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!

Remember -- EQNext was awarded "Game of Show" twice.

13

Comments

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by ste2000
    Originally posted by Vhayne
    So whatever worries we all have, hopefully it will still be a great game.  I have to many worries to count, and to many dreams for it to become a reality.  But rest assured that the game must be something special.  Either that, or these 2 sites will lose a lot of credibility.

    Well....................

    I like MMORPG.com for its Forums mainly.

    Not so sure about the Journalist part of it.

    Look how much they praised SWTOR and other MMO flops.

     

    Sometimes I think MMORPG.com staff are a bit out of tune with its members, they seems not to understand what their base really expect from a MMO.

    I hope this time their enthusiasm is genuine.

    There are like two or three million players active on swtor right now.

    Hardly a flop by any standards, even if you don't personally like the game, and I have no doubt that their praise of the title was well earned and based on interesting and fun design innovations that SWTOR brought to the genre.

     

    OK, I'll cry BS on this figure, likely not even higher than 500k paying customers, freeloaders are irrelevant to the equation.

    Research how F2P works and why the freeloaders are a good thing and why F2P brings in more money than P2P.

    I'll give you a hint, what I said was not BS and F2P works wonders for MMOs.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXA559KNopI

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo LondonPosts: 3,221Member
    Originally posted by ste2000
    Originally posted by Vhayne
    So whatever worries we all have, hopefully it will still be a great game.  I have to many worries to count, and to many dreams for it to become a reality.  But rest assured that the game must be something special.  Either that, or these 2 sites will lose a lot of credibility.

    Well....................

    I like MMORPG.com for its Forums mainly.

    Not so sure about the Journalist part of it.

    Look how much they praised SWTOR and other MMO flops.

     

    Sometimes I think MMORPG.com staff are a bit out of tune with its members, they seems not to understand what their base really expect from a MMO.

    I hope this time their enthusiasm is genuine.

    The main problem I think is the way mmorpg.com has such a primitive review system. I think what they write and how they write is more or less very good in transmitting their thoughts and feelings on a game: Which is as valid as any review. But a review system should provide various consolidation to inform players and I think mmorpg.com does not provide that.

    For eg:

    1. aggregate review score (across the web)

    2. break-down review scores (graphics, game controls, gameplay) with perhaps more analysis than what is currently done.

    3. Context review scores in comparison to similar mmorpgs and within it's category

    4. If you like x then you will like this variety of comparisons for different types of players.

    As it stands an arbitrary industry positive score is usually the end conclusion: IE devs took 4-5yrs, spent 50-100m$ = if you pay X$ you'll see that.  image

  • ste2000ste2000 londonPosts: 4,706Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by ste2000
     

    There are like two or three million players active on swtor right now.

    Hardly a flop by any standards, even if you don't personally like the game, and I have no doubt that their praise of the title was well earned and based on interesting and fun design innovations that SWTOR brought to the genre.

    C'mon now...........

    The reason there are 3 million active accounts is because the game is Free, and only a tiny part of that are paying customers.

    Also if the game was successful in the first place it would never had become F2P, let alone in just 6 months time.

    By any standard SWTOR is a big flop, I predicted that 6 months before even playing Beta, while MMORPG.com were still supporting it even after launch, when it was already obvious to most players that the game was shallow and had a short longevity time span.

  • AcidonAcidon Salem, ORPosts: 797Member
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan

    Please. Plenty of floppeed games have gotten the "Best of Show" crap. Best of show amounts to nothing more than "We have the best looking, specially rigged and strictly controlled demo that the real game will look nothing like at release".

    None of that crap matters until the game is put out into the wild for people to play the real game.

    You know, eventually, when you have succeeded in crushing the hope of every single person on the internet, human kind's demise will finally come into full swing.

    Earth needs a reboot.  We fucked up.  So I don't necessarily disagree with your methods, but on the other hand a bit of compassion can go a long ways.

    I said that with a straight face.  o/

     

     

    Playing: H1Z1, The Crew, Defiance, APB:Reloaded
    Mourning: World of Darkness, Vanguard, City of Heroes


    image


    My Humble MMO Blog:
    http://mmogasm.blogspot.com


    Free, Clean & Safe Quality of Life Software:
    http://www.acidonsolutions.com

  • Brabbit1987Brabbit1987 Ontario, CanadaPosts: 729Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by Brabbit1987
    Originally posted by Dullahan
    Originally posted by Brabbit1987

    I like how some of the people here act like, because it got best in show by 2 big sites, it MUST be at least something decent.

