Regardless of how critical the reviews might be, the fact remains that Zenimax has an NDA in place that prevents discussions. The press are allowed to post reviews about their experience in the game, but since they had to start from the beginning, those reviews will all be focused on the starting area experience, and the systems that you can access early on.
I'm sure we all remember Age of Conan? Probably one of the absolute best and most fun MMORPG's ever to hit the market, until you got to level 20 and left the starting area of Tortage. Then all the voice acting went away, all the clever quests disappeared, and you were left with a pale husk of grinding your way through generic levels of content, on an engine which performed badly when outside the short-draw-distance confines of the starting areas.
Will TESO be like that? Or will it get better as you hit the later content? Past history with dozens of MMO's suggests the odds of it getting better are pretty slim, and the fact that they keep the NDA in place lends credence to that conclusion.
If they really have faith in the quality of their game, they would lift the NDA entirely and let the long-time beta testers tell us about the later content (or lack thereof). The fact that they don't, makes me think they're following the same old trend of making a highly polished newbie zone to draw people into buying it at launch, and then hoping they can finish the rest of the game before everyone gets out of those areas and gets bored.
Prove me wrong, Zenimax.
This clause is generally understood as prohibiting the government from interfering with the printing and distribution of information or opinions, although freedom of the press, like freedom of speech, is subject to some restrictions, such as defamation law and copyright law.
In Lovell v. City of Griffin, Chief Justice Hughes defined the press as, "every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion."[1] The First Amendment's Freedom of the Press Clause has been extended to media including newspapers, books, plays, movies, and video games.[2] While the question remains whether bloggers or people posting on social media like Facebook and Twitter are covered by the Free Press Clause, they are covered by the Free Speech Clause.[3]
I'd love to see a company hold it's own against the U.S. constitution when it goes head-to-head with something like our Freedom of the Press. This does include video games. NDA policy cannot restrict an American citizen's constitutional right to Freedom of the Press unless of course said person(s) commits defamation or copy right law.
Signing the NDA is kind of voiding that Constitutional right, though, isn't it? I mean, it's essentially legally bound contract. You get to play - you don't talk about it. You don't have the right of Freedom of Speech because you have the right to play, instead.
Of course, I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know for sure.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
As I know there are only three reasons to make a review. You have been paid. You cannot hold your excitement about something. Or you have a hidden agenda. There is no altruistic reviews. “sway the reader(s) into making their final decision” - isn’t it contradictory? If you “sway the readers”, it will not be ever “their own” decision! Don’t you know that?
It seems only appropriate in this context to ask you: Have you been paid for your post? Do you have a hidden agenda? Are you overexcited about this game?
Why does the agenda have to be hidden? If something stinks and a lot of people tell me it stinks, then I'm a lot less likely to pay full price for it. In this instance, and from all the reviews I've read, I don't think I'll be paying full box price and $15 a month for this game. Every video I've watched and every review I've read has convinced me that this stinker will be F2P in the future. I can wait that long easily.
Lots and lots of good games out there, no reason to jump on a turd and ride it to the toilet just cause everyone else is.
Exactly my point: All of them giving the same forecast based on absolutely nothing but opinions of a half-made game. It's already affected YOU. Instead of actually trying to get into Beta, playing it, and experiencing it... you're already waiting for it to fail.
This is my point exactly.
Yes.... a half made game weeks before it's release. No wonder it's catch so much bad press, lol.
Are you just trying to be argumentative? It's half-made in the sense that they played an old build.
God... why do I even bother trying to communicate with people like you? You don't listen. You aren't trying to communicate. You're just trying to improve your own image of an ego by picking apart every single little thing you can. And it doesn't accomplish... anything.
I'm not trying to argue with anyone. I'm just trying to talk with you - try to get on the same page, here.
The problem is that we've heard it before. AoC supposedly had us beta testing an early build that was running in debug mode, making it unstable and that at launch everything would be fixed! Come launch...nope, still broke. Same with plenty of others. I'm not saying I don't have hope for TESO but this isn't the first time we've heard the same old song and dance.
Yeah... I've heard it before too. But then, I've also played the Beta of TESO. I've experienced it. I'm not even huge fan of TES. I went into thinking the game was going to blow balls. But... it didn't. It was actually really good. I was very, very surprised.
That's why these reviews bother me. It's not the fact that they're bashing a game. It's the fact that they're bashing the game based on a personal opinion that THEY experienced, and have the ability to affect YOUR decision when you haven't even played it. Whether you want to admit it or not, you're being affected by it. Even I am affected by it, and I understand exactly what the rhetoric is doing. It works that way.
I'm mad about this injustice - not that they hate the game. Like I said, I don't care what their opinion is. I'm just sick and tired of them using their free back-stage passes as a way to affect yours before you get a chance to actually experience it.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
Yeah... I've heard it before too. But then, I've also played the Beta of TESO. I've experienced it. I'm not even huge fan of TES. I went into thinking the game was going to blow balls. But... it didn't. It was actually really good. I was very, very surprised.
That's why these reviews bother me. It's not the fact that they're bashing a game. It's the fact that they're bashing the game based on a personal opinion that THEY experienced, and have the ability to affect YOUR decision when you haven't even played it. Whether you want to admit it or not, you're being affected by it. Even I am affected by it, and I understand exactly what the rhetoric is doing. It works that way.
