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!

Defiance gets 5.9 ( Mediocre ) from Ign.com

1356

Comments

  • AerowynAerowyn BUZZARDS BAY, MAPosts: 7,928Member
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
     

    Average gamer Joe doesn't even know sites like IGN exist. I mean you are making the assumption that average gamer joe that doesn't visit any gaming forums and gaming sites is going to go to a gaming site for a review. 

    Where exactly are they going to see this IGN review? In PC Gamer (Cause I hear magizines are doing so well even gamestop is having a hard time pushing them onto people while offering them for free). 

    i dont really know anyone that hasn't heard of IGN or PC Gamer that's a gamer.. know pretty much no one that knows mmorpg.com though.. IGN is a huge site and has a lot of influence in my experience.. i don't agree with a lot of their stuff but they do have pull from what I have seen.. which is also why a lot of big game companies try to put in a lot of face time with certain review sites...

    In my experience when gaming was a niche hobby, yes the big review sites had a lot of pull. Once gaming burst open into a mainstream thing that pretty much changed everything. The only ones that really see or take note of the big review sites are the enthusiasts. Its the same as with tech sites. Your average consumer or gamer just doesn't get into these things enough to bother. A well placed poster, commercial, or a good or bad word from a friend, family memeber, or coworker has a great deal more influence on your average gamer. 

     

    Yes, many developers and publishers are stuck in the past and still do their best to get as much face time on those sites as possible. It certainly hasn't seemed to be doing them any good lately considering all the flops. Blizzard and Activision know better which is why they found other ways like having WoW come preinstalled on your PC, storming social media, lots and lots and lots of commercials. Look at how much time Blizzard and activision put into those sites now days. Its barely a fraction of what it use to be and its because it doesn't yield the type of results it once did. Count the number of commercials for CoD and WoW, check out the posters and ad placements at places like Gamestop and Bestbuy, how many friends in the past two months have talked about CoD or WoW? 

     

    A youtube vid gone viral has more influence on a gamers purchase decision than a review from a site like IGN. 

     

    Welcome to 2013.

    if say a average gamer sees a poster of some game or commerical and says oh that's interesting maybe I want to find out some info on it.. what's the easiest place to go to get a general concensous? metacritic.. the 62 defiance is getting i don't think will help this game out much. hell i use metacritic for single player games all the time as I really don't have time to play them usually let alone research them.. but if a game is generally universally praised by fans and review sites I generally will give it a whirl.. And for me it usually pans out.. last two single player games I played were tomb raider and Bioshock Infinite both I felt excellent games overall.

    I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Webster, MAPosts: 4,813Member
    Originally posted by aligada87
    Originally posted by mmoguy43
    That is a bit low. I'd think they would give it a 6.4 or close. But I agree, that in the first 10-20 hours of play it is worse in quality compared to games like Global Agenda(8.4) or APB (7.6). Also, in limited time frames, it makes sense that MMORPGs like SWTOR can recieve an 9+ before realising how limited the game is.

    ya but even then swtor as bad as it is now there is still more contents to play with compared to defiance.

    Nah, the 3 hours of voiced dialog needed to tell you to go kill 10 enemies and come back just makes it seem like theres a lot of content. 

    "Dude this game is awesome, I've put in 120 hours into it so far!" 

    "Omg, how many quests did you do?"

    "Um, I think 4 or 5"

    "Oh so there is a lot of side content?"

    "No, they just like to talk alot"

     

    I kid, I kid, well sort of. 

     

    In any case I would hope SWTOR would have more content than Defiance currently does. You are compairing a game launched in December of 2011 vs. a game launched April of 2013. 

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG MelbournePosts: 1,133Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aligada87
    Originally posted by mmoguy43
    That is a bit low. I'd think they would give it a 6.4 or close. But I agree, that in the first 10-20 hours of play it is worse in quality compared to games like Global Agenda(8.4) or APB (7.6). Also, in limited time frames, it makes sense that MMORPGs like SWTOR can recieve an 9+ before realising how limited the game is.

    ya but even then swtor as bad as it is now there is still more contents to play with compared to defiance.