    You do realize what is behind the site is ... yep, people like us. Just because they run a big site, what makes their opinion anymore greater then someone else? Because they played a lot of games? LOL we all have!

    Hmm, I don't think all of "us" have major websites where our opinions can hurt our credibility, affect our readership and, on some level, jeopardize our source of income.

    Two of the biggest online mmo sites independently made a controversial decision to bestow its best in show award on an unshown game, something afaik thats unprecedented,  and people pretend its not a big deal.  Lawl.  TESO fans maybe?

     

    How likely do you think it would hurt their cred? It's their opinion, it can't hurt their cred. That's just a stupid excuse. Again, they are people just like us who have their own opinions. Their opinions is not a reflection on the entire mmo community, no offence. You act like the community never disagreed with one of these big sites, which has happened before, and yet they are still here and doing fine.

     

    Also, it's not about TESO, I feel the same way about it. I will judge it when it comes out. It's really that simple. I simply go by what "I" think, and not what some site says. You know, because I am able to make my own decisions and opinions about a game. Don't need someone else making them for me XD.

    If you want your opinion swayed and decided by sites with out knowing anything at all, ok go for it. 

    Game journalists do have reputations to consider.  They are human, with their own opinions and tastes, but you try to be as professional and objective as possible.  When "players" or bad journalists give critiques or analysis on games, they tend to be selfish and subjective.  They don't talk about what the game has or the quality of the product.  They tend to talk about why they didn't like it.  Which is about as useful as having a guy who hates first person shooters tell you about what he thinks of Battlefield 4.

    A respectable journalist and game industry professionals learn to evaluate games from a design standpoint.  What does the game bring to the table, what mechanics and systems have they improved on.  The polish of said systems and how well the interact with other systems.

    If a journalist puts out an extremely misleading article, it hurts their fan base and in turn makes the site lose money.

    So yes, it is important they give honest and accurate accounting of what they're reporting on.

    No one should automatically like a game just because someone else said it was good.  But when (2) respectable journalists working for (2) respected sites give high praise, it does make me excited.  There is something there to back it up, that's for sure.  How much I personally end up enjoying the game will depend entirely on my personal tastes, though.

    The problem is, no one knows what they saw at the show. They evaluate games from a design standpoint? Are you sure they did this for EQN? Was a playable version there? Was it simply a talk about that game and what they are planning? Was it concept art?

    Again, I don't care who gives a game best in show, it doesn't mean a darn thing if no one knows a thing about it. Also, no offence these sites have praised other games that I don't particularly like. Again, it's an opinion, and no matter how they look at it, it will always be their opinion.

    Also, again it will not hurt their cred because it's their opinion. If someone raged off a site in a fit because they didn't agree with an article about a game, they are retarded. 

    Again, you are excited about something you know nothing about. A good example was Elder Scrolls Online. So many people where excited when they first heard of it. As development continued, more and more people turned their eyes on it, because it just no longer felt like Elder Scroll. This same type of thing can happen with EQN, yet so many are getting excited by it getting best in show. It's almost like a lot of you are new to this MMO thing.

  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Pittsville, VAPosts: 5,215Member Uncommon

    Que Sera, Sera,
    Whatever will be, will be
    The future's not ours, to see
    Que Sera, Sera
    What will be, will be.

     

    You people worry too much about things you cannot control. Set your insecurities aside.
     

    "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause" ~Victor Hugo

  • ComanComan Hattem, AKPosts: 2,034Member Uncommon
    Just because people write about games, does not mean they actually know what is a good game. The people who suppose to create them often do not seem to understand what makes a good game. So how much is such an award really worth?  E3 is just one big marketing campaign for those companies. Blindly trusting anything coming from those events is just as crazy as trusting the ad's you see on this site claiming to be the "best" game out there. 
  • ArakaziArakazi OxfordPosts: 889Member
    Only two weeks left.... All I can say is thank f*ck for that. Sick to the back teeth with the way some people are promoting the game, continually ignoring the fact they know f*ck all about the game. Like a sad old man drooling over a woman he has never met, they continue fantasise over what might be and to talk utter drivel while the rest of us impatiently wait for solid information. One poster in particular is even defending SWTOR because it just happen to win the reward too. Pathetic. NOBODY defends that heap of junk, even their developers admit it sucks. Two best of show rewards? So what?! Tera and defiance won that reward,  two sorry excuses for an MMO if there ever was one. Oh yeah SWTOR won that reward! Fanboys, drooling like pavlov's dog everytime EQNext is mentioned. Do it in private, it's embaressing to the rest of us.
  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo LondonPosts: 3,221Member

