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!

[General Article] Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn: Review in Progress #4

2

Comments

  • HyanmenHyanmen KolkkalaPosts: 5,354Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DMKano

    Also the story is very cheesy, someone mentioned crafting - I just got my ltw to 50 and weaver to 38 - its a grind, imo. What is so great aboit it?

    It's very well done and can make you a huge amount of money at any level range. Money that actually matters in this game.

    You seem to have grinded your way to 50 asap though, so I'm not all that surprised the point in crafting completely got over your head.

    It's a sad sight to see, in all honesty. The game is brilliant but everyone plays it as if they were playing some WoW clone where NPC's supply you with everything and money is just another resource to grind on top of million other resources, not the driving force behind the game.

    "Housing is standard in most mmo's."
    - yolteotl79

  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Fresno, CAPosts: 615Member
    Originally posted by VassagoMael
    Originally posted by Tsumoro
    So is this the final RIP before the actual review score is given?

    This is the final review before the final final review.

    No, no. I hear they have an Epilogue planned to follow the Grand Final Review, which is slated to follow the Final Review which will be following the final Episodic Preview of the Review, which may or may not be what we just witnessed in this column.

    EA CEO John Riccitiello's on future microtransactions: "When you are six hours into playing Battlefield and you run out of ammo in your clip, and we ask you for a dollar to reload, you're really not very price sensitive at that point in time...We're not gouging, but we're charging."

  • trynxtrynx ashkelonPosts: 5Member
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by VassagoMael
    Originally posted by Tsumoro
    So is this the final RIP before the actual review score is given?

    This is the final review before the final final review.

    No, no. I hear they have an Epilogue planned to follow the Grand Final Review, which is slated to follow the Final Review which will be following the final Episodic Preview of the Review, which may or may not be what we just witnessed in this column.

    so this mean... that this is the semi final review and there will be another review before the grand final review?

  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Fresno, CAPosts: 615Member
    Originally posted by trynx
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by VassagoMael
    Originally posted by Tsumoro
    So is this the final RIP before the actual review score is given?

    This is the final review before the final final review.

    No, no. I hear they have an Epilogue planned to follow the Grand Final Review, which is slated to follow the Final Review which will be following the final Episodic Preview of the Review, which may or may not be what we just witnessed in this column.

    so this mean... that this is the semi final review and there will be another review before the grand final review?

    No, no. This is an Episodic Preview of the Review, we just don't know if this is the last episode before the Final Review, or if they'll sideswipe us with yet another episode.

    Isn't the antici.........pation exciting?!?

    EA CEO John Riccitiello's on future microtransactions: "When you are six hours into playing Battlefield and you run out of ammo in your clip, and we ask you for a dollar to reload, you're really not very price sensitive at that point in time...We're not gouging, but we're charging."

  • GrakulenGrakulen Staff Writer St. Charles, MOPosts: 460MMORPG.COM Staff Uncommon
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by trynx
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by VassagoMael
    Originally posted by Tsumoro
    So is this the final RIP before the actual review score is given?

    This is the final review before the final final review.

    No, no. I hear they have an Epilogue planned to follow the Grand Final Review, which is slated to follow the Final Review which will be following the final Episodic Preview of the Review, which may or may not be what we just witnessed in this column.

    so this mean... that this is the semi final review and there will be another review before the grand final review?

    No, no. This is an Episodic Preview of the Review, we just don't know if this is the last episode before the Final Review, or if they'll sideswipe us with yet another episode.

    Isn't the antici.........pation exciting?!?

    Careful what you wish for. We might go all Hollywood on you and reboot this review before we even get the final one out! (Think Spiderman).

  • clamoclamo House Springs, MOPosts: 16Member
    I was one of the lucky ones that got to play it during the closed beta. I had a blast during phase 2 but when phase 3 hit I was disappointed. I didn't get to play during phase 4 (open beta) but I did get to play during the free trial and all I can say is as long as they don't change to much, but add a lot more I am game.  9/10
  • itchmonitchmon west islip, NYPosts: 1,714Member Uncommon
    it definitely takes the "best available themepark" mantle away from Rift.  the fact that it does that while still remaining "obviously final fantasy"  means they are doing something right over at SqE (finally!!)

    RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.

    Currently Playing EVE, DFUW

    Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.