    Swtor is mmo, Defiance is not.

    As for the score vs Global Agenda and APB actually I think that was very unjustified. I've played all 3 gamed (APB and Global Agenda to a high level) and I don't feel either of them is better than Defiance in anyway (definitely NOT APB - APB is horrid compare to Defiance).

    Global Agenda is just as one dimensional as Defiance, and the arts are worse imo (because it is too fanciful, whereas Defiance is more realism). APB's artwork is better than both but it's gameplay is totally woeful and the game systems itself are wayyyy too prone to exploit. Also with APB there is nothing to do if there is no opposition, which is a BIG problem that neither Defiance or GA has.

  • sancher36sancher36 housePosts: 457Member
    I'm not a huge shooter fan but I'm enjoying defiance. I have learnt over the years to never trust a game review I read or listen to online. Even reading reviews in mags can be highly manipulated.
  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Webster, MAPosts: 4,813Member
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
     

    Average gamer Joe doesn't even know sites like IGN exist. I mean you are making the assumption that average gamer joe that doesn't visit any gaming forums and gaming sites is going to go to a gaming site for a review. 

    Where exactly are they going to see this IGN review? In PC Gamer (Cause I hear magizines are doing so well even gamestop is having a hard time pushing them onto people while offering them for free). 

    i dont really know anyone that hasn't heard of IGN or PC Gamer that's a gamer.. know pretty much no one that knows mmorpg.com though.. IGN is a huge site and has a lot of influence in my experience.. i don't agree with a lot of their stuff but they do have pull from what I have seen.. which is also why a lot of big game companies try to put in a lot of face time with certain review sites...

    In my experience when gaming was a niche hobby, yes the big review sites had a lot of pull. Once gaming burst open into a mainstream thing that pretty much changed everything. The only ones that really see or take note of the big review sites are the enthusiasts. Its the same as with tech sites. Your average consumer or gamer just doesn't get into these things enough to bother. A well placed poster, commercial, or a good or bad word from a friend, family memeber, or coworker has a great deal more influence on your average gamer. 

     

    Yes, many developers and publishers are stuck in the past and still do their best to get as much face time on those sites as possible. It certainly hasn't seemed to be doing them any good lately considering all the flops. Blizzard and Activision know better which is why they found other ways like having WoW come preinstalled on your PC, storming social media, lots and lots and lots of commercials. Look at how much time Blizzard and activision put into those sites now days. Its barely a fraction of what it use to be and its because it doesn't yield the type of results it once did. Count the number of commercials for CoD and WoW, check out the posters and ad placements at places like Gamestop and Bestbuy, how many friends in the past two months have talked about CoD or WoW? 

     

    A youtube vid gone viral has more influence on a gamers purchase decision than a review from a site like IGN. 

     

    Welcome to 2013.

    if say a average gamer sees a poster of some game or commerical and says oh that's interesting maybe I want to find out some info on it.. what's the easiest place to go to get a general concensous? metacritic.. the 62 defiance is getting i don't think will help this game out much. hell i use metacritic for single player games all the time as I really don't have time to play them usually let alone research them.. but if a game is generally universally praised by fans and review sites I generally will give it a whirl.. And for me it usually pans out.. last two single player games I played were tomb raider and Bioshock Infinite both I felt excellent games overall.

    Your an enthusiast so yes, its expected that you would want to seek out more info. Thats not how your average gamer is. Unfortunately I had a stint in retail and yes it was electronics (Drr). Your average gamer isn't as thoughtful as you think they are. People bought Kain and lynch like it was golden even though just about every reviewer gave it a mediocre to awful review and score. An awful game with reviews ranging from mediocre to awful sold millions of copies thanks to marketing and advertising. 

     

    In any case, it seems we disagree and thats fine. Not everyone can agree on everything. 

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon
    Sorry, I should have said SWTOR is limited in what there is to do instead of leaving it implying that it is limited in content (I know it isn't).
  • NetspookNetspook OsloPosts: 1,503Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Damedius

    You mean the same IGN that gave Bioshock Infinite a 9.5/10?

