where this game is right now 7/10.
EXACTLY HOW I FEEL....why do all these fanboy's keep saying that we should have EXPECTED the game to be a mediocre theme park mirrored after WOW?
Sorry guys, that just doesn't cut it....I've given 2 reviews already so I wont go too far into this, but the game really is not that great. Bioware should stick with single player RPG's....
"Not that great" is subjective, what's great to you may be horrible to me so on and so forth. Reviews are meant to offer an informative look at a game, it shouldn't be based on preference, as preference is different from person to person. A review should measure how a game stacks up for it's intended audience.
I'll go back to the COD scoring pointed out earlier. IS that 2.1 average based on the games intended audience, or is it based on those who don't like the franchise and prefer BF3? I'm willing to bet it's the latter.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I think all user-scores are absolutely justified, be it 0 scores or 10/10, and absolutely no matter for what reason they were given.
We'll just disagree then. I think 0 and 10 scores occur..but not to the degree we see on metacritic. That's not a review score where all things are considered , evaluated, then thrown in a pot and boiled down to a base score....those are merely numbers arbitrarily assigned by people with an agenda or at the least exteme bias 9emotionally fueled or otherwise). If most of them had the review particular down to support the number then fine..but this is just not the case. It's just a bunch of children saying" my dad can beat up your dad".
My biggest response is Who cares? I never ever listen to any critic when I make a decision to buy or not to buy any game. Taste in games is very personal and what some geek in an office somewhere likes in a game could be completely different than what I like in a game. I will read reviews not for the scores or final opinions but rather to see what information I can get on what the game actually is.
EXACTLY HOW I FEEL....why do all these fanboy's keep saying that we should have EXPECTED the game to be a mediocre theme park mirrored after WOW?
Sorry guys, that just doesn't cut it....I've given 2 reviews already so I wont go too far into this, but the game really is not that great. Bioware should stick with single player RPG's....
"Not that great" is subjective, what's great to you may be horrible to me so on and so forth. Reviews are meant to offer an informative look at a game, it shouldn't be based on preference, as preference is different from person to person. A review should measure how a game stacks up for it's intended audience.
I'll go back to the COD scoring pointed out earlier. IS that 2.1 average based on the games intended audience, or is it based on those who don't like the franchise and prefer BF3? I'm willing to bet it's the latter.
I would write another review and be as objective as possible, but I already did that and can't put myself up to it again. The game masks the oh so common theme-park ride with VO and a companion....EVERYTHING else in the game is standard fair that's been recycled since the early 2000's....it's not even 1% different....it's completely copied over...different setting, different story, same game. In the end, a game is a game because of gameplay....not story....if I want a good story, ill read a 5 dollar book.
I like how TOR fanboys cannot possibly justify in their mind how anyone might dislike their game enough to post a negative review about it... but a 10/10 is completely justified because TOR is the best game ever ever ever.
I mean sure.. you can like it.. but you can OBVIOUSLY see that it's not perfect... and for some people it's not good at all.
I gave it a 5/10 on Metacritic... and most of the negative reviews make more sense to me than the positive ones
It's not that we can't "possibly justify" that someone dislikes the game, it's that many of the people who dislike the game:
Not played it at all yet.
Are following the bandwagon of other peoples' reviews.
Have only played one aspect of the game (i.e. the single player storyline on the first planet, and they haven't even gotten their companion, their ship, or tried group play)
Have reviewed the game with an absurd score (numerous 0's). No game in existence deserves a 0 out of 10. Every game has at least a little bit of value... unless it somehow physically kills you. Then you are allowed to give it a 0. But then you would be dead...
I commend you for giving it a 5/10, even though by your choice of words you're not a fan of the game. I'm glad you didn't ravenously give it a 0/10 because it wasn't the messiah of MMO's that you thought it would be.
EDIT: Spelling/Grammar (ironic that I had to edit it again because I spelled grammar wrong)
For me, it depends on the class. I would give the game a solid 7 for the agent class. Its a good story, interesting class to play (especially the sniper) great acting, and a good sidekick. I leveled one up in Beta to around 30. For every other class its probably a 3 or 4. Nothing seemed interesting for the other classes. Just a blah and bland story, the gameplay was pretty much the same for all the light saber classes with some subtle differences. The smuggler could have been as good as the agent if all the dialogue wasn't so corny. Just nothing held my interest like the agent storyline did. The space combat is horrible, simply dreadful, and I wish I could have more character customization at the beginning. I grouped some during beta and that didn't even feel right. I felt too much like I was playing a single player game. Is it worth it for $30 for 60 days, yeah, but $60 at launch for 30 days to wait in a 2 hour line to get in and then just to kicked out for no reason after 20 minutes is crazy.
