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!

PC Gamer gave SWToR 93

1234568

Comments

  • sgelsgel HeraklionPosts: 1,081Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Ginaz

    Originally posted by dubyahite

    I trust PC Gamer a heck of a lot more than most folks around these forums

    Same here.  Random Dude on the Internet isn't exactly someone I would go to for advice or info.

    How about readin a lot of differnet opinions and then forming your own?... that's a tad less foolish than comparing ONE magazine to ONE random person on the internet...

    ..Cake..

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,643Member Uncommon

    The only opinions I trust are mine and my friends.

    Random internet posts and 'commericially enhanced' reviews are just waffle, whether they are good or bad.

    This game getting steller reviews from commercial sites in the first month was predicted though, so it's performing as expected.

  • TardcoreTardcore MinskPosts: 2,325Member

    Originally posted by ktanner3

    As a fan of this game, I could care less what the reviews say. The only opinion that matters is the players and we willl see their opinion in the coming months with sub numbers.

    As a non-fan of the game, I completely agree. I think its at least safe to say at this point that Bioware is certainly not going to take a financial loss on this game, but player retention rate and growth once the honeymoon period is over will be the real measures of success.

    image

    "Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "

  • xmentyxmenty SingaporePosts: 679Member

    Originally posted by vesavius

    The only opinions I trust are mine and my friends.

    Random internet posts and 'commericially enhanced' reviews are just waffle, whether they are good or bad.

    This game getting steller reviews from commercial sites in the first month was predicted though, so it's performing as expected.

     

     I have to agree with Vea, 

    My personal rating for SWTOR 60 - 65.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Pardon my English as it is not my 1st language :)

  • MundusMundus BerlinPosts: 237Member

    Seriously, who cares for reviews? The only important opinion is oneselves. According to many critics "Men in Tights" is a horrible movie and it may very well be, though for me it is still one of my all time favourites for the Godfather scene alone. :D

    I guess you can only tell for yourself, which is of course sometimes hard if certain games don't provide a trial (for a "good" reason?) ...

  • VultureSkullVultureSkull LONDONPosts: 1,774Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Mundus

    Seriously, who cares for reviews? The only important opinion is oneselves. According to many critics "Men in Tights" is a horrible movie and it may very well be, though for me it is still one of my all time favourites for the Godfather scene alone. :D

    I guess you can only tell for yourself, which is of course sometimes hard if certain games don't provide a trial (for a "good" reason?) ...

    Hit Nail Head.

     

  • Eir_SEir_S Argyle, NYPosts: 4,623Member

    Originally posted by Razeron

    Originally posted by Eir_S

    They actually gave Cataclysm a 93?  :

    Times like these make me glad I stopped reading game payoff.. er.. review mags years ago.

     

     

    Cataclysm got a 93/100 for ANYTHING? 

     

     AHA HAH HAH HAH

    I personally give Cata a 93 rating for Best Reason to Quit WoW.  That's all it managed to do for me.  It was just super-hyped, that's all most of these reveiws are.

  • SouldrainerSouldrainer Elmer, NJPosts: 1,857Member

    Originally posted by teakbois

    Originally posted by Vhaln

      Must be because it's so popular, another giant MMO everyone loves to hate, like WoW.  

     

    This is the first MMORPG thats ever come out that so many people want to see fail.  Every game that comes out has people like puremallace that are blindly loyal to one game that they will trash the next without any grasp of reality, but this sort of behavior is widespread with SWTOR.  Because people feel its a threat to their game (it probably isnt) and they are annoyed by the hype it got.  Throw in the disgruntled SWG vets and you have a volatile batch of haters not yet seen before.

    SWG fans really need to get over it.  I passed on SWG for two reasons: 

    #1 Nothing I saw embodied anything even remotely like Star Wars.  Sandbox =/= SW.  If we are talking Star Trek or Dune or Mad Max, sandbox is definitely the way to go, but Star Wars was always about the story.  Nothing they ever did in the 6 SW movies was ever random or exploratory.  They had clear cut stories and their choices within their stories shape their characters.  When KOTOR 1 came out it blew the doors way off of what a SW game should be.  SWTOR is the new version of this, and for SW fans who understand the IP and the launch pains of the genre, it is excellent.

    #2 SOE.  They have poor vision, and proved it numerous times within the 3 months I played Everquest.

    The haters need to use their hate.  Strike the game down!  This kind of hate flying in the face of rational reviews only makes the game more popular.

     

    PC Gamer is not the only site to give the game accolades though.  Here is the award page:

    http://www.swtor.com/awards 

    Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.

  • Vato26Vato26 BFE, MOPosts: 3,930Member

    Originally posted by Souldrainer

    Originally posted by teakbois


    Originally posted by Vhaln

      Must be because it's so popular, another giant MMO everyone loves to hate, like WoW.  

     

    This is the first MMORPG thats ever come out that so many people want to see fail.  Every game that comes out has people like puremallace that are blindly loyal to one game that they will trash the next without any grasp of reality, but this sort of behavior is widespread with SWTOR.  Because people feel its a threat to their game (it probably isnt) and they are annoyed by the hype it got.  Throw in the disgruntled SWG vets and you have a volatile batch of haters not yet seen before.