    MMORPG.com staff have really put their collective heads on the block with that verdict of confidence. It's like saying, "I'm so confident, that if I'm wrong you can press this button and eject me from this airplane (View To A Kill style) if I'm wrong."

    I think the "forgelight engine" and the addition of "make it yourself storybricks" has got to be why EQN is such a winner in MMORPG.com staff's eyes - and in 2 weeks the punters of mmorpg.com as well. image

  • francis3343francis3343 Green Valley, ONPosts: 8Member
    I would love it if the crafting part has community project just like Horizon or now called Istaria had. If anyone played that game in the past they would remember the building of the mines, bridge to new areas, Guild towns, And discovering of new races. All this was done server vs server so one server could have access to the new land mass or mine or even race.. Was the best crafting events I have ever played.. Still have chills thinking about the event the merge the servers! It was insane!!
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Sioux City, IAPosts: 3,828Member


    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Roin
    I could never accept a "Best of Show" or "Best at Show" that was only shown behind closed doors. Me, personally that would instantly disqualify it from even being considered.
    Why?  That's some weird logic.  The people who saw it behind closed doors got to see it for themselves.  They weren't taking someone's word on it.They evaluated what they saw vs the other, public shown MMOs and made the choice they felt was best.  The fact that they got a screening to something others didn't should have zero bearing on what level of quality they thought the game was.The picked the best from what they saw.
    Hmm, would it be OK for a movie to win the Academy Award for best picture if it had never been released to the public? Probably not. Game site reviewers seem more susceptible to the hype train than most, and these awards are frequent based more on what is promised vs the final delivery so are not good indicators of future market success.
    The awards they gave were specific to their site.  The only people who needed to see the game to rightfully award such praise are the people who work for and write articles for the sites.  The logic of "It's not fair, I didn't see it, so they shouldn't be able to judge it" is beyond comical.
    They did not back up the award.
    "Why is it the Best of Show?"
    "Because we said so!"
    This does not make for great journalism.

    How many other "interested parties" were there? Why did only 2 out of however many give this award? Kyleran's movie analogy was spot on.

    It may have been the best game at the show. No facts have been presented to support this award. Can't talk about it? Don't give the award. Or accept the hit your reputation will take.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • SkuzSkuz WorcesterPosts: 1,034Member Uncommon

    So the people who have seen it think it's quite impressive then, a few trolls think that equates to "some guys got paid off by SOE" - which is laughable as the same old line gets trotted out ad infinitum around here & other sites with zero evidence to back it up of any kind whatsoever, it's just a troll theory pulled out of a troll sphincter to make a troll look less troll-like.

    Now I'm not going to say it'll be a real breath of fresh air in the MMO-space, but it could be, I've read enough to lead me to think it will be very different to the current crop of MMO's whilst retaining a EverQuest flavour - all else is open to conjecture until the big reveal come August 2nd at SOE Live.

    Personally I am very much looking forward to finding out whether SOE has learned from its history & from the mistakes of hundreds of EQ/WoW clones.

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by AlBQuirk

    They did not back up the award.
    "Why is it the Best of Show?"
    "Because we said so!"
    This does not make for great journalism.

     

    How many other "interested parties" were there? Why did only 2 out of however many give this award? Kyleran's movie analogy was spot on.

    press outlets saw it -- beyond mmorpg, TTH, Curse

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5789537#5789537

     

     

  • DullahanDullahan Posts: 2,059Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by AlBQuirk

    They did not back up the award.
    "Why is it the Best of Show?"
    "Because we said so!"
    This does not make for great journalism.

     

    How many other "interested parties" were there? Why did only 2 out of however many give this award? Kyleran's movie analogy was spot on.

    press outlets saw it -- beyond mmorpg, TTH, Curse

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5789537#5789537

     

     

    Most wouldn't give this award because it was controversial as can be seen by the posts in the many threads about this topic.