    Dwight D Eisenhower

    My optimism wears heavy boots and is loud.

    Henry Rollins

  • ElandrialElandrial atlanta, GAPosts: 162Member Uncommon
    teleport is pricey?really?wow ihave over 100k gil just following the storyline,not framing fates which make no money.oh yeah lvl 42.i teleport occasionally a lot of times i take the airship but that 200gil itself.plus the time to go back to town to use it.
  • ElandrialElandrial atlanta, GAPosts: 162Member Uncommon
    teleport is pricey?really?wow ihave over 100k gil just following the storyline,not framing fates which make no money.oh yeah lvl 42.i teleport occasionally a lot of times i take the airship but that 200gil itself.plus the time to go back to town to use it.
  • zaylinzaylin Olympia, WAPosts: 789Member
    Originally posted by Sho0terMcgavin
    Originally posted by albob35
    I can't quite put my finger on it, but I have really been enjoying this game. I think in one of your earlier RIPs you called it "the bug". Its been a while, but I too have caught it.

    I felt the same way.  By the time I reached level 42 on my dragoon.  I couldn't bring myself to log in.  I doubt i'll ever log back in.  Decent game, but same old same old.

    Funny thing is, a lot of people are looking for that first MMO exp IE in one sense the same old, same old. FF11 was my first mmo, and i have to say IMO, they captured the feel and essence of 11, and then brought it up to date and a fresh feel, with some similarity. been a long time I got "The Bug" . lol its been even longer where I caught my self up at 3am still playing going "oh shit think i need to gooo to bed now!" {grins}

    but as always not every game is going to please or satisfy everyone.

    "I like Jalapeno on my pizza,how bout chuw?" :^)

  • zaylinzaylin Olympia, WAPosts: 789Member
    Originally posted by Grakulen
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by trynx
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by VassagoMael
    Originally posted by Tsumoro
    So is this the final RIP before the actual review score is given?

    This is the final review before the final final review.

    No, no. I hear they have an Epilogue planned to follow the Grand Final Review, which is slated to follow the Final Review which will be following the final Episodic Preview of the Review, which may or may not be what we just witnessed in this column.

    so this mean... that this is the semi final review and there will be another review before the grand final review?

    No, no. This is an Episodic Preview of the Review, we just don't know if this is the last episode before the Final Review, or if they'll sideswipe us with yet another episode.

    Isn't the antici.........pation exciting?!?

    Careful what you wish for. We might go all Hollywood on you and reboot this review before we even get the final one out! (Think Spiderman).

     

    HA...Hahaha!! :-)

  • ZoeMcCloskeyZoeMcCloskey Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,148Member Uncommon
    So far am loving this game.

    image
  • TelondarielTelondariel Ottawa, ONPosts: 1,001Member
    Originally posted by Grakulen
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by trynx
    Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
    Originally posted by VassagoMael
    Originally posted by Tsumoro
    So is this the final RIP before the actual review score is given?

    This is the final review before the final final review.

    No, no. I hear they have an Epilogue planned to follow the Grand Final Review, which is slated to follow the Final Review which will be following the final Episodic Preview of the Review, which may or may not be what we just witnessed in this column.

    so this mean... that this is the semi final review and there will be another review before the grand final review?

    No, no. This is an Episodic Preview of the Review, we just don't know if this is the last episode before the Final Review, or if they'll sideswipe us with yet another episode.

    Isn't the antici.........pation exciting?!?

    Careful what you wish for. We might go all Hollywood on you and reboot this review before we even get the final one out! (Think Spiderman).

    Regardless.  

     

    I can appreciate that these reviewettes (new word!) are taking into consideration the substantial re-launch pains FF has had..again.   Having finally been able to buy a copy in NA yesterday, I can personally see some of the issues that are being talked about.  In particular is a surge in lag from the tidal wave of people who are finally allowed into the game after sales were resumed.  SE, as with the other launch issues, seems to have been ill-prepared to deal with the new population spike.

     

    For me, and apparently others, this lag issue fundamentally hinders regular gameplay.  If I am affected by simple movements and rudimentary actions, my grouping participation would be grossly affected as well.  They need to manage the surge of new players better.