I'm mad about this injustice - not that they hate the game. Like I said, I don't care what their opinion is. I'm just sick and tired of them using their free back-stage passes as a way to affect yours before you get a chance to actually experience it.
What I see here is someone that likes a game that a lot of other people don't. It bothers you that other people have a different opinion than you. Instead of accepting that you like the game and other people don't, you try and come up with wild theories about how reviews are supposed to be unbiased. Their bias is affecting everyone's brains through their rhetoric and hurting my game!
You are basically arguing that people should not look to reviewers in order to inform them about a product they might be interested in. Personally, I think it's better that consumers are able to be informed about a products quality and features before they make a decision about buying. I don't even think most of the reviews are that bad btw. To me, it looks like most of them think it's a fairly average entry into the MMORPG space.
As I know there are only three reasons to make a review. You have been paid. You cannot hold your excitement about something. Or you have a hidden agenda. There is no altruistic reviews. “sway the reader(s) into making their final decision” - isn’t it contradictory? If you “sway the readers”, it will not be ever “their own” decision! Don’t you know that?
It seems only appropriate in this context to ask you: Have you been paid for your post? Do you have a hidden agenda? Are you overexcited about this game?
Why does the agenda have to be hidden? If something stinks and a lot of people tell me it stinks, then I'm a lot less likely to pay full price for it. In this instance, and from all the reviews I've read, I don't think I'll be paying full box price and $15 a month for this game. Every video I've watched and every review I've read has convinced me that this stinker will be F2P in the future. I can wait that long easily.
Man, if it's a stinker to you... why would you play it even at F2P?
Honestly, I think that's the real thing I hate about F2P: it brings in people who don't even want to be there. Everything else (p2w, paygates, whatever) is a matter of implementation that can be resolved. But playing with people who obviously think it's a turd, but are just as obviously willing to ride that turd if it's free...
I think you misread my intent. It's a turd if it costs full price plus a sub, but it doesn't look so bad that I wouldn't give it a shot if it was free,and then decide whether I want go behind the pay wall on my own. Every review I've read has said the same thing; this game isn't worth $60.00 plus $15.00 a month.
Maybe it's the metaphor.
Even F2P requires that *some* people paying into the game; and at a higher rate than they would be in a 'box+sub' model, in order to basically subsidize those who are playing for free. When you're saying 'it's a turd if it costs full price," you're basically saying "eat shit for me, sucker" to the people who's contributions allow F2P to work at all.
And I'd honestly rather play on a ghost-server with a handful of people who are happy to be there, than play on a full server with a bunch of freeloaders who insult the people paying for their tickets.
FFS, the game has a box price and a sub and they're STILL locking things behind a pay wall. That's un-fucking-acceptable. Either there's a pay wall and everything in game is obtainable through in-game means, or it's F2P and you lock things behind a pay wall. If they're already introducing pay walls, then I'll wait until it's F2P and then choose which pay walls I want to pay for.
See, now that's an argument that actually makes sense.
Yeah... I've heard it before too. But then, I've also played the Beta of TESO. I've experienced it. I'm not even huge fan of TES. I went into thinking the game was going to blow balls. But... it didn't. It was actually really good. I was very, very surprised.
That's why these reviews bother me. It's not the fact that they're bashing a game. It's the fact that they're bashing the game based on a personal opinion that THEY experienced, and have the ability to affect YOUR decision when you haven't even played it. Whether you want to admit it or not, you're being affected by it. Even I am affected by it, and I understand exactly what the rhetoric is doing. It works that way.
I'm mad about this injustice - not that they hate the game. Like I said, I don't care what their opinion is. I'm just sick and tired of them using their free back-stage passes as a way to affect yours before you get a chance to actually experience it.
What I see here is someone that likes a game that a lot of other people don't. It bothers you that other people have a different opinion than you. Instead of accepting that you like the game and other people don't, you try and come up with wild theories about how reviews are supposed to be unbiased. Their bias is affecting everyone's brains through their rhetoric and hurting my game!
You are basically arguing that people should not look to reviewers in order to inform them about a product they might be interested in. Personally, I think it's better that consumers are able to be informed about a products quality and features before they make a decision about buying. I don't even think most of the reviews are that bad btw. To me, it looks like most of them think it's a fairly average entry into the MMORPG space.
I think... you're being very rational in your approach to how you perceive me. And I can even see how you might come to your conclusion. Unfortunately, you're wrong in your assessment.
I don't like it when people masquerade their opinions as actual legitimate news outlets - period. It's dishonest, it's unethical, and it's immoral.
I dislike it even more when they expect people to treat them as anything more than an opinion factory. Not because people don't treat them appropriately, but because of the power that provides that factory to affect your judgement. In this thread alone, 80% of the people are bashing a game simply based on these factories' ability to produce an opinion... and they haven't even tried it. And worse... they try to defend their point of view as if they are somehow immune to the fact that they can't know something without actually having experienced it.
I'm done here. Your arguments on this subject are completely dead and are not worthy of further examination. You're just arguing because you hate to be wrong - and you are.