  • Brabbit1987Brabbit1987 Ontario, CanadaPosts: 729Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MumboJumbo

    MMORPG.com staff have really put their collective heads on the block with that verdict of confidence. It's like saying, "I'm so confident, that if I'm wrong you can press this button and eject me from this airplane (View To A Kill style) if I'm wrong."

    I think the "forgelight engine" and the addition of "make it yourself storybricks" has got to be why EQN is such a winner in MMORPG.com staff's eyes - and in 2 weeks the punters of mmorpg.com as well. image

    I assume you are the youtuber, Congrats on 100k Mumbo :3

    @topic

    Really, I am looking forward to EQN just as much as I am looking forward to ESO. I do not like judging games based on rewards given. Nor do I think anyone should. The problem isn't that everyone is excited, the problem is many of you are ASSUMING things. I just don't understand why people can't just wait till they actually know what the game is like. Even once information is released, that still will not give you enough information to judge if the game is good or not.

    I am a firm believer that you need to PLAY a game before your able to make an accurate judgement of opinion on a game. A good example of this is Minecraft.

    I hated that game with a passion, but never played it. I said it looked stupid and sounds stupid. *coughs* Well I am now addicted to it XD, it just goes to show you, that I had to play it to actually make a good judgement on it. It's a pretty great game now that I actually played it and tried it out.

    However, the opposite has been done before as well. I thought a game would be so absolutly fantastic, and it turned out to be boring to and nothing new. Again you have to actually play it.

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,257Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Stromm
    Originally posted by Vhayne
    So whatever worries we all have, hopefully it will still be a great game.  I have to many worries to count, and to many dreams for it to become a reality.  But rest assured that the game must be something special.  Either that, or these 2 sites will lose a lot of credibility.

    So cute that you still think "industry awards" mean anything.

    Are you selling hype?

    I will buy 2 hypes please.

    image

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Roin
    I could never accept a "Best of Show" or "Best at Show" that was only shown behind closed doors. Me, personally that would instantly disqualify it from even being considered.

    Why?  That's some weird logic.  The people who saw it behind closed doors got to see it for themselves.  They weren't taking someone's word on it.

     

    They evaluated what they saw vs the other, public shown MMOs and made the choice they felt was best.  The fact that they got a screening to something others didn't should have zero bearing on what level of quality they thought the game was.

    The picked the best from what they saw.


    Hmm, would it be OK for a movie to win the Academy Award for best picture if it had never been released to the public? Probably not. Game site reviewers seem more susceptible to the hype train than most, and these awards are frequent based more on what is promised vs the final delivery so are not good indicators of future market success.
    The awards they gave were specific to their site.  The only people who needed to see the game to rightfully award such praise are the people who work for and write articles for the sites.  The logic of "It's not fair, I didn't see it, so they shouldn't be able to judge it" is beyond comical.
    They did not back up the award.
    "Why is it the Best of Show?"
    "Because we said so!"
    This does not make for great journalism.

     

    How many other "interested parties" were there? Why did only 2 out of however many give this award? Kyleran's movie analogy was spot on.

    It may have been the best game at the show. No facts have been presented to support this award. Can't talk about it? Don't give the award. Or accept the hit your reputation will take.

    It's best in show.

    Why?

    You'll find out in about a week when SOE live hits and the journalists can release their article explaining why they named it best in show and will see the product yourself on August 2nd.

    Why is this hard for you guys to understand?  Does the fact that you're going to hear why at a later date some how negate the fact that they picked what they thought was the best in show?  They would gladly have told us why they had picked it if it wasn't for the NDA.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Sioux City, IAPosts: 3,828Member


    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Roin
    I could never accept a "Best of Show" or "Best at Show" that was only shown behind closed doors. Me, personally that would instantly disqualify it from even being considered.
    Why?  That's some weird logic.  The people who saw it behind closed doors got to see it for themselves.  They weren't taking someone's word on it.

    They evaluated what they saw vs the other, public shown MMOs and made the choice they felt was best.  The fact that they got a screening to something others didn't should have zero bearing on what level of quality they thought the game was.

    The picked the best from what they saw.