     

    My experience so far?  I'm going to wait and see, while going back to my old game.  

    image
  • DwarfZZZDwarfZZZ MadridPosts: 197Member Uncommon
    I like the game a lot and I think I was longing for this kind of slow pace once again in a mmorpg. But I have just only one grip: the game's asthetic... I'm sure it must be something cultural, but I can't connect with the characters, with the world, the moogs seem silly to me...

    My FFXIV ARR referral code for new EU accounts: UYXTV3K3

  • h0tNstilettosh0tNstilettos Sedalia, MOPosts: 25Member

    I'm actually quite shocked at the people thinking this game is a 7. This game deserved nothing under a 9. It deserves a 9 minimum. It's not perfect, but very very good, especially considering the game was remade from the ground up in just two years

     

    I've played MMORPGs for 10 years, including all the big name ones like EQ1, WoW, Rift, Terra, GW2, Maplestory, and ARR is by far the best I've played. It is only launch, and many features they wanted at launch will be coming in patch 2.1 in November.

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    I'm actually quite shocked at the people thinking this game is a 7. This game deserved nothing under a 9. It deserves a 9 minimum. It's not perfect, but very very good, especially considering the game was remade from the ground up in just two years

     

    I've played MMORPGs for 10 years, including all the big name ones like EQ1, WoW, Rift, Terra, GW2, Maplestory, and ARR is by far the best I've played. It is only launch, and many features they wanted at launch will be coming in patch 2.1 in November.

    I disagree.  ARR is a "good" game, but 7 is being generous.  The graphics are less than stellar.  The combat isn't that great.  The game doesn't innovate in any areas (it's by far the most cookie-cutter traditional MMO I've ever seen).  I won't bring up it's abysmal launch.

    Imo, fans of Final Fantasy, or fans of traditional themepark MMOs should give ARR a try.  It's got a decent little story and has semi-decent amount of content.  However, the game lacks a lot of depth and innovation that many current and future MMOs have.  It's just your typical themepark MMO with tab target combat, done decently well.

    A rating of 5-7 is deserved.  Anything more than that is nothing more than a fan boy rating that doesn't consider the whole package or contrast it to other innovative MMOs.

    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

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by DMKano

    1-50 is about an 8/10

    once you hit 50 the game is a 6.7/10

    Just my 2c

    Also the story is very cheesy, someone mentioned crafting - I just got my ltw to 50 and weaver to 38 - its a grind, imo. What is so great aboit it?

    Complexity. Choices.  Interdependency. Variation.

     

    To give an example of complexity: You could choose to aim for 100% HQ, if you take a certain amount of steps, but if you choose a different method that yields lower % HQ and takes far less steps, the experience per hour could still be higher at the latter case. A certain crafting recipie could yield more exp per hour than another one, but give less gil per hour; this can change depending on the market situation.

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    I'm actually quite shocked at the people thinking this game is a 7. This game deserved nothing under a 9. It deserves a 9 minimum. It's not perfect, but very very good, especially considering the game was remade from the ground up in just two years

     

    I've played MMORPGs for 10 years, including all the big name ones like EQ1, WoW, Rift, Terra, GW2, Maplestory, and ARR is by far the best I've played. It is only launch, and many features they wanted at launch will be coming in patch 2.1 in November.

    I disagree.  ARR is a "good" game, but 7 is being generous.  The graphics are less than stellar.  The combat isn't that great.  The game doesn't innovate in any areas (it's by far the most cookie-cutter traditional MMO I've ever seen).  I won't bring up it's abysmal launch.

    Imo, fans of Final Fantasy, or fans of traditional themepark MMOs should give ARR a try.  It's got a decent little story and has semi-decent amount of content.  However, the game lacks a lot of depth and innovation that many current and future MMOs have.  It's just your typical themepark MMO with tab target combat, done decently well.

    A rating of 5-7 is deserved.  Anything more than that is nothing more than a fan boy rating that doesn't consider the whole package or contrast it to other innovative MMOs.

    The crafting system and market in FF blows away the grand majority of the competitors. The depth is just fine. 

     

    Furthermore, on a strictly merit-based rating system, a "good game" can per definition never be 5. It is rather 7 or 8. 9 being great; 10 being excellent (ign uses a similar system). In a system, where the ratings are based on comparison and distributed according to a normal contradiction, there are not enough mmorpgs  that beat FFXIV to put it anywhere below 7.