You haven't played the game. You don't know if it is good or not. You've only listened to other opinions and defended those opinions as fact simply because of unanimous perspective by several opinions with a loud voice. And you have hearkened to that opinion so intently, you would rather think of some crazy reason why someone would arbitrarily defend the game as being good instead of the obvious reason why they would do so - they played it and found it was good.
This is my final point - you've not even played it, and have been sold it as bad, that you won't even think to listen to someone that says otherwise. I not only told you otherwise, I explained to you how and why you already think its bad.
Yeah... I've heard it before too. But then, I've also played the Beta of TESO. I've experienced it. I'm not even huge fan of TES. I went into thinking the game was going to blow balls. But... it didn't. It was actually really good. I was very, very surprised.
That's why these reviews bother me. It's not the fact that they're bashing a game. It's the fact that they're bashing the game based on a personal opinion that THEY experienced, and have the ability to affect YOUR decision when you haven't even played it. Whether you want to admit it or not, you're being affected by it. Even I am affected by it, and I understand exactly what the rhetoric is doing. It works that way.
I'm mad about this injustice - not that they hate the game. Like I said, I don't care what their opinion is. I'm just sick and tired of them using their free back-stage passes as a way to affect yours before you get a chance to actually experience it.
What I see here is someone that likes a game that a lot of other people don't. It bothers you that other people have a different opinion than you. Instead of accepting that you like the game and other people don't, you try and come up with wild theories about how reviews are supposed to be unbiased. Their bias is affecting everyone's brains through their rhetoric and hurting my game!
You are basically arguing that people should not look to reviewers in order to inform them about a product they might be interested in. Personally, I think it's better that consumers are able to be informed about a products quality and features before they make a decision about buying. I don't even think most of the reviews are that bad btw. To me, it looks like most of them think it's a fairly average entry into the MMORPG space.
I think... you're being very rational in your approach to how you perceive me. And I can even see how you might come to your conclusion. Unfortunately, you're wrong in your assessment.
I don't like it when people masquerade their opinions as actual legitimate news outlets - period. It's dishonest, it's unethical, and it's immoral.
I dislike it even more when they expect people to treat them as anything more than an opinion factory. Not because people don't treat them appropriately, but because of the power that provides that factory to affect your judgement. In this thread alone, 80% of the people are bashing a game simply based on these factories' ability to produce an opinion... and they haven't even tried it. And worse... they try to defend their point of view as if they are somehow immune to the fact that they can't know something without actually having experienced it.
I'm done here. Your arguments on this subject are completely dead and are not worthy of further examination. You're just arguing because you hate to be wrong - and you are.
You haven't played the game. You don't know if it is good or not. You've only listened to other opinions and defended those opinions as fact simply because of unanimous perspective by several opinions with a loud voice. And you have hearkened to that opinion so intently, you would rather think of some crazy reason why someone would arbitrarily defend the game as being good instead of the obvious reason why they would do so - they played it and found it was good.
This is my final point - you've not even played it, and have been sold it as bad, that you won't even think to listen to someone that says otherwise. I not only told you otherwise, I explained to you how and why you already think its bad.
Have a good day.
I've played in 3 beta weekends. I know how we might be able to solve this. Link a single review of a game - ever written or displayed on youtube - that does not show bias.
You can repeat that I'm wrong over and over again if you want, but reviews, by their very nature have bias.
I find it rather refreshing to see a high profile game getting bad press of this magnitude. A refreshing change from the norm of 9.8-10s across the board. It gets boring after a while.
wow on launch was better than eso is now, and I been playing wow since early betas, being european i played both korean/asian and na betas, and still was better experience than eso
saying bad press is killing the game, I would say press is too forgiving considering how much eso charges, no mmorpg charges full console price ( there REALLY WAS NO MMO that charged 60$, even worse in uk where its 50 pounds.. to normal 25-35, latest final fantasy was 15.. or 20$), + sub + cash shop
Bad press is killing the game because eso droped nda for press, so according to you zenimax should lie about everything and never drop nda until launch and trick people into buying the game...thats some good logic there
This is wrong.....when wow launched it no bgs, crazy class imbalances, and a TON of glitches (falling through the world, mobs being unkillable, etc)
thanks for calling this guy out he is a total and complete liar from the word go. Not even exaggeration here, this guy is totally fabricating.
WoW was a train wreck well into the first month after release.
Not going to violate NDA again but he is lying about ESO as well.
As I know there are only three reasons to make a review. You have been paid. You cannot hold your excitement about something. Or you have a hidden agenda. There is no altruistic reviews. “sway the reader(s) into making their final decision” - isn’t it contradictory? If you “sway the readers”, it will not be ever “their own” decision! Don’t you know that?
It seems only appropriate in this context to ask you: Have you been paid for your post? Do you have a hidden agenda? Are you overexcited about this game?
Why does the agenda have to be hidden? If something stinks and a lot of people tell me it stinks, then I'm a lot less likely to pay full price for it. In this instance, and from all the reviews I've read, I don't think I'll be paying full box price and $15 a month for this game. Every video I've watched and every review I've read has convinced me that this stinker will be F2P in the future. I can wait that long easily.