    Hmm, would it be OK for a movie to win the Academy Award for best picture if it had never been released to the public? Probably not. Game site reviewers seem more susceptible to the hype train than most, and these awards are frequent based more on what is promised vs the final delivery so are not good indicators of future market success.
    The awards they gave were specific to their site.  The only people who needed to see the game to rightfully award such praise are the people who work for and write articles for the sites.  The logic of "It's not fair, I didn't see it, so they shouldn't be able to judge it" is beyond comical.
    They did not back up the award.
    "Why is it the Best of Show?"
    "Because we said so!"
    This does not make for great journalism.How many other "interested parties" were there? Why did only 2 out of however many give this award? Kyleran's movie analogy was spot on.It may have been the best game at the show. No facts have been presented to support this award. Can't talk about it? Don't give the award. Or accept the hit your reputation will take.

    It's best in show.Why?You'll find out in about a week when SOE live hits and the journalists can release their article explaining why they named it best in show and will see the product yourself on August 2nd.Why is this hard for you guys to understand?  Does the fact that you're going to hear why at a later date some how negate the fact that they picked what they thought was the best in show?  They would gladly have told us why they had picked it if it wasn't for the NDA.
    And is E3 in 2 weeks time? No. It was about a month and a half ago. Sony Live is NOT E3.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • ArakaziArakazi OxfordPosts: 889Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Roin
    I could never accept a "Best of Show" or "Best at Show" that was only shown behind closed doors. Me, personally that would instantly disqualify it from even being considered.

    Why?  That's some weird logic.  The people who saw it behind closed doors got to see it for themselves.  They weren't taking someone's word on it.

     

    They evaluated what they saw vs the other, public shown MMOs and made the choice they felt was best.  The fact that they got a screening to something others didn't should have zero bearing on what level of quality they thought the game was.

    The picked the best from what they saw.


    Hmm, would it be OK for a movie to win the Academy Award for best picture if it had never been released to the public? Probably not. Game site reviewers seem more susceptible to the hype train than most, and these awards are frequent based more on what is promised vs the final delivery so are not good indicators of future market success.
    The awards they gave were specific to their site.  The only people who needed to see the game to rightfully award such praise are the people who work for and write articles for the sites.  The logic of "It's not fair, I didn't see it, so they shouldn't be able to judge it" is beyond comical.
    They did not back up the award.
    "Why is it the Best of Show?"
    "Because we said so!"
    This does not make for great journalism.

     

    How many other "interested parties" were there? Why did only 2 out of however many give this award? Kyleran's movie analogy was spot on.

    It may have been the best game at the show. No facts have been presented to support this award. Can't talk about it? Don't give the award. Or accept the hit your reputation will take.

    It's best in show.

    Why?

    You'll find out in about a week when SOE live hits and the journalists can release their article explaining why they named it best in show and will see the product yourself on August 2nd.

    Why is this hard for you guys to understand?  Does the fact that you're going to hear why at a later date some how negate the fact that they picked what they thought was the best in show?  They would gladly have told us why they had picked it if it wasn't for the NDA.

    Sure that's great for the Journalist who managed to get to see the sneak peak. But to give the rewards to a game they can tell us nothing about until a month and a half later is just bullshit. They should of given it to another game, that way we can have a look at the demos and the videos and examine the content and even have a discussion based on some facts. As it is, they give out a reward and can't give us a single reason as to why they gave them a reward and the rest of us are left scratching our heads while some are wetting themselves in anticipation. It has made the reward pretty much pointless. Don't give rewards to games under a NDA no matter how good it is.

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Arakazi
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Originally posted by Gallus85

    Originally posted by Roin
    I could never accept a "Best of Show" or "Best at Show" that was only shown behind closed doors. Me, personally that would instantly disqualify it from even being considered.

    Why?  That's some weird logic.  The people who saw it behind closed doors got to see it for themselves.  They weren't taking someone's word on it.

     

    They evaluated what they saw vs the other, public shown MMOs and made the choice they felt was best.  The fact that they got a screening to something others didn't should have zero bearing on what level of quality they thought the game was.

    The picked the best from what they saw.