  • delateurdelateur Spokane, WAPosts: 156Member
    I just started playing on Friday. So far,I am liking the gameplay and the solo experience. Difficult to gauge the community since I had to shut off the yell and shout channels due to all the trade spam. So far, two blacklisted for trade tells. Definitely needs some oversight on SE's part. If the community is decent, I think I will stick around for a while. Solid 7/10 so far.
  • echolynfanecholynfan Lancaster, PAPosts: 681Member
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    I'm actually quite shocked at the people thinking this game is a 7. This game deserved nothing under a 9. It deserves a 9 minimum. It's not perfect, but very very good, especially considering the game was remade from the ground up in just two years

     

    I've played MMORPGs for 10 years, including all the big name ones like EQ1, WoW, Rift, Terra, GW2, Maplestory, and ARR is by far the best I've played. It is only launch, and many features they wanted at launch will be coming in patch 2.1 in November.

    I disagree.  ARR is a "good" game, but 7 is being generous.  The graphics are less than stellar.  The combat isn't that great.  The game doesn't innovate in any areas (it's by far the most cookie-cutter traditional MMO I've ever seen).  I won't bring up it's abysmal launch.

    Imo, fans of Final Fantasy, or fans of traditional themepark MMOs should give ARR a try.  It's got a decent little story and has semi-decent amount of content.  However, the game lacks a lot of depth and innovation that many current and future MMOs have.  It's just your typical themepark MMO with tab target combat, done decently well.

    A rating of 5-7 is deserved.  Anything more than that is nothing more than a fan boy rating that doesn't consider the whole package or contrast it to other innovative MMOs.

    The crafting system and market in FF blows away the grand majority of the competitors. The depth is just fine. 

     

    Furthermore, on a strictly merit-based rating system, a "good game" can per definition never be 5. It is rather 7 or 8. 9 being great; 10 being excellent (ign uses a similar system). In a system, where the ratings are based on comparison and distributed according to a normal contradiction, there are not enough mmorpgs  that beat FFXIV to put it anywhere below 7.

    Agreed. I'm not a fanboy of the FF franchise but I do know an excellent MMO when I play one and FF ARR deserves a soild 9 in comparison to everything else that's on the market. I want to know which games these people have been playing if they think FF ARR is only a 6-7. 

    Currently playing SWTOR and it's MUCH better than it was at launch.

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    I'm actually quite shocked at the people thinking this game is a 7. This game deserved nothing under a 9. It deserves a 9 minimum. It's not perfect, but very very good, especially considering the game was remade from the ground up in just two years

     

    I've played MMORPGs for 10 years, including all the big name ones like EQ1, WoW, Rift, Terra, GW2, Maplestory, and ARR is by far the best I've played. It is only launch, and many features they wanted at launch will be coming in patch 2.1 in November.

    I disagree.  ARR is a "good" game, but 7 is being generous.  The graphics are less than stellar.  The combat isn't that great.  The game doesn't innovate in any areas (it's by far the most cookie-cutter traditional MMO I've ever seen).  I won't bring up it's abysmal launch.

    Imo, fans of Final Fantasy, or fans of traditional themepark MMOs should give ARR a try.  It's got a decent little story and has semi-decent amount of content.  However, the game lacks a lot of depth and innovation that many current and future MMOs have.  It's just your typical themepark MMO with tab target combat, done decently well.

    A rating of 5-7 is deserved.  Anything more than that is nothing more than a fan boy rating that doesn't consider the whole package or contrast it to other innovative MMOs.

    The crafting system and market in FF blows away the grand majority of the competitors. The depth is just fine. 

     

    Furthermore, on a strictly merit-based rating system, a "good game" can per definition never be 5. It is rather 7 or 8. 9 being great; 10 being excellent (ign uses a similar system). In a system, where the ratings are based on comparison and distributed according to a normal contradiction, there are not enough mmorpgs  that beat FFXIV to put it anywhere below 7.

    The crafting system in FF isn't anything special.  It's better than some, but not the best by far.

    The breadcrumb trail of quests and forced story quest are so unimaginative and non-innovative that it has* to have points taken off for it.

    The launch was by far the worst out of the dozens of AAA MMORPGS, and certainly not a representation of what I would expect from a pay to play game.  But I don't deduct any points for that, and the issues have been mostly cleared up already.

    Instanced dungeons are simplistic and often boring.

    The combat system is slow, clunky and extremely cookie cutter.