Man, if it's a stinker to you... why would you play it even at F2P?
Honestly, I think that's the real thing I hate about F2P: it brings in people who don't even want to be there. Everything else (p2w, paygates, whatever) is a matter of implementation that can be resolved. But playing with people who obviously think it's a turd, but are just as obviously willing to ride that turd if it's free...
I think you misread my intent. It's a turd if it costs full price plus a sub, but it doesn't look so bad that I wouldn't give it a shot if it was free,and then decide whether I want go behind the pay wall on my own. Every review I've read has said the same thing; this game isn't worth $60.00 plus $15.00 a month.
Maybe it's the metaphor.
Even F2P requires that *some* people paying into the game; and at a higher rate than they would be in a 'box+sub' model, in order to basically subsidize those who are playing for free. When you're saying 'it's a turd if it costs full price," you're basically saying "eat shit for me, sucker" to the people who's contributions allow F2P to work at all.
And I'd honestly rather play on a ghost-server with a handful of people who are happy to be there, than play on a full server with a bunch of freeloaders who insult the people paying for their tickets.
Well, don't get me wrong here. I'm not a freeloader by any means. I've never played a F2P title without paying my fair share, and in the case of World of Tanks and Planetside 2, I probably payed for 2-3 people's subs per month just on my own. lol
What I don't want to do is hear review sites saying "It's not worth box price plus a sub", then I say say screw it and pay the box price plus the sub only to find out that they were right and I don't like it. I'd rather wait until it's F2P, or at the very least a really good free trial like EVE Online's two weeks free, and if I do really like it, then believe me I'll be one of the paying customers.
Now lets flip the coin over for a second. I'm actually not a fan of the F2P model. I believe that it ends up costing players MORE per month to obtain the things they want in F2P than in the sub model. Several of the best tanks in WoT are 100% behind a pay wall.
I prefer a game where you simply have a sub and then everything in game is available to the player. My preferred alternative to F2P is the two week free trial, where players can determine whether the game is worth a sub. For instance, I've been paying a sub in EVE Online for eight years now and it's worth every dollar. But that's simply not a realistic expectation in today's market, so I'll wait for the realistic expectation of a F2P model.
FFS, the game has a box price and a sub and they're STILL locking things behind a pay wall. That's un-fucking-acceptable. Either there's a pay wall and everything in game is obtainable through in-game means, or it's F2P and you lock things behind a pay wall. If they're already introducing pay walls, then I'll wait until it's F2P and then choose which pay walls I want to pay for.
See, now that's an argument that actually makes sense.
I am so tired of the Gaming press slamming a game before the Beta is over. ESO should not have dropped the NDA. It could kill a game like this especially with a subscription model.
The problem with the Press is most of them are no more qualified than I am. I have been gaming longer than most of the MMORPG staff have been alive. I could have beta-tested PONG. But they didn't let us and we were so excited by it we didn't care about the bugs.
I am also not a Elder Scrolls Fanboi. I can take it or leave it. Will I buy ESO? Probably not at the moment but not because of the press but because I cannot afford the time for another game. I play LOTRO and that's about all I have time for. But if I had the time I would play ESO.
What pisses me off is that these horrible press reviews can kill a game before it gets going. W.O.W. would die at launch if released today. 2 hour queue's. Horrible crashes and bugs that weren't fixed for months and an Endgame that required 40+ raiders with an insane lockout and Random loot drop that meant it could take more than a year to get your gear. Hardcore all the way. I loved wow. I put up with all of that because the rest of the game was awesome. But if it was released today you wouldn't hear about the awesomeness...All you would hear are the bad things. Hellgate London died because it was released way to early and they didn't have enough servers....Hmmmm Sounds familiar...
I'm Out!
What I got from this is that free speech isn't cool.
Anyways, snide comments aside; this is the reason NDAs exist. They hide you from people talking about your game. (good or bad) Fact of the matter is that if your game is still under NDA (Which, as far as I know, there is still a limited NDA on ESO) less then 2 months from launch; then you are either not confident that your product is ready or just plain have something to hide.
If the general vibe from press is not good for the bit they can cover, it does not mean that the rest of the game is bad. The problem is that usually MMOs have a poor perspective out of the gate because a lot of them are heavily lopsided towards end game. This is not acceptable anymore, especially as MMOs strive to maintain relevance; (specifically themepark style MMORPGS) they have to be compelling out of the gate.
Also using hindsight as an argument isn't a very strong way to backup a point. Everything is crystal clear in hind sight. It doesn't matter how well WoW would do if it came out today, because it came out 8 years ago.
Considering the amount of money Bethesda and Zenimax spend on marketing, not just for TESO, I think it is safe to assume that NO part of the press, at least not the part that takes it income from ad revenue, is overly negative of the game.
In fact, it is almost certain that they are very generous with their views.
Tricky path to keep at least an resemblance of objectivity for your readers at the same time as to not bite the hand that feeds you.
Someone mentioned Angryjoe and youtube, and that is more often then not were I get my first impressions, not AJ necessarily but youtube, I have found Totalbiscuit for example to strike very close to my own views on many occasions so I tend to listen.