    I'll take whatever they have to say with a grain of salt.

    My time played for Bioshock Infinite is 5 hours.

    My time played for Defiance is 120+ hours.

     

    Really?

    Considering that BSI is currently the highest rated game on metacritics, both by metascore and user score, this opinion of yours means nothing at all. You're obviously the odd man out, not IGN.

    Haven't played this game yet, and I can't decide if I'm gonna buy it or not. Seems fun, but IGN's review, like some others I've read, gives the impression that this game is fun for only a few hours. Think I'll just wait and see how user ratings are after a couple of weeks.

  • AsheramAsheram San Diego, CAPosts: 1,989Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
    Originally posted by aligada87
    Originally posted by mmoguy43
    That is a bit low. I'd think they would give it a 6.4 or close. But I agree, that in the first 10-20 hours of play it is worse in quality compared to games like Global Agenda(8.4) or APB (7.6). Also, in limited time frames, it makes sense that MMORPGs like SWTOR can recieve an 9+ before realising how limited the game is.

    ya but even then swtor as bad as it is now there is still more contents to play with compared to defiance.

    Swtor is mmo, Defiance is not.

    As for the score vs Global Agenda and APB actually I think that was very unjustified. I've played all 3 gamed (APB and Global Agenda to a high level) and I don't feel either of them is better than Defiance in anyway (definitely NOT APB - APB is horrid compare to Defiance).

    Global Agenda is just as one dimensional as Defiance, and the arts are worse imo (because it is too fanciful, whereas Defiance is more realism). APB's artwork is better than both but it's gameplay is totally woeful and the game systems itself are wayyyy too prone to exploit. Also with APB there is nothing to do if there is no opposition, which is a BIG problem that neither Defiance or GA has.

    Global Agenda was even worse at launch as everything was instanced and you needed a group to do any of its content, it was a long time til it even got an open world to play in.

    image
  • nationalcitynationalcity Decatur, MIPosts: 330Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by VastoHorde

    Looks like we got our review and honestly I think its a good review. If you people continue to support these poor excuses for mmos then thats all we are going to get.

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/18/defiance-review-pc

    This poor excuse for an MMO has already given me more entertainment and enjoyment than the following MMOs combined... 

     

    SWTOR - IGN gave them a 9.6 and of course the game was a massive flop

    AoC - IGN gave it a 7.9 and of course the game was a massive flop

    Aion - IGN gave it an 8.5 and of course the game was a massive flop

    Fallen Earth - IGN gave it an 8.1 and of course the game was a massive flop

     

    I'll gladly continue to support a poor excuse for an MMO that I enjoy rather than the "True" MMOs out there that I find boring as hell. 

     

    Currently I play APB, Rift, GW2, Defiance and PS2. There are some games like WoW and EVE that simply aren't my cup of tea but most like TERA and FFXIV simply aren't worth my time. 

     

     

     

    I think my definition of massive flop and yours are completely different......

     

    I betcha 3 outta them 4 games you listed have bigger sub numbers then defiance lol......

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG MelbournePosts: 1,133Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Asheram
    Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
    Originally posted by aligada87
    Originally posted by mmoguy43
    That is a bit low. I'd think they would give it a 6.4 or close. But I agree, that in the first 10-20 hours of play it is worse in quality compared to games like Global Agenda(8.4) or APB (7.6). Also, in limited time frames, it makes sense that MMORPGs like SWTOR can recieve an 9+ before realising how limited the game is.

    ya but even then swtor as bad as it is now there is still more contents to play with compared to defiance.

    Swtor is mmo, Defiance is not.

    As for the score vs Global Agenda and APB actually I think that was very unjustified. I've played all 3 gamed (APB and Global Agenda to a high level) and I don't feel either of them is better than Defiance in anyway (definitely NOT APB - APB is horrid compare to Defiance).