    Zero innovation in story telling.  Most of the cutscenes don't even have voice overs.  You can't control anything in the story.  Your story is the same as everyone else. etc etc.

    The FATE public quest system is horrible.  GW2 did it WAY better, and EQ2 is set to do open world events even greater than GW2.

    I could go on and on.

    FFXIV is a "good" game.  And as such, 5-7 is "good" and a rating it deserves.  8 9 and 10 are reserved for great and amazing/innovating games, and 1-4 are ratings reserved for terrible - bad games.

    FFXIV is a solid 5-7 depending on your own personal preferences.  If you really like themepark, traditional MMOs, and really like the asian/FF theme, a 7 is a legit score.  If you really don't care for the game, you have to admit the game is at least a 5 or 6, because what it does do (even though it's nothing great, new or revolutionary) it does well enough.

    But 8 9 or 10?

    On what planet? lol.

    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

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    I'm actually quite shocked at the people thinking this game is a 7. This game deserved nothing under a 9. It deserves a 9 minimum. It's not perfect, but very very good, especially considering the game was remade from the ground up in just two years

     

    I've played MMORPGs for 10 years, including all the big name ones like EQ1, WoW, Rift, Terra, GW2, Maplestory, and ARR is by far the best I've played. It is only launch, and many features they wanted at launch will be coming in patch 2.1 in November.

    I disagree.  ARR is a "good" game, but 7 is being generous.  The graphics are less than stellar.  The combat isn't that great.  The game doesn't innovate in any areas (it's by far the most cookie-cutter traditional MMO I've ever seen).  I won't bring up it's abysmal launch.

    Imo, fans of Final Fantasy, or fans of traditional themepark MMOs should give ARR a try.  It's got a decent little story and has semi-decent amount of content.  However, the game lacks a lot of depth and innovation that many current and future MMOs have.  It's just your typical themepark MMO with tab target combat, done decently well.

    A rating of 5-7 is deserved.  Anything more than that is nothing more than a fan boy rating that doesn't consider the whole package or contrast it to other innovative MMOs.

    The crafting system and market in FF blows away the grand majority of the competitors. The depth is just fine. 

     

    Furthermore, on a strictly merit-based rating system, a "good game" can per definition never be 5. It is rather 7 or 8. 9 being great; 10 being excellent (ign uses a similar system). In a system, where the ratings are based on comparison and distributed according to a normal contradiction, there are not enough mmorpgs  that beat FFXIV to put it anywhere below 7.

    The crafting system in FF isn't anything special.  It's better than some, but not the best by far.

    The breadcrumb trail of quests and forced story quest are so unimaginative and non-innovative that it has* to have points taken off for it.

    The launch was by far the worst out of the dozens of AAA MMORPGS, and certainly not a representation of what I would expect from a pay to play game.  But I don't deduct any points for that, and the issues have been mostly cleared up already.

    Instanced dungeons are simplistic and often boring.

    The combat system is slow, clunky and extremely cookie cutter.

    Zero innovation in story telling.  Most of the cutscenes don't even have voice overs.  You can't control anything in the story.  Your story is the same as everyone else. etc etc.

    The FATE public quest system is horrible.  GW2 did it WAY better, and EQ2 is set to do open world events even greater than GW2.

    I could go on and on.

    FFXIV is a "good" game.  And as such, 5-7 is "good" and a rating it deserves.  8 9 and 10 are reserved for great and amazing/innovating games, and 1-4 are ratings reserved for terrible - bad games.

    FFXIV is a solid 5-7 depending on your own personal preferences.  If you really like themepark, traditional MMOs, and really like the asian/FF theme, a 7 is a legit score.  If you really don't care for the game, you have to admit the game is at least a 5 or 6, because what it does do (even though it's nothing great, new or revolutionary) it does well enough.

    But 8 9 or 10?

    On what planet? lol.

    There are a few scores between "good" and "bad", but you seem to omit them in your score system. 

    If your "5-7" is for "good", and "1-4" is for terrible-bad games, where is your rating for "mediocre" and "okay" games? I.e. what is the rating for things between "bad" and "good"?

    This is all semantics of course. Of interest is to behold the ign rating system at "http://www.ign.com/wikis/ign/Game_Reviews#".