And even though they to are a bit in the pocket of the publishers they have a lot more freedom to say what they like, just as long as you know Joe for example tend to be angry.
If you take any review from one of the larger sites and just take away one or two points I think most of the time we would do ourselves a favor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
I am so tired of the Gaming press slamming a game before the Beta is over. ESO should not have dropped the NDA. It could kill a game like this especially with a subscription model.
The problem with the Press is most of them are no more qualified than I am. I have been gaming longer than most of the MMORPG staff have been alive. I could have beta-tested PONG. But they didn't let us and we were so excited by it we didn't care about the bugs.
I am also not a Elder Scrolls Fanboi. I can take it or leave it. Will I buy ESO? Probably not at the moment but not because of the press but because I cannot afford the time for another game. I play LOTRO and that's about all I have time for. But if I had the time I would play ESO.
What pisses me off is that these horrible press reviews can kill a game before it gets going. W.O.W. would die at launch if released today. 2 hour queue's. Horrible crashes and bugs that weren't fixed for months and an Endgame that required 40+ raiders with an insane lockout and Random loot drop that meant it could take more than a year to get your gear. Hardcore all the way. I loved wow. I put up with all of that because the rest of the game was awesome. But if it was released today you wouldn't hear about the awesomeness...All you would hear are the bad things. Hellgate London died because it was released way to early and they didn't have enough servers....Hmmmm Sounds familiar...
I'm Out!
befoer ei dig through the rest of this thread, i have to ask did youa ctully play hellgates london. i did, im sorry that gmae was horrid.
F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.
WOW was the worst mmo launch i have experienced still to this day. I couldn't even log in for the first 5 days or so.
You must not have experienced many then, And sorry, I was in on day 2 of WoW and while there were server issues, WoW doesn't even rank in the top 10 worst MMO launches I have been in.
WoW had huge imballance issues, clipping issues, falling through the world issues, server stability, complete disfunctional class (till patch 1.7)
Wow had a god awfull launch.
Comparing an MMO launched in 2004 when MMOs had very little track history and games launched 10 years later after hundreds if not thousands of MMO's have been released worldwide is brilliant !! Can you even comprehend how much technology has changed in 10 years?
Edit:
"................When it launched the fact that the developer was caught off guard by the response to its first MMO release was painfully obvious. Servers were down for days at a time, players couldn’t loot, server-side lag was abundant and no matter how many new shards the studio launched, they filled to peak population incredibly quickly. The early days of WoW were hampered by its own success."
From Bill who said he had to play it for 10 hours before he started to get enjoyment to other reviewers on this site who've just been having a negative time all around. It seems that it's not a good sign for the game. A customer should have to spend 10+ hours into a game to start getting enjoyment out of it. You want the people playing the game to be enjoying it from the get go. Something like openly testing and cooperatively talking with testers could fix. However, seeing as the beta is so close to launch and hold a very limiting NDA only weeks before it's release. There's truly no time left to fix the product properly in a manor that'd allow people to enjoy the game from the get go.
You guys are completely forgetting that not everyone is an experienced MMO player who just wants to skip to some imaginary end game and be epic in a day or two. I am an experienced MMO vet who understands why is that but I still understand that an MMO should start slow and don't really have problem with it if game overall is what I want. Besides 10 hours is nothing for (any) MMO.
WOW was the worst mmo launch i have experienced still to this day. I couldn't even log in for the first 5 days or so.
You must not have experienced many then, And sorry, I was in on day 2 of WoW and while there were server issues, WoW doesn't even rank in the top 10 worst MMO launches I have been in.
WoW had huge imballance issues, clipping issues, falling through the world issues, server stability, complete disfunctional class (till patch 1.7)
Wow had a god awfull launch.
Comparing an MMO launched in 2004 when MMOs had very little track history and games launched 10 years later after hundreds if not thousands of MMO's have been released worldwide is brilliant !! Can you even comprehend how much technology has changed in 10 years?
Edit:
"................When it launched the fact that the developer was caught off guard by the response to its first MMO release was painfully obvious. Servers were down for days at a time, players couldn’t loot, server-side lag was abundant and no matter how many new shards the studio launched, they filled to peak population incredibly quickly. The early days of WoW were hampered by its own success."
Again.........brilliant !!!
Even though you are right about the technical issues, though it was poorly handled even for those days and age where only part of the problem.
The rest of the issues, like class ballance, clipping issues, falling through floors, broken quests, broken skills and certainly not least a complete disfunctional class ( you know.. the one they removed from the game 2 days before release and putted a napkin art placeholder back in for) , are things they had years and years of experiance in, the principle of all issues underlined, with the exception of server stability should never have entered the game.
But you completely ignored them. Just like how you completely ignored it being a response to someone who claims wow's launch wasnt bad at all.
Edit : that said, how bad ANY mmo was released in the patch never was and never will be a justification of the state another is released. But overall ESO, wasnt running all that bad at all, especially since during this stress test theywhere trying to actuall crash the servers. Makes sense to see what your equipment can handle and where it needs to be improved.
This is turning into politics rather than the benefit of criticism influencing better investment.