    SWG fans really need to get over it.  I passed on SWG for two reasons: 

    #1 Nothing I saw embodied anything even remotely like Star Wars.  Sandbox =/= SW.  If we are talking Star Trek or Dune or Mad Max, sandbox is definitely the way to go, but Star Wars was always about the story.  Nothing they ever did in the 6 SW movies was ever random or exploratory.  They had clear cut stories and their choices within their stories shape their characters.  When KOTOR 1 came out it blew the doors way off of what a SW game should be.  SWTOR is the new version of this, and for SW fans who understand the IP and the launch pains of the genre, it is excellent.

    #2 SOE.  They have poor vision, and proved it numerous times within the 3 months I played Everquest.

    The haters need to use their hate.  Strike the game down!  This kind of hate flying in the face of rational reviews only makes the game more popular.

     

    PC Gamer is not the only site to give the game accolades though.  Here is the award page:

    http://www.swtor.com/awards 

    Well, I think we know where EA has been shelling all that money.

    Half those 2011 rewards scream of "bribe".

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon

    Can anyone give a link to proove that review sites are payed to make their reviews without being all tin-foil-hatty?

    I ask because I have never heard this happen.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member

    Originally posted by I_Return

    Originally posted by teakbois


    Originally posted by I_Return

    I simply tired of games being rewarded with high scores for copying other games. When games like AoC , Vanguard or Spellbourne come out, there's hardly any attention paid to them cause they don't selll magazines or have millions of followers. AoC is a great mmorpg, Vanguard is probably the great moorpg available at this time, and Spellbourne simply couldn't sustain itself but atleast they tried.

     

    Oh there was LOTS of attention paid to Vanguard.  problem was, it sucked.  And it was also quite possibly the least innovative game launched post WoW.  The only thing I can think of unique about it was the defensive target.  Diplomacy too I suppose, but it is a minigame and was worthless at launch outside of the first 10 levels of story from your home town.

    Crafting , Exploring ,  Role playing , diplomacy , building , sailing . Vanguard was "massive" . Vanguard is one of a few "massive" multiplayer online role playing game on the market. The only other "Massive" game was shadowbane. I will consider Mortal Online another "Massive" game. Lineage 2 is Massive.

     

    What I like about a massive game or multiplayer game, I am the story, unwritten and undetermined by what the developers have cattle shooted me into. Vanguard lets a play be who they want, and that is why it is a true mmorpg.

    LotrO, Rift , AoC, WoW , DCUO ect are multiplayer online Role playing games.

    SWTOR is a online role playing game.

     

    In the mutliplaer only game an area is limiteless in how many characters can be in one area, in a online rpg, there is a limit to how many characters can be zoned into an instance. In a "Massive"  game it is one persistant world with little to no instancing.

     

    Do you understand the difference ? Passing SWtOR as a Massive game , is simply wrong in my opinion.

    That is just semantics. So the genre is moving towards MORPG .. so what? If MOPRGs are more fun, more successful, more power to them.

    An massively empty and boring world is a bad game. The G stands for game whether it is MMORPG, or MOPRG. Without a good game, massive does not matter. And from all these examples, massive is really not that crucial for a good game.

  • catlanacatlana Houston, TXPosts: 1,677Member

    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    Can anyone give a link to proove that review sites are payed to make their reviews without being all tin-foil-hatty?

    I ask because I have never heard this happen.

    I have heard of only two issues. First, the Eurogamer guy played a MMO for less than ten hours then absolutely slammed it. Slamming a MMO can generate impressive hits. Second, there was a editor / reviewer who published a review of a game without managerial approval at Gamespot. He slammed the game and was let go.  

  • PurutzilPurutzil East Stroudsburg, PAPosts: 2,924Member Uncommon

    Wow 93, they got paid pretty well to give that review...

     

    Seriously, who really doesn't understand that big companies get paid by the publisher to give good reviews for most big games. Money tends to give games better ratings then they deserve. Its not some 'omg really?' fact, its pretty obvious when you look on many review sights with big titles having big review scores despite big flaws that might otherwise make it flop.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,783Member Uncommon

    Who cares what PC Gamer thinks?  They're not exactly a reputable source.  Not after they gave Spiral Knights a 51 at the end of a shoddy review with about as many factual errors as paragraphs.  And yes, errors on facts, not just opinions, with stuff roughly of on par with asserting that SWTOR has 12 classes and a level cap of 40.  And even the rating of 51 seemed to be mostly based on a rant about how the reviewer hated a business model because he didn't understand it.  (For what it's worth, the 51 isn't the problem.  Any other number at the end of such a shoddy review wouldn't have made it any better.)

  • VincentG85VincentG85 BourgesPosts: 14Member


    PC Gamer gave SWToR 93...

    But got The Secret World on its cover !

