Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

CEO claims frustration that "there doesn't seem to be any way to review the game objectively"

Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 10,938

"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

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

My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

«134567

Comments

  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,713
    "I want an objective review so I am asking my friends to do it."
    Harbinger of Fools
  • Azaron_NightbladeAzaron_Nightblade Member EpicPosts: 4,685
    Originally posted by Slapshot1188

      

     
    Can't help but wonder if this is related to the change of reviewer for the game.
     
     
     

    It's probably in response to the negative review. I doubt he convinced Bill into assigning a new reviewer for the game.

    It also doesn't sound like he's having much success in finding what he wants.

    My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)

    https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247

    He doesn't specifically mention MMORPG.com. He refers to the mmorpg press as part of his greater network of press/media connections. 

     

    Dude, we get it - You have some kind of issue with this guy. Take it to IMs with Ryan, hug it out, do whatever you gotta do, but spamming this site with this tired shtick of "I'm just concerned" is getting old. 

    Get over it or get new material. 

     

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • uidLuc1duidLuc1d Member UncommonPosts: 194
    LOL, this thing is still in existence?
  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Dakeru
    "I want an objective review so I am asking my friends to do it."

    Actually, it's quite the opposite. Bill said "I’m beginning to feel like I’m too close to the game to give it a fully unbiased review" so he handed it off to Steve to give the site's readers an objective view of the game.

    Don't let that get in the way of your tinfoil and conspiracies, though. imageimage

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • thunderclesthundercles Member UncommonPosts: 510
    Sounds like he wants a better review because it crowdfotging. Crowdforging is cool but the actual game.is still very rough. I'm sure you can do crowd forging and still come out with a bad game if the engine, programming, etc.. Is bad. If I was a reviewer I might give morenpoins for dev involvement with community but the game is still rough and not work the cost.

    Tldr: rough game + crowdforging does not equal good review.
  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by thundercles
    Sounds like he wants a better review because it crowdfotging. Crowdforging is cool but the actual game.is still very rough. I'm sure you can do crowd forging and still come out with a bad game if the engine, programming, etc.. Is bad. If I was a reviewer I might give morenpoins for dev involvement with community but the game is still rough and not work the cost. Tldr: rough game + crowdforging does not equal good review.

    That's a really good point. If he's looking for people to focus on the crowdforging aspects and the strength of the dev/community relationship, he's probably better off looking toward game developer publications/sites than gaming sites. ex: Gamedev.net, EDGE magazine, Gamasutra, IGDA. The gaming sites are going to review the game, not the game creation process, and so far it's a unanimous verdict on the game itself. 

     

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,713
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Dakeru
    "I want an objective review so I am asking my friends to do it."

    Actually, it's quite the opposite. Bill said "I’m beginning to feel like I’m too close to the game to give it a fully unbiased review" so he handed it off to Steve to give the site's readers an objective view of the game.

    Don't let that get in the way of your tinfoil and conspiracies, though. imageimage

     

    I do have a tinfoil theory - it involves you attacking the OP and valiantly defending this game.

    Harbinger of Fools
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    He doesn't specifically mention MMORPG.com. He refers to the mmorpg press as part of his greater network of press/media connections. 

     

    Dude, we get it - You have some kind of issue with this guy. Take it to IMs with Ryan, hug it out, do whatever you gotta do, but spamming this site with this tired shtick of "I'm just concerned" is getting old. 

    Get over it or get new material. 

     

     

    I agree. The game might have some problems and needs work before I'd consider it, but at least these guys are transparent, Anyone can get a free try of the game, it makes the personal crusade against the Devs look quite suspect IMO. 

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • NibsNibs Member UncommonPosts: 287
    Originally posted by Slapshot1188

     

    Not sure how comfortable I am seeing the CEO state that he is telling his "friends" at sites like MMORPG (specifically mentioned) who he thinks should review his game...
     
    Can't help but wonder if this is related to the change of reviewer for the game.
     
     
     

    If I've written a new death metal opera I'm not going to want a critic of Armenian folk music to write the review.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Dakeru
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Dakeru
    "I want an objective review so I am asking my friends to do it."