If people were always misinformed with their investments, and made bad investments then people would lose. They would lose their money and have a lower standard of living. By offering the right information for investment, or criticism, informed investors will invest in the right place which of course would mean a strong business which creates jobs, and has a positive influence in the sector/industry.
If for example a game was bad for the wrong reasons, and people invest into the company, and other companies follow suit, then how is that any good for the sector of the video game industry? Are mmos meant to be a safe haven for secound rate video game programmers that they than can prey on ignorant consumers and produce bad video games and still be 'successful'?
Im not saying ESO is a bad game, since I have not played the game, and the pvp looks great as well. However, criticism and information are important not just for consumers but the industry as well.
So in attempt to protect ESO, it might be doing more harm to the industry by putting guilt on those expressing their opinion, which I believe is their honest opinion.
Also if consumers have no reliable information with overly positive reviews, and also they have more than one bad experience in a video game that did not have reviews that helped their decision then they would/might be less likely to make an impulse buy before trying it out.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
People are saying the opening portion of the game is boring. I'd really like someone to make a video with a side by side comparison of ESO and WOW; just pure gameplay for the fist 30 minutes.
One where you're breaking out of a Daedric Prison surrounded by the likes of Michael Gambon, John Cleese and Jennifer Hale. The other where you're killing wolves in Northshire Abbey.
The MMO crowd have become so entitled they don't know a good thing when it slaps them in the face. It doesn't help that Skyrim is an impossible game to follow. The bar was set so high for ESO that it was always going to be this way.
People are saying the opening portion of the game is boring. I'd really like someone to make a video with a side by side comparison of ESO and WOW; just pure gameplay for the fist 30 minutes.
One where you're breaking out of a Daedric Prison surrounded by the likes of Michael Gambon, John Cleese and Jennifer Hale. The other where you're killing wolves in Northshire Abbey.
The MMO crowd have become so entitled they don't know a good thing when it slaps them in the face. It doesn't help that Skyrim is an impossible game to follow. The bar was set so high for ESO that it was always going to be this way.
#2 Any post that parrot's the word "entitlement" over a needed server stress test disguised as a BETA with 15 minute video opinions (see #1) isn't serious about having a discussion about the game.
Don't worry! I can feel that this game will success, a lot!
Just the fact that the Imperial Edition now is booked out on most of the online-stores AFTER the beta!
That says a lot, if this game was so bad that the reviews say people wouldnt pay that kind of money for a game WITH subscription.
Maybe some people dont want ESO to succeed, and they feel they have to wrote about it in reviews.. I know now. But a word of advice, dont read review on a BETA....
WOW was the worst mmo launch i have experienced still to this day. I couldn't even log in for the first 5 days or so.
You must not have experienced many then, And sorry, I was in on day 2 of WoW and while there were server issues, WoW doesn't even rank in the top 10 worst MMO launches I have been in.
WoW had huge imballance issues, clipping issues, falling through the world issues, server stability, complete disfunctional class (till patch 1.7)
Wow had a god awfull launch.
Comparing an MMO launched in 2004 when MMOs had very little track history and games launched 10 years later after hundreds if not thousands of MMO's have been released worldwide is brilliant !! Can you even comprehend how much technology has changed in 10 years?
Edit:
"................When it launched the fact that the developer was caught off guard by the response to its first MMO release was painfully obvious. Servers were down for days at a time, players couldn’t loot, server-side lag was abundant and no matter how many new shards the studio launched, they filled to peak population incredibly quickly. The early days of WoW were hampered by its own success."
Again.........brilliant !!!
Even though you are right about the technical issues, though it was poorly handled even for those days and age where only part of the problem.
The rest of the issues, like class ballance, clipping issues, falling through floors, broken quests, broken skills and certainly not least a complete disfunctional class ( you know.. the one they removed from the game 2 days before release and putted a napkin art placeholder back in for) , are things they had years and years of experiance in, the principle of all issues underlined, with the exception of server stability should never have entered the game.
But you completely ignored them. Just like how you completely ignored it being a response to someone who claims wow's launch wasnt bad at all.
Edit : that said, how bad ANY mmo was released in the patch never was and never will be a justification of the state another is released. But overall ESO, wasnt running all that bad at all, especially since during this stress test theywhere trying to actuall crash the servers. Makes sense to see what your equipment can handle and where it needs to be improved.
And you completely ignored when WoW launched there was very little track record of MMO's with a "how to do it book". It was figure it out on the fly and then point to a 3 year old article which states that's WoW's issues where caused by it's success.
#2 Any post that parrot's the word "entitlement" over a needed server stress test disguised as a BETA with 15 minute video opinions (see #1) isn't serious about having a discussion about the game.
My post was completely lost on you. I'm talking about the current mindset of large portion of the MMO community and their impossibly high expectations.
Comments
Signing the NDA is kind of voiding that Constitutional right, though, isn't it? I mean, it's essentially legally bound contract. You get to play - you don't talk about it. You don't have the right of Freedom of Speech because you have the right to play, instead.
Of course, I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know for sure.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
Yeah... I've heard it before too. But then, I've also played the Beta of TESO. I've experienced it. I'm not even huge fan of TES. I went into thinking the game was going to blow balls. But... it didn't. It was actually really good. I was very, very surprised.