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    I'm actually quite shocked at the people thinking this game is a 7. This game deserved nothing under a 9. It deserves a 9 minimum. It's not perfect, but very very good, especially considering the game was remade from the ground up in just two years

     

    I've played MMORPGs for 10 years, including all the big name ones like EQ1, WoW, Rift, Terra, GW2, Maplestory, and ARR is by far the best I've played. It is only launch, and many features they wanted at launch will be coming in patch 2.1 in November.

    I disagree.  ARR is a "good" game, but 7 is being generous.  The graphics are less than stellar.  The combat isn't that great.  The game doesn't innovate in any areas (it's by far the most cookie-cutter traditional MMO I've ever seen).  I won't bring up it's abysmal launch.

    Imo, fans of Final Fantasy, or fans of traditional themepark MMOs should give ARR a try.  It's got a decent little story and has semi-decent amount of content.  However, the game lacks a lot of depth and innovation that many current and future MMOs have.  It's just your typical themepark MMO with tab target combat, done decently well.

    A rating of 5-7 is deserved.  Anything more than that is nothing more than a fan boy rating that doesn't consider the whole package or contrast it to other innovative MMOs.

    The crafting system and market in FF blows away the grand majority of the competitors. The depth is just fine. 

     

    Furthermore, on a strictly merit-based rating system, a "good game" can per definition never be 5. It is rather 7 or 8. 9 being great; 10 being excellent (ign uses a similar system). In a system, where the ratings are based on comparison and distributed according to a normal contradiction, there are not enough mmorpgs  that beat FFXIV to put it anywhere below 7.

    The crafting system in FF isn't anything special.  It's better than some, but not the best by far.

    The breadcrumb trail of quests and forced story quest are so unimaginative and non-innovative that it has* to have points taken off for it.

    The launch was by far the worst out of the dozens of AAA MMORPGS, and certainly not a representation of what I would expect from a pay to play game.  But I don't deduct any points for that, and the issues have been mostly cleared up already.

    Instanced dungeons are simplistic and often boring.

    The combat system is slow, clunky and extremely cookie cutter.

    Zero innovation in story telling.  Most of the cutscenes don't even have voice overs.  You can't control anything in the story.  Your story is the same as everyone else. etc etc.

    The FATE public quest system is horrible.  GW2 did it WAY better, and EQ2 is set to do open world events even greater than GW2.

    I could go on and on.

    FFXIV is a "good" game.  And as such, 5-7 is "good" and a rating it deserves.  8 9 and 10 are reserved for great and amazing/innovating games, and 1-4 are ratings reserved for terrible - bad games.

    FFXIV is a solid 5-7 depending on your own personal preferences.  If you really like themepark, traditional MMOs, and really like the asian/FF theme, a 7 is a legit score.  If you really don't care for the game, you have to admit the game is at least a 5 or 6, because what it does do (even though it's nothing great, new or revolutionary) it does well enough.

    But 8 9 or 10?

    On what planet? lol.

    There are a few scores between "good" and "bad", but you seem to omit them in your score system. 

    If your "5-7" is for "good", and "1-4" is for terrible-bad games, where is your rating for "mediocre" and "okay" games? I.e. what is the rating for things between "bad" and "good"?

    This is all semantics of course. Of interest is to behold the ign rating system at "http://www.ign.com/wikis/ign/Game_Reviews#".

    That system you linked lines up with exactly what I said.

     

    my 1-4 5-7 8-10 was generalized to keep the post at a reasonable word-count, but the essence of what I said is exactly with what you agree with.

    IGN: 

    6.0-6.9 - OKAY

     

    5.0-5.9 - MEDIOCRE

    FFXIV is somewhere between Mediocre and OK (as I already stated).  It does zero innovation and lacks creativity.  It's dated in many areas and isn't a perfect game.  Some systems are down right tacked-on feeling and don't even do a good job of imitating other MMOs in many areas.  Case in point, their story and fate systems are bland and boarder on terrible.

    FFXIV is not a "Bad" game, but it's certainly not: 

    8.0-8.9 - GREAT

    or

    9.0-9.9 - AMAZING

    A highly subjective and weak argument may be made for

    7.0-7.9 - GOOD

    But then again, I already stated 5-7 is more than fair in my previous post, though considering other games that have released over the past few years, I would disagree with FFXIV being a 7, personally, but I wouldn't cry foul if someone said they felt it was a 7.