    Actually, it's quite the opposite. Bill said "I’m beginning to feel like I’m too close to the game to give it a fully unbiased review" so he handed it off to Steve to give the site's readers an objective view of the game.

    Don't let that get in the way of your tinfoil and conspiracies, though. imageimage

     

    I do have a tinfoil theory - it involves you attacking the OP and valiantly defending this game.

    If you could, please link to where I "valiantly defended" the game. I don't think I've tossed my hat in the ring for either side on PFO. I may have, though. If so, please link to it. I'm interested in what gave you that impression. 

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • MisterZebubMisterZebub Member LegendaryPosts: 3,584
    Originally posted by Slapshot1188

     

    Ryan Dancy

     

      <p may-blank-within="" md-container="" "="">

    It frustrates me that there doesn't seem to be any way to review the game objectively. Most of the people who would write a review for a big site like mmorpg.com aren't the target market for the game, and most of the target market for the game doesn't have the connections to get asked to write a review.

    I've told my friends in the press (not just mmorpg but a bunch of them) that they should try to find someone who sees value in the Crowdforging experience to do the review. That's hard for them, because they actually get to "Crowdforge" MMOs quite often. They're in very early and see the behind-the-scenes work before the public and are often asked for their input and opinions. So to a lot of those folks the opportunity to do that is very "meh". But it's not reflective of the audience, who rarely, if ever, get the kind of access we're giving people and the kind of impact that generates.

    If you devalue "Crowdforging" to zero, you can't review what we're selling very objectively.

     

     
     
    Not sure how comfortable I am seeing the CEO state that he is telling his "friends" at sites like MMORPG (specifically mentioned) who he thinks should review his game...
     
    Can't help but wonder if this is related to the change of reviewer for the game.
     
     
     

    And here we go. This is what I personally feel may be the biggest problem with crowdfunding a game. People know about your game from day one. So as soon as you try to drum up interest, your game is being judged by the public. Compound that with the problem that brunt of crowdfunded games are a bit niche, and you get every Tom Dick and Jackhole rampaging over every minute shed of information that a company releases during the game creation process.

    And what's wrong with that? Well, the game making process isn't very pretty, and can be especially ugly in the early stages. So this gives the doomsayers who like to shout things from the rooftops such as "train wreck", "vaporware","con game", "amateurs", "lairs", "thieves" etc. so much ammo to justify their own myopic view of the games progress that much of what is just part of the normal evolution of a new game, begins to look sinister to those who don't have a complete grasp of the process.

    This can also be compounded by the problem that there is for some reason a contingent of gamers out there that feel because they don't like a certain type of niche game, they feel they have every justification to attempt to hamstring and hang shit on said game in an attempt to ruin the actual fans of the game, and its maker's, good time.

    Due to this I can see the guys point. However on the other hand this waterfall of shit  isn't much different that what even the biggest AAA MMO companies have to endure from the gaming public and press. So frankly I feel this is a very sad situation but due to the nature of the very angry community that surrounds these types of games, I don't feel there is any way for the situation to improve.

    Personally I'm laying bets on how long before game developers decide that the MMORPG customer base is just too toxic to justify the exhaustive work involved in bringing them their type of game, kicks us all to the curb, and moves on the greener pastures.

    "People worry about kids playing with guns, or watching violent videos...
    That some sort of culture of violence will take them over.
    Nobody worries about kids listening to thousands - literally, thousands of songs
    About heartbreak, rejection...pain, misery and loss. Did I listen to pop music
    Because I was miserable... or was I miserable because I listened to pop music?"

  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Member RarePosts: 5,484
    Reviewing is a subjective art. What you should be hoping for is a variety of honest and well thought out reviews by people who enjoy and understand gaming instead of  "objective" reviews. Oh, and you should hope Anita Sarkeesian reviews it and hates it so people will buy it to spite her.

    "We have met the enemy and he is us." ~Pogo Possum. 

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 12,761

    As an outsider that just peeks at this game's development every now and then. I have to say that Dancy's comments about how the game is being reviewed and received and how fans should spread the good word stick out like a sore thumb and are a case study in why developers should quietly develop and insulate themselves by hiring PR experts to do the engaging for them.