That's why these reviews bother me. It's not the fact that they're bashing a game. It's the fact that they're bashing the game based on a personal opinion that THEY experienced, and have the ability to affect YOUR decision when you haven't even played it. Whether you want to admit it or not, you're being affected by it. Even I am affected by it, and I understand exactly what the rhetoric is doing. It works that way.
I'm mad about this injustice - not that they hate the game. Like I said, I don't care what their opinion is. I'm just sick and tired of them using their free back-stage passes as a way to affect yours before you get a chance to actually experience it.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
What I see here is someone that likes a game that a lot of other people don't. It bothers you that other people have a different opinion than you. Instead of accepting that you like the game and other people don't, you try and come up with wild theories about how reviews are supposed to be unbiased. Their bias is affecting everyone's brains through their rhetoric and hurting my game!
You are basically arguing that people should not look to reviewers in order to inform them about a product they might be interested in. Personally, I think it's better that consumers are able to be informed about a products quality and features before they make a decision about buying. I don't even think most of the reviews are that bad btw. To me, it looks like most of them think it's a fairly average entry into the MMORPG space.
Maybe it's the metaphor.
Even F2P requires that *some* people paying into the game; and at a higher rate than they would be in a 'box+sub' model, in order to basically subsidize those who are playing for free. When you're saying 'it's a turd if it costs full price," you're basically saying "eat shit for me, sucker" to the people who's contributions allow F2P to work at all.
And I'd honestly rather play on a ghost-server with a handful of people who are happy to be there, than play on a full server with a bunch of freeloaders who insult the people paying for their tickets.
See, now that's an argument that actually makes sense.
I think... you're being very rational in your approach to how you perceive me. And I can even see how you might come to your conclusion. Unfortunately, you're wrong in your assessment.
I don't like it when people masquerade their opinions as actual legitimate news outlets - period. It's dishonest, it's unethical, and it's immoral.
I dislike it even more when they expect people to treat them as anything more than an opinion factory. Not because people don't treat them appropriately, but because of the power that provides that factory to affect your judgement. In this thread alone, 80% of the people are bashing a game simply based on these factories' ability to produce an opinion... and they haven't even tried it. And worse... they try to defend their point of view as if they are somehow immune to the fact that they can't know something without actually having experienced it.
I'm done here. Your arguments on this subject are completely dead and are not worthy of further examination. You're just arguing because you hate to be wrong - and you are.
You haven't played the game. You don't know if it is good or not. You've only listened to other opinions and defended those opinions as fact simply because of unanimous perspective by several opinions with a loud voice. And you have hearkened to that opinion so intently, you would rather think of some crazy reason why someone would arbitrarily defend the game as being good instead of the obvious reason why they would do so - they played it and found it was good.
This is my final point - you've not even played it, and have been sold it as bad, that you won't even think to listen to someone that says otherwise. I not only told you otherwise, I explained to you how and why you already think its bad.
Have a good day.
I've played in 3 beta weekends. I know how we might be able to solve this. Link a single review of a game - ever written or displayed on youtube - that does not show bias.
You can repeat that I'm wrong over and over again if you want, but reviews, by their very nature have bias.
thanks for calling this guy out he is a total and complete liar from the word go. Not even exaggeration here, this guy is totally fabricating.
WoW was a train wreck well into the first month after release.
Not going to violate NDA again but he is lying about ESO as well.
Well, don't get me wrong here. I'm not a freeloader by any means. I've never played a F2P title without paying my fair share, and in the case of World of Tanks and Planetside 2, I probably payed for 2-3 people's subs per month just on my own. lol
What I don't want to do is hear review sites saying "It's not worth box price plus a sub", then I say say screw it and pay the box price plus the sub only to find out that they were right and I don't like it. I'd rather wait until it's F2P, or at the very least a really good free trial like EVE Online's two weeks free, and if I do really like it, then believe me I'll be one of the paying customers.
Now lets flip the coin over for a second. I'm actually not a fan of the F2P model. I believe that it ends up costing players MORE per month to obtain the things they want in F2P than in the sub model. Several of the best tanks in WoT are 100% behind a pay wall.
I prefer a game where you simply have a sub and then everything in game is available to the player. My preferred alternative to F2P is the two week free trial, where players can determine whether the game is worth a sub. For instance, I've been paying a sub in EVE Online for eight years now and it's worth every dollar. But that's simply not a realistic expectation in today's market, so I'll wait for the realistic expectation of a F2P model.
Why thank you kind sir!
What I got from this is that free speech isn't cool.
Anyways, snide comments aside; this is the reason NDAs exist. They hide you from people talking about your game. (good or bad) Fact of the matter is that if your game is still under NDA (Which, as far as I know, there is still a limited NDA on ESO) less then 2 months from launch; then you are either not confident that your product is ready or just plain have something to hide.
If the general vibe from press is not good for the bit they can cover, it does not mean that the rest of the game is bad. The problem is that usually MMOs have a poor perspective out of the gate because a lot of them are heavily lopsided towards end game. This is not acceptable anymore, especially as MMOs strive to maintain relevance; (specifically themepark style MMORPGS) they have to be compelling out of the gate.