All a bunch of butt-hurt sandbox fans and SWG refugees flooding metacritic to give TOR a bad review. You can't really take Metacrific seriously because most of the users who take the time to score a game there are doing so because they have a motive to destroy the game...
You can always tell the real reviews from the blatantly negative ones because real reviews will highlight both the goods and bads and give a fair score. The haters give the game a 0 and no real information as to why other than usually some one-line garbage rant.
Comments
im 90% sure, we will get 10/10 reviews from these sites:
IGN
Gamespot
1UP
Kotaku
It is funny, go read the negative reviews compared to the positive reviews. Many of the negative reviews talk about the game(some really good ones I might add) while most of the positive reviews are people attacking the negative reviewers while giving the game a 10.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/339443/Video-FollowUp-Guide-For-Enhancing-Graphics-and-Performance-in-SWTORSorry-still-Nvidia-Only.html
User reviews are personal reviews, take them as they are. The haters and fanboys tend to balance each other out because they both give exagerated "like" or "dislike" scores. However, there's the occasional user review that is actually a good reveiew that gives a more realistic picture of the game than any of the critics do. Either way, don't take user reviews at face value, you have to see why people are giving good or negative reviews, and you'll get a better idea than the often half-baked or paid off critic reviews.
Besides, If you disagree with what all the "haters" that are posting negative reviews, then add your own. Otherwise, deal with it.
Perhaps all of us who like the game need to go write positive reviews on there to "up" the score!
Metacritic has been a gong show for some time. As someone else already said, it's always 10's or 1's for user reviews. Hard to take it seriously. The critic reviews are just as bad since most gaming sites are paid for by EAbucks or whoever the publisher happens to be paying for the ads on the site.
At the end of the day it's best to just play a trial or buddy key or full game cost and figure things out for yourself.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
having looked at the reviews there are a lot that say its a good game..my point i suppose i am trying to make is that are we not to beleive all the negative and beleive all the positive reviews.and why are all the negative classed as wow or gw2 fanbois..seems kind of strange to me..best way to find out i suppose is try it for yourself,then you will find out..trust noone not even reviews because these sites are paid to advertise the game.
EXACTLY HOW I FEEL....why do all these fanboy's keep saying that we should have EXPECTED the game to be a mediocre theme park mirrored after WOW?
Sorry guys, that just doesn't cut it....I've given 2 reviews already so I wont go too far into this, but the game really is not that great. Bioware should stick with single player RPG's....
99% of the negative reviews are complete nonsense, I've been reading several of them. They haven't played at all but are just there to trash the game. I don't take user reviews serious at all over there when its so obivious that they are trolling all over the place.
I like how TOR fanboys cannot possibly justify in their mind how anyone might dislike their game enough to post a negative review about it... but a 10/10 is completely justified because TOR is the best game ever ever ever.
I mean sure.. you can like it.. but you can OBVIOUSLY see that it's not perfect... and for some people it's not good at all.
I gave it a 5/10 on Metacritic... and most of the negative reviews make more sense to me than the positive ones
..Cake..
I'd give SWTOR a 2.
Archaic pricing model for a WoW clone? Even with the Star Wars setting the lack of content doesn't justify so many poor decisions in crafting this game. EA went to its roots of just trying to cash in on a genre done better elsewhere (which has worked for them in the past granted) but they haven't had the leadership in a good decade to make it work.
Hope people enjoy it now. Have fun with the new shiny game, cuz that's what it was built to be. Shiny.
Then in 6 months we'll wait for a real contender in the MMORPG genre to stand up.
This game was not even half designed to be "it".
But hopefully it'll serve some fans some good and make BioWare concentrate more on what they're actually good at.
I used to play MMOs like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
MWF3...
That is all.
After reading a bit from metacritic, the the game is popular but has a low score then its more then likely a good game.
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
Reading some of the negative comments, the ones I read have obviously played the game and just don't like it. People are allowed to not like a game and I find user ratings are generally right and reflect the views of the community on the whole. That user score will probably go up to a 7 and I think that is where this game is right now 7/10.
"Not that great" is subjective, what's great to you may be horrible to me so on and so forth. Reviews are meant to offer an informative look at a game, it shouldn't be based on preference, as preference is different from person to person. A review should measure how a game stacks up for it's intended audience.