     

    What some see as refreshing transparency, many of us see as desperate attempts at manipulation. I guess Derek Smart and Smedley's examples of why you shouldn't do this are not enough.

     

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,516

    This is the risk you run when you announce your game as ready for consumption and begin charging for it.

    I hope future devs, including Pantheon's, learn that the game you launch, though perhaps only a lite version, better not lack the polish and appeal of the finished product.


  • FoomerangFoomerang Member UncommonPosts: 5,618

    An objective review of a video game. Poor fella.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    Well, he have some point. Having someone who only enjoy typical themepark MMOs is only valid to other people with the same taste, kinda like letting something who only listen to metal review a rap album.

    But I don't think the dev team actually should have any say in who get to review their game either, that kinda takes out the point of making reviews. It is the sites job to find someone who can review a game fairly, not the devs.

    That Pathfinder gets bad scores could of course be because none of the reviewers are in the right focus group but the game is honestly in a pretty crappy state and shouldn't started to charge anyone yet so the question is if even players who enjoy this type of game would score it much higher.

    This site usually gives pretty fair reviews and if it faults somewhere it is that it often is too generous with the score. I don't hang out so much at other sites so I don't know how things are there.

    We do remember Eurogamers review of DFO though with a 1 of 10 score which felt unfair, DFO might have many flaws but considering the scores EUGamer usually gives out it should have gotten something like 4 of 10.

  • ShaighShaigh Member RarePosts: 2,000

    Crowdforging experience is subjective and usually you either care for it a lot or you don't care for it at all. I don't think its something that a reviewer should spend much time writing about, a columnist will do a far better job talking about it because they can give a far more subjective description about it.

     

    Instead of asking for it to be part of the review he would be better served asking if he could talk about it in a column where he could speak of what they have done with it and how its changing the game for the better.

    The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,516

    Personally the crowdforging thing he is pushing is much ado about nothing at this point. If you're going to crowdforge, you can do it during test phases with those who backed your game. Once you start charging for the game, crowdforging is no longer a feature or an excuse.

    As to a reviewer that understands what they are trying to create, I think the guy who took over for Bill seemed perfectly suited. He had a knowledge of Eve and an appreciation for sandbox games in general. I think what the CEO actually means, is he just wants a reviewer that likes his game.


  • AudoucetAudoucet Member UncommonPosts: 69

    RD can't see a very simple truth : even in games like SWTOR, there has been as much crowdforging as in PFO, for better or worse.

    I know, because I actually contributed in a very big part of SWTOR, which is the "mod" system. It wasn't in the game at the beginning of beta, but we have succeeded in obtaining some kind of appearance choice over our characters, after a lot of lobbying. 

    And that's just the thing that I personally lead, with my 3000+ beta players petition. Lots of people crowdforged other things. That's called beta process...

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 12,761
    Originally posted by Loke666

    Well, he have some point. Having someone who only enjoy typical themepark MMOs is only valid to other people with the same taste, kinda like letting something who only listen to metal review a rap album.

    But I don't think the dev team actually should have any say in who get to review their game either, that kinda takes out the point of making reviews. It is the sites job to find someone who can review a game fairly, not the devs.

    That Pathfinder gets bad scores could of course be because none of the reviewers are in the right focus group but the game is honestly in a pretty crappy state and shouldn't started to charge anyone yet so the question is if even players who enjoy this type of game would score it much higher.

    This site usually gives pretty fair reviews and if it faults somewhere it is that it often is too generous with the score. I don't hang out so much at other sites so I don't know how things are there.

    We do remember Eurogamers review of DFO though with a 1 of 10 score which felt unfair, DFO might have many flaws but considering the scores EUGamer usually gives out it should have gotten something like 4 of 10.

    Well that's really the elephant in the room isn't it? Does he really expect that someone who "sees value in the crowdforging experience" will gloss over the fact that charging a sub to play an early access game is a very unusual weird-ass move?

     

    If you want the game previewed as an early access alpha or beta you don't start charging a sub or open up a cash store.