Also using hindsight as an argument isn't a very strong way to backup a point. Everything is crystal clear in hind sight. It doesn't matter how well WoW would do if it came out today, because it came out 8 years ago.
Considering the amount of money Bethesda and Zenimax spend on marketing, not just for TESO, I think it is safe to assume that NO part of the press, at least not the part that takes it income from ad revenue, is overly negative of the game.
In fact, it is almost certain that they are very generous with their views.
Tricky path to keep at least an resemblance of objectivity for your readers at the same time as to not bite the hand that feeds you.
Someone mentioned Angryjoe and youtube, and that is more often then not were I get my first impressions, not AJ necessarily but youtube, I have found Totalbiscuit for example to strike very close to my own views on many occasions so I tend to listen.
And even though they to are a bit in the pocket of the publishers they have a lot more freedom to say what they like, just as long as you know Joe for example tend to be angry.
If you take any review from one of the larger sites and just take away one or two points I think most of the time we would do ourselves a favor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
befoer ei dig through the rest of this thread, i have to ask did youa ctully play hellgates london. i did, im sorry that gmae was horrid.
F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to
Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.
Comparing an MMO launched in 2004 when MMOs had very little track history and games launched 10 years later after hundreds if not thousands of MMO's have been released worldwide is brilliant !! Can you even comprehend how much technology has changed in 10 years?
Edit:
"................When it launched the fact that the developer was caught off guard by the response to its first MMO release was painfully obvious. Servers were down for days at a time, players couldn’t loot, server-side lag was abundant and no matter how many new shards the studio launched, they filled to peak population incredibly quickly. The early days of WoW were hampered by its own success."
Again.........brilliant !!!
You guys are completely forgetting that not everyone is an experienced MMO player who just wants to skip to some imaginary end game and be epic in a day or two. I am an experienced MMO vet who understands why is that but I still understand that an MMO should start slow and don't really have problem with it if game overall is what I want. Besides 10 hours is nothing for (any) MMO.
Even though you are right about the technical issues, though it was poorly handled even for those days and age where only part of the problem.
The rest of the issues, like class ballance, clipping issues, falling through floors, broken quests, broken skills and certainly not least a complete disfunctional class ( you know.. the one they removed from the game 2 days before release and putted a napkin art placeholder back in for) , are things they had years and years of experiance in, the principle of all issues underlined, with the exception of server stability should never have entered the game.
But you completely ignored them. Just like how you completely ignored it being a response to someone who claims wow's launch wasnt bad at all.
Edit : that said, how bad ANY mmo was released in the patch never was and never will be a justification of the state another is released. But overall ESO, wasnt running all that bad at all, especially since during this stress test they where trying to actuall crash the servers. Makes sense to see what your equipment can handle and where it needs to be improved.
This is turning into politics rather than the benefit of criticism influencing better investment.
If people were always misinformed with their investments, and made bad investments then people would lose. They would lose their money and have a lower standard of living. By offering the right information for investment, or criticism, informed investors will invest in the right place which of course would mean a strong business which creates jobs, and has a positive influence in the sector/industry.
If for example a game was bad for the wrong reasons, and people invest into the company, and other companies follow suit, then how is that any good for the sector of the video game industry? Are mmos meant to be a safe haven for secound rate video game programmers that they than can prey on ignorant consumers and produce bad video games and still be 'successful'?
Im not saying ESO is a bad game, since I have not played the game, and the pvp looks great as well. However, criticism and information are important not just for consumers but the industry as well.
So in attempt to protect ESO, it might be doing more harm to the industry by putting guilt on those expressing their opinion, which I believe is their honest opinion.
Also if consumers have no reliable information with overly positive reviews, and also they have more than one bad experience in a video game that did not have reviews that helped their decision then they would/might be less likely to make an impulse buy before trying it out.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
People are saying the opening portion of the game is boring. I'd really like someone to make a video with a side by side comparison of ESO and WOW; just pure gameplay for the fist 30 minutes.
One where you're breaking out of a Daedric Prison surrounded by the likes of Michael Gambon, John Cleese and Jennifer Hale. The other where you're killing wolves in Northshire Abbey.
The MMO crowd have become so entitled they don't know a good thing when it slaps them in the face. It doesn't help that Skyrim is an impossible game to follow. The bar was set so high for ESO that it was always going to be this way.
#1 A thirty minute video is against the NDA.
#2 Any post that parrot's the word "entitlement" over a needed server stress test disguised as a BETA with 15 minute video opinions (see #1) isn't serious about having a discussion about the game.
Don't worry! I can feel that this game will success, a lot!
Just the fact that the Imperial Edition now is booked out on most of the online-stores AFTER the beta!
That says a lot, if this game was so bad that the reviews say people wouldnt pay that kind of money for a game WITH subscription.
Maybe some people dont want ESO to succeed, and they feel they have to wrote about it in reviews.. I know now. But a word of advice, dont read review on a BETA....
And you completely ignored when WoW launched there was very little track record of MMO's with a "how to do it book". It was figure it out on the fly and then point to a 3 year old article which states that's WoW's issues where caused by it's success.
My post was completely lost on you. I'm talking about the current mindset of large portion of the MMO community and their impossibly high expectations.