I'll go back to the COD scoring pointed out earlier. IS that 2.1 average based on the games intended audience, or is it based on those who don't like the franchise and prefer BF3? I'm willing to bet it's the latter.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
We'll just disagree then. I think 0 and 10 scores occur..but not to the degree we see on metacritic. That's not a review score where all things are considered , evaluated, then thrown in a pot and boiled down to a base score....those are merely numbers arbitrarily assigned by people with an agenda or at the least exteme bias 9emotionally fueled or otherwise). If most of them had the review particular down to support the number then fine..but this is just not the case. It's just a bunch of children saying" my dad can beat up your dad".
Well, to put it in a different perspecive.
Here are critic and user reviews for "Easy Virtue"
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1202807-easy_virtue/
A movie based on a Noel Coward play. Not very enthusiastic right? But I loved it. So much so that I'm going to buy it.
Here are other horrible user/pro reviews for Pandorum:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/pandorum/
I loved it and have seen it several times.
However, here is are user reviews for "The fast and the Furious"
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1108372-fast_and_the_furious/
Pros didn't think much of it but the users really liked it.
Boondock Saints?
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/boondock_saints/
Pros hated it, users liked it and I was thought it was average at best.
So who am I to believe? I'll just stick with my own opinion.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
My biggest response is Who cares? I never ever listen to any critic when I make a decision to buy or not to buy any game. Taste in games is very personal and what some geek in an office somewhere likes in a game could be completely different than what I like in a game. I will read reviews not for the scores or final opinions but rather to see what information I can get on what the game actually is.
Is the game buggy?
Are there players active in the game?
What is the playstyle?
What type of game is it?
etc etc.
Why I never use meta critic.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-force-unleashed-
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic
http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3
http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/duke-nukem-forever
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
I would write another review and be as objective as possible, but I already did that and can't put myself up to it again. The game masks the oh so common theme-park ride with VO and a companion....EVERYTHING else in the game is standard fair that's been recycled since the early 2000's....it's not even 1% different....it's completely copied over...different setting, different story, same game. In the end, a game is a game because of gameplay....not story....if I want a good story, ill read a 5 dollar book.
It's not that we can't "possibly justify" that someone dislikes the game, it's that many of the people who dislike the game:
Not played it at all yet.
Are following the bandwagon of other peoples' reviews.
Have only played one aspect of the game (i.e. the single player storyline on the first planet, and they haven't even gotten their companion, their ship, or tried group play)
Have reviewed the game with an absurd score (numerous 0's). No game in existence deserves a 0 out of 10. Every game has at least a little bit of value... unless it somehow physically kills you. Then you are allowed to give it a 0. But then you would be dead...
I commend you for giving it a 5/10, even though by your choice of words you're not a fan of the game. I'm glad you didn't ravenously give it a 0/10 because it wasn't the messiah of MMO's that you thought it would be.
EDIT: Spelling/Grammar (ironic that I had to edit it again because I spelled grammar wrong)
For me, it depends on the class. I would give the game a solid 7 for the agent class. Its a good story, interesting class to play (especially the sniper) great acting, and a good sidekick. I leveled one up in Beta to around 30. For every other class its probably a 3 or 4. Nothing seemed interesting for the other classes. Just a blah and bland story, the gameplay was pretty much the same for all the light saber classes with some subtle differences. The smuggler could have been as good as the agent if all the dialogue wasn't so corny. Just nothing held my interest like the agent storyline did. The space combat is horrible, simply dreadful, and I wish I could have more character customization at the beginning. I grouped some during beta and that didn't even feel right. I felt too much like I was playing a single player game. Is it worth it for $30 for 60 days, yeah, but $60 at launch for 30 days to wait in a 2 hour line to get in and then just to kicked out for no reason after 20 minutes is crazy.
All a bunch of butt-hurt sandbox fans and SWG refugees flooding metacritic to give TOR a bad review. You can't really take Metacrific seriously because most of the users who take the time to score a game there are doing so because they have a motive to destroy the game...
You can always tell the real reviews from the blatantly negative ones because real reviews will highlight both the goods and bads and give a fair score. The haters give the game a 0 and no real information as to why other than usually some one-line garbage rant.
Since my post got lost in a sea of rapid thread replies, repeating because it needs to be read: http://games.ign.com/articles/121/1212865p1.html
^ The problem with metacritic user reviews.
This is like dragon age 2 review scandal but reversed lol
"It has potential"
-Second most used phrase on existence
"It sucks"
-Most used phrase on existence
I especially like the reviews that begin:
'I haven't played this game...'
or
'I only played in the beta weekend...'