    Maybe if FFXIV had released in it's current form around the same time Aion did, I could let an 8 slip, but not today.  Not even close.

    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

  • h0tNstilettosh0tNstilettos Sedalia, MOPosts: 25Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    I'm actually quite shocked at the people thinking this game is a 7. This game deserved nothing under a 9. It deserves a 9 minimum. It's not perfect, but very very good, especially considering the game was remade from the ground up in just two years

     

    I've played MMORPGs for 10 years, including all the big name ones like EQ1, WoW, Rift, Terra, GW2, Maplestory, and ARR is by far the best I've played. It is only launch, and many features they wanted at launch will be coming in patch 2.1 in November.

    I disagree.  ARR is a "good" game, but 7 is being generous.  The graphics are less than stellar.  The combat isn't that great.  The game doesn't innovate in any areas (it's by far the most cookie-cutter traditional MMO I've ever seen).  I won't bring up it's abysmal launch.

    Imo, fans of Final Fantasy, or fans of traditional themepark MMOs should give ARR a try.  It's got a decent little story and has semi-decent amount of content.  However, the game lacks a lot of depth and innovation that many current and future MMOs have.  It's just your typical themepark MMO with tab target combat, done decently well.

    A rating of 5-7 is deserved.  Anything more than that is nothing more than a fan boy rating that doesn't consider the whole package or contrast it to other innovative MMOs.

    The crafting system and market in FF blows away the grand majority of the competitors. The depth is just fine. 

     

    Furthermore, on a strictly merit-based rating system, a "good game" can per definition never be 5. It is rather 7 or 8. 9 being great; 10 being excellent (ign uses a similar system). In a system, where the ratings are based on comparison and distributed according to a normal contradiction, there are not enough mmorpgs  that beat FFXIV to put it anywhere below 7.

    The crafting system in FF isn't anything special.  It's better than some, but not the best by far.

    The breadcrumb trail of quests and forced story quest are so unimaginative and non-innovative that it has* to have points taken off for it.

    The launch was by far the worst out of the dozens of AAA MMORPGS, and certainly not a representation of what I would expect from a pay to play game.  But I don't deduct any points for that, and the issues have been mostly cleared up already.

    Instanced dungeons are simplistic and often boring.

    The combat system is slow, clunky and extremely cookie cutter.

    Zero innovation in story telling.  Most of the cutscenes don't even have voice overs.  You can't control anything in the story.  Your story is the same as everyone else. etc etc.

    The FATE public quest system is horrible.  GW2 did it WAY better, and EQ2 is set to do open world events even greater than GW2.

    I could go on and on.

    FFXIV is a "good" game.  And as such, 5-7 is "good" and a rating it deserves.  8 9 and 10 are reserved for great and amazing/innovating games, and 1-4 are ratings reserved for terrible - bad games.

    FFXIV is a solid 5-7 depending on your own personal preferences.  If you really like themepark, traditional MMOs, and really like the asian/FF theme, a 7 is a legit score.  If you really don't care for the game, you have to admit the game is at least a 5 or 6, because what it does do (even though it's nothing great, new or revolutionary) it does well enough.

    But 8 9 or 10?

    On what planet? lol.

    There are a few scores between "good" and "bad", but you seem to omit them in your score system. 

    If your "5-7" is for "good", and "1-4" is for terrible-bad games, where is your rating for "mediocre" and "okay" games? I.e. what is the rating for things between "bad" and "good"?

    This is all semantics of course. Of interest is to behold the ign rating system at "http://www.ign.com/wikis/ign/Game_Reviews#".

    That system you linked lines up with exactly what I said.

     

    my 1-4 5-7 8-10 was generalized to keep the post at a reasonable word-count, but the essence of what I said is exactly with what you agree with.

    IGN: 

    6.0-6.9 - OKAY

     

    5.0-5.9 - MEDIOCRE

    FFXIV is somewhere between Mediocre and OK (as I already stated).  It does zero innovation and lacks creativity.  It's dated in many areas and isn't a perfect game.  Some systems are down right tacked-on feeling and don't even do a good job of imitating other MMOs in many areas.  Case in point, their story and fate systems are bland and boarder on terrible.