    Global Agenda is just as one dimensional as Defiance, and the arts are worse imo (because it is too fanciful, whereas Defiance is more realism). APB's artwork is better than both but it's gameplay is totally woeful and the game systems itself are wayyyy too prone to exploit. Also with APB there is nothing to do if there is no opposition, which is a BIG problem that neither Defiance or GA has.

    Global Agenda was even worse at launch as everything was instanced and you needed a group to do any of its content, it was a long time til it even got an open world to play in.

    Exactly. Good point.

    That's why I think this score is completely unjustified considering the score that GA and APB got.

  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Webster, MAPosts: 4,813Member
    Originally posted by nationalcity
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by VastoHorde

    Looks like we got our review and honestly I think its a good review. If you people continue to support these poor excuses for mmos then thats all we are going to get.

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/18/defiance-review-pc

    This poor excuse for an MMO has already given me more entertainment and enjoyment than the following MMOs combined... 

     

    SWTOR - IGN gave them a 9.6 and of course the game was a massive flop

    AoC - IGN gave it a 7.9 and of course the game was a massive flop

    Aion - IGN gave it an 8.5 and of course the game was a massive flop

    Fallen Earth - IGN gave it an 8.1 and of course the game was a massive flop

     

    I'll gladly continue to support a poor excuse for an MMO that I enjoy rather than the "True" MMOs out there that I find boring as hell. 

     

    Currently I play APB, Rift, GW2, Defiance and PS2. There are some games like WoW and EVE that simply aren't my cup of tea but most like TERA and FFXIV simply aren't worth my time. 

     

     

     

    I think the worlds definition of massive flop and yours are completely different......

     

    I betcha 3 outta them 4 games you listed have bigger sub numbers then defiance lol......

    Fallen earth the free to play? 

    SWTOR the free to play? 

    Aion the free to play? 

    Or AoC which is more of an extended trial type of free to play?

     

  • erictlewiserictlewis Cottondale, ALPosts: 3,026Member Uncommon

    Well I tried it in beta, and what can I say.  5.9 is really giving them to much.  I ranked it more of a 3.  The reasons are simple the chat window on the pc is bad, and the ui on the pc is bad.  I got to say trion blew it on this one but thats not really a surpise. 

    As far as the tv show, it was uhh kind of ok, but its not farscape, its not bsg, and its not firefly, and it sure does not have the potential that swg had.  So yea if it last for more than two seasons I will be shocked. 

     

  • nationalcitynationalcity Decatur, MIPosts: 330Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by nationalcity
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by VastoHorde

    Looks like we got our review and honestly I think its a good review. If you people continue to support these poor excuses for mmos then thats all we are going to get.

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/18/defiance-review-pc

    This poor excuse for an MMO has already given me more entertainment and enjoyment than the following MMOs combined... 

     

    SWTOR - IGN gave them a 9.6 and of course the game was a massive flop

    AoC - IGN gave it a 7.9 and of course the game was a massive flop

    Aion - IGN gave it an 8.5 and of course the game was a massive flop

    Fallen Earth - IGN gave it an 8.1 and of course the game was a massive flop

     

    I'll gladly continue to support a poor excuse for an MMO that I enjoy rather than the "True" MMOs out there that I find boring as hell. 

     

    Currently I play APB, Rift, GW2, Defiance and PS2. There are some games like WoW and EVE that simply aren't my cup of tea but most like TERA and FFXIV simply aren't worth my time. 

     

     

     

    I think the worlds definition of massive flop and yours are completely different......

     

    I betcha 3 outta them 4 games you listed have bigger sub numbers then defiance lol......

    Fallen earth the free to play? 

    SWTOR the free to play? 

    Aion the free to play? 

    Or AoC which is more of an extended trial type of free to play?

     

    Just because what they went f2p there massive flops *shakes head* I just don't understand...

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid hell, NJPosts: 6,754Member Uncommon
    The game still needs a bunch of improvements, but IGN's reviews dont affect my decisions with games in the slightest. I trust more very indepth reviews from people who play the game extensively and give more unbiased reviews and hit every point good and bad of the game. When i watch or read IGN reviews i do it to compare their biased opinions with other reviewers. Then i press X to close the IGN window.

    image
  • ThornrageThornrage Eastern North CarolinaPosts: 592Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aligada87
    Originally posted by Thornrage
    Originally posted by mysticalspam
    yhea.... i wanted to get this game but was waiting on the reviews... glad i waited, i wont spend money on anything with raiting lower than a 7.5

    lol

    I'm glad I dont wait on someone else to decide what games I buy.

