Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
A great & fair Mortal Online review - "I would say give Mortal a chance"!!!
challe50
Member UncommonPosts: 21
There is another review out there at http://www.glimpsedog.com/content/107-mortal-online-review.html
Please note that this is THE DAY AFTER release and very much has happened since that!
A fair interview which ends up at 6.5/10. Some qoutes:
"Upon logging in to the game for the first time, I was pleasantly suprised by how much I enjoyed the first person view."
"What makes the first person view so enjoyable and immersive is largely down to the fantastic animations from this view. Climing on to a horse or swinging your sword feels absolutely real as the camera swings around just as your eyes would in real life. You really have to experience it to know what I'm talking about, but you can take my word for it, that it adds a lot of realism to the game. "
You see, you can get used to the 1st person view! 
End of the review:
"I guess the big questions is “should you subscribe?”. Now, this really depends on you, rather than the game itself. If you are looking for the next big MMO and want to hop straight into a finished and polished experience, I would say no, run a mile. However, if you are desperate to escape the pile of seemingly cloned themepark games, and are patient enough to support this game as it evolves over the years, then I would say give Mortal a chance. It's certainly not the worst you could do. Who knows, perhaps Starvault will follow in the footsteps of games like EVE online. For now, Mortal Online is a game lacking in several areas, but at least it dares to do things a bit differently, and it's great to see indie developers bring their brainchild into the world and breath it life."
Many of the things he is describing does not exist anymore since this is a fairly old review, and many things has been fixed/updated/changed. Hopefully we can see another review from him soon when the game is more polished that it was during beta/the day after release since this is the most non biased, and he shows that "he is understanding the game" review out there. What makes it great and fair IMO is what he states in the beginning:
"Now before I get into the guts of this review, it's worth noting that Starvault is NOT Blizzard, nor are they SOE or EA." and "This type of MMO is at a completely different end of the spectrum to linear based games, such as the popular games World of Warcraft and Age of Conan. Instead of levels there are player skills, instead of grinding there is fun, instead of being forced down specific routes, there is complete and utter freedom"
He shows us that he knows what to review, and is doing it after those premisses . Not another compared to X and X and X games...
Great read!
Comments
This is just to compare launch to now, pointing out what's fixed and what's not.
"Unfortunately, these animations don't look quite so good from the perspective of an observer, with character models sometimes sliding or jittering along" FIXED
"Again, Starvault have assured us that the trees are only temporary and they'll be updated as soon as they get the speedtree software working." NOT UPDATED YET. VERY SOON.
"What follows in the next few hours is unrewarding exploration, lacklusture PvE and a PvP system that doesn't really have much of a point except for taking your enemies gear." HALF TRUE - There are now secret places and dungeons to explore although bugged at this time due to navmesh. PvE lacks 'eyes' therefore not always presenting the challenge. PvP is now about guild politics, area control, taxes and taking their gear still :P Hopefully we'll see the PvE aspect drastically improve over this month.
"guild pvp is lacking due to several missing features. Crafting nodes don't deplete so you can't fight over them, territory control isn't there, guild keeps have little use and there is currently no war decloration system." FIXED/IMPLEMENTED
Exactly!
Much/most of the stuff he is talking about is fixed or on the way with the new build. The only way the review is unfair is that it is the day after release. But except for that, I think it is good!
As an online game product...and if there was some authority to regulate online games...Mortal Online would never have the authorization to release..because its a very unfinished , bugged no quality product...
Its not a question of personal tastes..its a question of checkin for facts, and comparing a product to another...looking at MO without the fanboysm, or whatever...its just a subpare product that shouldnt be allowed to be sold to the general public..its outrageous that this is possible nowadays....
If a bunch of amateur coders dont have the money, time and talent to build a gigantic work that is an mmorpg..then they just be still and do nothing instead of releasing gargage..this is just my opinion based in facts comparing quality products to this...called MO...
This is all that this game presents.. empty promises.
I wouldn't say the promises are empty, they've been delivering good so far. We've waited a long time for this second epic patch to come along and now the community expects a lot more from SV after the merge has been done. You're probably aware of the upcoming features they said would happen after the engine merge.
Yeah that was pretty bad to be fair, siege weapons need to remain in the world and they said they would fix it. Using siege weapons before the fix is kinda asking for it to happen. That's just karma for a 2am siege.
Ahaha, fanbois at their best. You completely trashed the negative review which was done few days after release here: http://www.brighthub.com/video-games/mmo/reviews/67137.aspx?p=3#comments because it was "wrong" to review a game so soon after release. Yet this review done in same matter is "great and fair"? Thanks for the laugh.
Sorry, but any review giving this unfinished pile of junk more then 4/10, falls under biased for me. He failed to realise in his review that the game would remain as unstable and buggy as it was first days after launch. I am quite certain that if he was to review the game again now, he would have vastly different opinion, being tired of screen draggers and the fact that there is nothing to do except for useless ganking.
Well, for one thing, the review (the one in bright hub) was written in April (look at page 9 in the comments section if you need to check it). They just slapped a new date on the review when the game was released for SEO purposes (search engine optimization). How much can you trust a review site that does that?
P.S. Unless you NEED to check it, just trust me. They make $$ off the ad revenue and I think we should avoid rewarding the way they do business (the seo linkfarm part not the revenue from ads)
I think we all know who the Mortal Online Mods are
BTW.. this "review" was discussed previously and the "review" was based on Open Beta.. and was hyped annonymously by the author on here and on the MO Forums in an attempt to drive traffic to his site. When you have to link your own review on a forum (annonymously) and say think like how you just found the first MO review and think it's fair.... well that should tell you all you need to know.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Absolutely,
Especially if you go writing news articles about the negative response to your own review. http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Mortal-Online-Review-Fallout-From-Fanboys-23833.html Although I don't remember Will Usher being anonymous.
No, you say its great and fair because its simply the only review that isn't too harsh on MO and its the most indulging one.
You felt the need to post it because of the more recent review at massively.
Comparing a game to another is just as fair as basing a review upon what the game COULD become with a LOT of "IF's".
And just like he said in the review, MO is for people who are desperate to play a "sandbox game", and desperation is never a very good motive to subscribe to a game.
There is already a thread for this topic. Please discuss it here : http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/280915/page/1
Locked.