  • TookyGTookyG Warhammer Online Correspondent Alameda, CAPosts: 1,188Member

    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    Can anyone give a link to proove that review sites are payed to make their reviews without being all tin-foil-hatty?

    I ask because I have never heard this happen.

    The only proof I have is common sense.  EA has a ton of advertising dollars to spend.  If you bash EA's baby, don't expect to see many of those dollars for quite a while.

    Until you cancel your subscription, you are only helping to continue the cycle of mediocrity.

  • rdrpappyrdrpappy Hamilton, OHPosts: 325Member

    Ya I agree with all of you the score seemed a bit low, but they did hit some good points in the review and we all have to respect the effort.

    93 from PC Gamer, but it's 100 in all your hearts.

  • MehveMehve Kitchener, ONPosts: 487Member

    Originally posted by catlana

    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    Can anyone give a link to proove that review sites are payed to make their reviews without being all tin-foil-hatty?

    I ask because I have never heard this happen.

    I have heard of only two issues. First, the Eurogamer guy played a MMO for less than ten hours then absolutely slammed it. Slamming a MMO can generate impressive hits. Second, there was a editor / reviewer who published a review of a game without managerial approval at Gamespot. He slammed the game and was let go.  

    Yeah, that was Gerstmann over at Gamespot, over his review of Kane and Lynch. Pretty embarrassing for all parties concerned. Thanks to privacy laws and plenty of spin from all sides, we'll never know all the details, but no tinfoil is required to see that something stank there.

    A Modest Proposal for MMORPGs:
    That the means of progression would not be mutually exclusive from the means of enjoyment.

  • BarCrowBarCrow Tampa, FLPosts: 2,212Member

    Every game has many likers and many haters. This reviewer likes the game. Some reviewers not so much. So of course the guy that likes it must be paid by Bioware/EA. I guess the reviewers that gave SWTOR a bad rating must be paid off by Arenanet or Blizzard or <insert desired name here>.

    Idiots. I won't say who are the idiots. It's all about perception.

    It never ends.

  • GinazGinaz Calgary, ABPosts: 1,731Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by sgel

    Originally posted by Ginaz


    Originally posted by dubyahite

    I trust PC Gamer a heck of a lot more than most folks around these forums

    Same here.  Random Dude on the Internet isn't exactly someone I would go to for advice or info.

    How about readin a lot of differnet opinions and then forming your own?... that's a tad less foolish than comparing ONE magazine to ONE random person on the internet...

    I do.  I don't soley rely on PC Gamer to form my opinions, but I've been reading their magazine for around 10 years now and more often than not, their views on games and gaming closely match my own (not always, see DA2 and DCU).  I formed my own opinion about SWTOR by playing the beta for a few months and listening to the opinions of people I trust and respect.   MMORPG.com and other sites like are full of "Random Dudes on the Internet" who's opinions mean nothing to me.  Understand, dude?

    image

    Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?

    Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.

  • Eir_SEir_S Argyle, NYPosts: 4,623Member

    Originally posted by rdrpappy

    Ya I agree with all of you the score seemed a bit low, but they did hit some good points in the review and we all have to respect the effort.

    93 from PC Gamer, but it's 100 in all your hearts.

    Right on, yeah!  

     

    Wait..... what?

  • JetrpgJetrpg Whitehouse, OHPosts: 2,376Member

    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    Can anyone give a link to proove that review sites are payed to make their reviews without being all tin-foil-hatty?

    I ask because I have never heard this happen.

    CAn you link me proof that they aren't ohhh

    "Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine

  • GinazGinaz Calgary, ABPosts: 1,731Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Jetrpg

    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    Can anyone give a link to proove that review sites are payed to make their reviews without being all tin-foil-hatty?

    I ask because I have never heard this happen.

    CAn you link me proof that they aren't ohhh

    He's not the one making claims that gaming sites are paid for reviews so its not up to him to prove that they aren't.  Thats not how it works.

    image

    Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?

    Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.

  • warmaster670warmaster670 Simcoe, ONPosts: 1,384Member

    Originally posted by Ginaz

    Originally posted by Jetrpg


    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    Can anyone give a link to proove that review sites are payed to make their reviews without being all tin-foil-hatty?

    I ask because I have never heard this happen.

    CAn you link me proof that they aren't ohhh

    He's not the one making claims that gaming sites are paid for reviews so its not up to him to prove that they aren't.  Thats not how it works.

    Ya really, its like saying someones a murderer then claming they need to prove there not, you dont have to prove they are.

     

    People love to claim reviewers were bought off.....wqhen a game they dont like gets a good review, and no other time.

    Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling"
    Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.

  • SmoeySmoey CambridgePosts: 572Member Uncommon

    I held off from buying this as I was burnt with the newer releases (FFXIV, AOC, RIFT... etc) and I havent had an MMO make me want to play day after day since DAoC. I was bored which is simply why I decided to buy SWTOR and I'm glad that I did. It is fun and it is a well made MMO which does have the pull factor. Yes, it could be a lot better but it is a great game. 

    (\ /) ?
    ( . .)
    c('')('')

Sign In or Register to comment.