    I'm glad I do wait on someone else to decide what games I buy because waiting on reviews is much more smater then being a retard who waste money and then complains later on that the game was crap and they want their money back.

     

    If I put my money down on a game and dont like it, oh well, I move on to the next. I dont get butt hurt like the rest of you.

    If I had waited for some random person to make up my mind on Defiance, I would have missed out on the past week of fun.

    Think about it, I like the game. What if I was working for IGN and made the review with a 7.6? Does that mean you are going to buy the game because I told you it was good? Reviews are just like opinion which are just like assholes. 

    "I don't give a sh*t what other people say. I play what I like and I'll pay to do it too!" - SerialMMOist

  • DarkVergilDarkVergil Memphis, TNPosts: 73Member
    The game is shit, serouisly who didnt expect this?
  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Webster, MAPosts: 4,813Member
    Originally posted by nationalcity
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by nationalcity
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by VastoHorde

    Looks like we got our review and honestly I think its a good review. If you people continue to support these poor excuses for mmos then thats all we are going to get.

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/18/defiance-review-pc

    This poor excuse for an MMO has already given me more entertainment and enjoyment than the following MMOs combined... 

     

    SWTOR - IGN gave them a 9.6 and of course the game was a massive flop

    AoC - IGN gave it a 7.9 and of course the game was a massive flop

    Aion - IGN gave it an 8.5 and of course the game was a massive flop

    Fallen Earth - IGN gave it an 8.1 and of course the game was a massive flop

     

    I'll gladly continue to support a poor excuse for an MMO that I enjoy rather than the "True" MMOs out there that I find boring as hell. 

     

    Currently I play APB, Rift, GW2, Defiance and PS2. There are some games like WoW and EVE that simply aren't my cup of tea but most like TERA and FFXIV simply aren't worth my time. 

     

     

     

    I think the worlds definition of massive flop and yours are completely different......

     

    I betcha 3 outta them 4 games you listed have bigger sub numbers then defiance lol......

    Fallen earth the free to play? 

    SWTOR the free to play? 

    Aion the free to play? 

    Or AoC which is more of an extended trial type of free to play?

     

    Just because what they went f2p there massive flops *shakes head* I just don't understand...

    Nah, I only consider them massive flops because they lost the majority of their intial player base and failed to profit on their original buisness model as they had planned and had to restructure to stay afloat. 

  • PurutzilPurutzil East Stroudsburg, PAPosts: 2,923Member Uncommon
    I'm quite amazed they rated it so low. Then again they weren't probably paying so its not getting suck up scores like all the other games which would probably net it not all that far from other MMos out there that got scoreed. So yay, it didn't do to bad, not perfect but its only about ~1 point  from what the top games REALLY are rated! XD
  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon
    Well, maybe the reason for the low score does have more to do with the reviewer hearing the hype and just not buying it. He gave the show a 6.9 on top of that. Pretty much saying, it not as amazing as they said it would be.
  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG MelbournePosts: 1,133Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79

    SWTOR the free to play?

    lol swtor free to play...

     

    Good luck getting anywhere in swtor with that mentality.

     

    Swtor is pay to stay mate - try having any fun not paying. You can't even get enough action bars for your actions.

  • PurutzilPurutzil East Stroudsburg, PAPosts: 2,923Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by VastoHorde

    Looks like we got our review and honestly I think its a good review. If you people continue to support these poor excuses for mmos then thats all we are going to get.

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/18/defiance-review-pc

    This poor excuse for an MMO has already given me more entertainment and enjoyment than the following MMOs combined... 

    Aion - IGN gave it an 8.5 and of course the game was a massive flop

     

     

    Wait... what? Aion, the game that was top of the charts in the Eastern market for years was a flop? Really? What the heck are you on?