    FFXIV is not a "Bad" game, but it's certainly not: 

    8.0-8.9 - GREAT

    or

    9.0-9.9 - AMAZING

    A highly subjective and weak argument may be made for

    7.0-7.9 - GOOD

    But then again, I already stated 5-7 is more than fair in my previous post, though considering other games that have released over the past few years, I would disagree with FFXIV being a 7, personally, but I wouldn't cry foul if someone said they felt it was a 7.

    Maybe if FFXIV had released in it's current form around the same time Aion did, I could let an 8 slip, but not today.  Not even close.

    Lol, there is no way you are very experienced in MMOs to think this game deserves a mediocre or okay rating. The original horrible FFXIV has a rating of 5.1 already, which you claim ARR deserves the same. ARR is leaps and bounds better than the original, AND better than most AAA titles out there. You also claim ARR does nothing new and innovative. There's only one other MMORPG that does crafting similar to ARR, though I don't remember the name of it, but it is nowhere near as good as ARRs. And let's not forget gathering. Other innovations include the Gold Saucer amusement park coming in a future patch, and let's not forget treasure hunting coming in the first patch 2.1, and Chocobo raising and breeding. Yes, raising pets has been done before, but ARR's companion system that where your chocobo can be a mount, battle companion, and the raising and breeding aspect for chocobos make this game's approach much more in-depth. Housing is also superior in this game compared to any MMORPG before it. You would know this if you've read about it. The Armoury system is very nice as well. There are other innovations slipping my mind. Let's not forget about how much ARR caters to solo players. Very few MMORPGs have such a balance between solo and group play. Let's not forget how superior the music and storyline are compared to most MMOs. Let's not forget how much more well designed the tutorial stages of the game are that introduce players at a nice pace. You are simply one of the people that think ARR does nothing innovative because it disguises itself as a traditional MMORPG. They did this intentionally. They took things that have been done before, but innovated them. Plus the things I mentioned not done before coming. It sounds to me like you think the game is not amazing unless it does everything completely different and new to the point where it's not even recognizable as an MMORPG.

     
     
     
     
  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    Lol, there is no way you are very experienced in MMOs to think this game deserves a mediocre or okay rating. The original horrible FFXIV has a rating of 5.1 already, which you claim ARR deserves the same. ARR is leaps and bounds better than the original, AND better than most AAA titles out there. You also claim ARR does nothing new and innovative. There's only one other MMORPG that does crafting similar to ARR, though I don't remember the name of it, but it is nowhere near as good as ARRs. And let's not forget gathering. Other innovations include the Gold Saucer amusement park coming in a future patch, and let's not forget treasure hunting coming in the first patch 2.1, and Chocobo raising and breeding. Yes, raising pets has been done before, but ARR's companion system that where your chocobo can be a mount, battle companion, and the raising and breeding aspect for chocobos make this game's approach much more in-depth. Housing is also superior in this game compared to any MMORPG before it. You would know this if you've read about it. The Armoury system is very nice as well. There are other innovations slipping my mind. Let's not forget about how much ARR caters to solo players. Very few MMORPGs have such a balance between solo and group play. Let's not forget how superior the music and storyline are compared to most MMOs. Let's not forget how much more well designed the tutorial stages of the game are that introduce players at a nice pace. You are simply one of the people that think ARR does nothing innovative because it disguises itself as a traditional MMORPG. They did this intentionally. They took things that have been done before, but innovated them. Plus the things I mentioned not done before coming. It sounds to me like you think the game is not amazing unless it does everything completely different and new to the point where it's not even recognizable as an MMORPG.

     
     
     
     

    You can see the list of MMOs I've played "seriously" in my signature and I've given far more than that a fair shake of a try.  You simply rattle off a bunch of features you like in the game and put far too much emotion into your post.  Too much "me me me" and not enough stepping back and looking at the big picture.

    Case in point, you clearly haven't played many MMORPGs, especially sandbox ones, if you think FFARR has "The best crafting".  The system isn't even as good as Vanguard's crafting system, and that game came out about 5 or 6 years ago.

    You need to learn to be a little more objective in your posts.  Branch out and actually play a broader amount of MMOs, or games in general.  You clearly put too much weight in what you like and fail to evaluate the game in a more objective way.

    Not that I can blame you.  A lot of people judge games very subjectively,  but you're not going to win an argument with your emotional pleas.

    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

2
Sign In or Register to comment.