    Hmm, would it be OK for a movie to win the Academy Award for best picture if it had never been released to the public? Probably not. Game site reviewers seem more susceptible to the hype train than most, and these awards are frequent based more on what is promised vs the final delivery so are not good indicators of future market success.
    The awards they gave were specific to their site.  The only people who needed to see the game to rightfully award such praise are the people who work for and write articles for the sites.  The logic of "It's not fair, I didn't see it, so they shouldn't be able to judge it" is beyond comical.
    They did not back up the award.
    "Why is it the Best of Show?"
    "Because we said so!"
    This does not make for great journalism.

     

    How many other "interested parties" were there? Why did only 2 out of however many give this award? Kyleran's movie analogy was spot on.

    It may have been the best game at the show. No facts have been presented to support this award. Can't talk about it? Don't give the award. Or accept the hit your reputation will take.

    It's best in show.

    Why?

    You'll find out in about a week when SOE live hits and the journalists can release their article explaining why they named it best in show and will see the product yourself on August 2nd.

    Why is this hard for you guys to understand?  Does the fact that you're going to hear why at a later date some how negate the fact that they picked what they thought was the best in show?  They would gladly have told us why they had picked it if it wasn't for the NDA.

    Sure that's great for the Journalist who managed to get to see the sneak peak. But to give the rewards to a game they can tell us nothing about until a month and a half later is just bullshit. They should of given it to another game, that way we can have a look at the demos and the videos and examine the content and even have a discussion based on some facts. As it is, they give out a reward and can't give us a single reason as to why they gave them a reward and the rest of us are left scratching our heads while some are wetting themselves in anticipation. It has made the reward pretty much pointless. Don't give rewards to games under a NDA no matter how good it is.

    Lead me through your logic.

    The guy saw a product and thought it was superior to all at the show.  You didn't get to see it, but the person deciding on which one to give the award did.  He gives said game the award, and tells you that you'll find out why at SOE Live.

    Explain the bullshit to me.

    Personally I think it would be bullshit to give the award to an inferior product, knowing good and well that another game deserved it.

    You're going to be told why, just not right now.  How does the time in which you* will learn why a journalist gave an award have any bearing on the fact that it deserved it?

    It's not like they gave an award and said "Just cuz!" Haha.  They have reasons to back up why they gave it best in show.  When the NDA lifts, they will be publishing an article explaining why, on the same day.  Then you'll get all the conversation you want.

    Your logic is extremely flawed.  Sorry to say.  

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • ArakaziArakazi OxfordPosts: 889Member
    By that reasoning the Oscars can be decided on trailers or previews that only a select few have seen.
  • arcatomarcatom plymouth, MAPosts: 33Member
    Originally posted by Arakazi
    By that reasoning the Oscars can be decided on trailers or previews that only a select few have seen.

    EQ didn't win game of the year. All it did was win best game at E3. That means, according to these sites, it had the best potential out of the games that were in that particular show. That's all. Nothing more.

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Arakazi
    By that reasoning the Oscars can be decided on trailers or previews that only a select few have seen.

    Games, especially  MMORPGs, are different than movies.

    Movies are a static experience that lasts a very short, finite amount of time.  MMORPGs have huge amounts of content and are impossible to fully view before a review is given.

    Also, by your failed logic, how would YOU having seen the game or read the article the same day the award was given have anything to do with who got the award?

    Would you have phoned the journalist, told him you thought it wasn't good and made him change the award? LOL

    The point is, he saw the product in action, got a low down on the features, mechanics, graphics, concepts, etc, and contrasted that to all the other ones he got to see at the show, and  gave the award to the one he thought deserved it.

    The fact that YOU did not get to see it has zero weight on his decision.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • XthosXthos Columbus, OHPosts: 2,628Member
    Originally posted by tixylix
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    But PS2 was great.

    [mod edit]

    Seems to be largely opinion, as some hail it as the best pvp experience out there now, and some hate it...  I have not played it.

  • KrimzinKrimzin Fort Worth, TXPosts: 545Member Uncommon

    For a game to win Best in Show at E3, that isn't just a fluff award. Games are voted on by everyone and unless it is actually a solid game it wouldn't win. Have there been games in the past that won and were crap, probably. I don't believe this is the case for EverQuest Next.

    There are always going to be supporters and there are always going to be Trolls.

    I choose to be a supporter and could care less what the trolls think.

    Just because I'm a gamer doesn't mean I drive a Honda.


    It's an Orange thing
Sign In or Register to comment.