     

    Sorry for picking this post but... I really couldn't stand seeing that. Next thing you will tell me that Macs are, in fact, the number 1 computer system out there since "graphic artists" use it the most and counting their numbers to define it.

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG MelbournePosts: 1,133Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Purutzil
    I'm quite amazed they rated it so low. Then again they weren't probably paying so its not getting suck up scores like all the other games which would probably net it not all that far from other MMos out there that got scoreed. So yay, it didn't do to bad, not perfect but its only about ~1 point  from what the top games REALLY are rated! XD

    I don't think it is because they were "paid" per se, as don't really want to make assumptions on any corruption might exist lol...

     

    But I can deduce why the score might be higher (though still don't think it is justified):

    1. Global Agenda's concept was "fresh" when it came out.

    2. GA was made by an indie AND upstart studio who's first game was that game.

    3. APB was a cops and robbers game, maybe the IGN guys REALLY likes cops and robbers (or like being a tryhard Mexican gangster who secretly do the Mexican accent too in their private time)

    4. APB was also made by an indie upstart studio and first game.

    5. There is less advertising form GA and APB, therefore less expectations.

     

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79

    Nah, I only consider them massive flops because they lost the majority of their intial player base and failed to profit on their original buisness model as they had planned and had to restructure to stay afloat. 

    You say that like loosing most of your players before the first year is a new thing...

    Everything is going F2P in hopes to generate more revenue... Defiance B2P w/ cash shop?

  • PurutzilPurutzil East Stroudsburg, PAPosts: 2,923Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
    Originally posted by Purutzil
    I'm quite amazed they rated it so low. Then again they weren't probably paying so its not getting suck up scores like all the other games which would probably net it not all that far from other MMos out there that got scoreed. So yay, it didn't do to bad, not perfect but its only about ~1 point  from what the top games REALLY are rated! XD

    I don't think it is because they were "paid" per se, as don't really want to make assumptions on any corruption might exist lol...

     

    But I can deduce why the score might be higher (though still don't think it is justified):

    1. Global Agenda's concept was "fresh" when it came out.

    2. GA was made by an indie AND upstart studio who's first game was that game.

    3. APB was a cops and robbers game, maybe the IGN guys REALLY likes cops and robbers (or like being a tryhard Mexican gangster who secretly do the Mexican accent too in their private time)

    4. APB was also made by an indie upstart studio and first game.

    5. There is less advertising form GA and APB, therefore less expectations.

     

    Talking about other games, not defiance. Yeah... theres actually a lot of that 'behind the counter' being paid deal to say bluntly. To be fair, corruption is everywhere from politics to business. Its how we sadly conduct our business.

    Its not at all uncommon at all with the press, this site here (sorry, we know they pay the bills and we know YOU know) has done it, and other sites even to far extremes. Remember dorito gate (linked below if you want a thread about it) its pretty much a reality we come to associate with it. Scores are useless really. Even IF someone wasn't fueled by bias, I'd still say to go out and play something and try it. Even a bad game you can find yourself actually enjoying the gameplay off despite many viewing it negatively.

     

    http://kotaku.com/5957810/the-contemptible-games-journalist-why-so-many-people-dont-trust-the-gaming-press-and-why-theyre-sometimes-wrong

  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Webster, MAPosts: 4,813Member
    Originally posted by mmoguy43
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79

    Nah, I only consider them massive flops because they lost the majority of their intial player base and failed to profit on their original buisness model as they had planned and had to restructure to stay afloat. 

    You say that like loosing most of your players before the first year is a new thing...

    Everything is going F2P in hopes to generate more revenue... Defiance B2P w/ cash shop?

    Defiance is b2p with an optional service, fluff, and convienence shop. Its a far cry from the monstrosity of SWTOR and others. 

    And no, I don't consider losing most of your players before the first year a new thing, nor do I consider losing most of your players after the first month or two as the games I listed did a new thing. There have been many flops in the MMO industry that have done this. 

Sign In or Register to comment.