     

    Neverwinter tried the same shit with their endless "open beta." They tried to do a pre-emptive strike against being reviewed by declaring that it was just beta... and then they opened up the cash store and made characters there permanent. So the gaming media saw this and said "Screw you. Call it a beta if you want but you're monetizing it as a finished product... here's our review."

     

    You can't have it both ways. And even the blindest pro-crowdsourcing fanboy who wants to keep a shred of credibility will need to take the post-release monetization model into consideration when rating this. Sorry... you want to be reviewed as an unfinished work in progress? Drop the sub.

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • alkarionlogalkarionlog Member RarePosts: 2,640

    so let see if I get it, the game who is in a alpha state with monthly fee, having the ceo complaning about his player base not forcing people to play it, now want people to write review he want, if not its not valid, plus he want some handicap for it being a crownfunding game?

     

    I find more awesome the fact he still have a game to work on....

    FOR HONOR, FOR FREEDOM.... and for some money.
  • AndiusMeuridiarAndiusMeuridiar Member UncommonPosts: 91
    Originally posted by Audoucet

    RD can't see a very simple truth : even in games like SWTOR, there has been as much crowdforging as in PFO, for better or worse.

    I know, because I actually contributed in a very big part of SWTOR, which is the "mod" system. It wasn't in the game at the beginning of beta, but we have succeeded in obtaining some kind of appearance choice over our characters, after a lot of lobbying. 

    And that's just the thing that I personally lead, with my 3000+ beta players petition. Lots of people crowdforged other things. That's called beta process...

    Truth. The only thing unique about PFO's "Crowdforging" process is the number of players. Individual players get more input because there are fewer of them. But there are many MMOs that pull development ideas from the forums which is prettymuch all PFO's "Crowdforging" process boiled down to. I remember how it went when I set in motion the Crowdforging process that turned capstones into dedication bonuses. We the players talked with each other with very minimal feedback from GW until they announced their decision. It wasn't like developing the game alongside them. Their internal discussions stayed internal. Honestly Crowfall is leaps and bounds ahead in terms of communication with their community.

  • flizzerflizzer Member RarePosts: 2,402
    This makes for great comedy.  I sure hope this game continues to give this guy a voice!
  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by Loke666

    Well, he have some point. Having someone who only enjoy typical themepark MMOs is only valid to other people with the same taste, kinda like letting something who only listen to metal review a rap album.

    But I don't think the dev team actually should have any say in who get to review their game either, that kinda takes out the point of making reviews. It is the sites job to find someone who can review a game fairly, not the devs.

    That Pathfinder gets bad scores could of course be because none of the reviewers are in the right focus group but the game is honestly in a pretty crappy state and shouldn't started to charge anyone yet so the question is if even players who enjoy this type of game would score it much higher.

    This site usually gives pretty fair reviews and if it faults somewhere it is that it often is too generous with the score. I don't hang out so much at other sites so I don't know how things are there.

    We do remember Eurogamers review of DFO though with a 1 of 10 score which felt unfair, DFO might have many flaws but considering the scores EUGamer usually gives out it should have gotten something like 4 of 10.

    Well that's really the elephant in the room isn't it? Does he really expect that someone who "sees value in the crowdforging experience" will gloss over the fact that charging a sub to play an early access game is a very unusual weird-ass move?

    If you want the game previewed as an early access alpha or beta you don't start charging a sub or open up a cash store.

    Neverwinter tried the same shit with their endless "open beta." They tried to do a pre-emptive strike against being reviewed by declaring that it was just beta... and then they opened up the cash store and made characters there permanent. So the gaming media saw this and said "Screw you. Call it a beta if you want but you're monetizing it as a finished product... here's our review."

    You can't have it both ways. And even the blindest pro-crowdsourcing fanboy who wants to keep a shred of credibility will need to take the post-release monetization model into consideration when rating this. Sorry... you want to be reviewed as an unfinished work in progress? Drop the sub.

    Yeah, I agree with you 100% there. As soon as a game actually cost moneyit is fair to review it like a released game.

Sign In or Register to comment.