This review proves once again just how different a game's rating can turn out depending on who writes the article. Overall I have to give you kudos for the information you provide in your review. It was fair without leaning too far in either direction. The lag can be reduced by making some 'tweak's' to your system settings to optimize the game but even then there's still some lag issues. I know there are those that are not having this problem right now but the larger player base still has trouble. The game has a steep learning curve to some degree and will take time for players to 'figure out'. I still think it deserves better than a 6.9 rating but I won't hammer your review based on just that number.
"I am running AoC with Windows Vista Ultimate on a Dual Core E6750 @2.66, Dual ATI Radeon HD 3850, 2 Gig Corsair RAM and cable modem." thats great, now what are you playing fallen earth with??
ok, joking aside, that review actually had a decent amount of info. the more i read about the game, the more i want to try it. i was pretty confused with the rating, until i got to the paragraph about the lag.... i hope icarus can get that cleared up, because this is really starting to sound like my alternate mmo, for when i need some time out of middle earth....
Good review(EDITED: Bad review, see his system specs.), however I disagree with 6.9 because you can tell he purposely avoided giving it a 7 (lol).
An indie company took on the challenge of making an original, sandbox game (which is SO rare) and the game actually had a good launch. This is already quite remarkable. The difference in the community score and the reviewer`s score leaves a bad taste in my mouth, its as if the reviewer didn`t like the game much and scored according to that rather than the relatively neutral review he wrote.
Waaaait a minute... so Aion is the best MMORPG that was ever reviewed here, while FE is mediocre? Oh my... What probably happened, in my opinion, was that they read the complains about the Aion review, and then decided to give the next game a worse rating, to show they can't be bribed by each company (especially not by smaller ones).
Seriously:
The only thing the author actually complained about is lag he experienced and that he considered the game to be too difficult for him. Well, about the lag: I play from Europe, and even during times when lots of people are online I have no latency problems since they implemented the server performance patches. Sometimes I even upload stuff to youtube and still play FE at the same time without problems. So I don't know what the author was doing with his computer.
Maybe he is confusing latency with FPS, because sometimes 2GB RAM can be a bit on the low end.
And about the game difficulty:
Not everyone likes to mindlessly grind through hordes of monsters without paying attention, while actually watching tv at the same time. If you don't like a challenging game then that doesn't mean that the game is bad.
I don't say FE is perfect, it got it's issues. But it is the only MMORPG since years that really keeps me motivated to play on, and many other people feel that way. Saying it is worse than Aion, Champions Online and the other stuff simply doesn't do the game justices. Maybe it is because FE targets an audience a bit more mature than the typical MMORPG crowd, I don't know.
Yeah, I don't judge a review based on the number given either. The number is something that is highly relative and subjective, whereas a review if written right contains factual information that can help people decide if the game is right for them. This was a good review. Everything seemed spot on. I would have mentioned that crafting is done in real time, because that's a big deal to some, but it's not a major ommission.
Good review, however I disagree with 6.9 because you can tell he purposely avoided giving it a 7 (lol). An indie company took on the challenge of making an original, sandbox game (which is SO rare) and the game actually had a good launch. This is already quite remarkable. The difference in the community score and the reviewer`s score leaves a bad taste in my mouth, its as if the reviewer didn`t like the game much and scored according to that rather than the relatively neutral review he wrote.
MMORPG.com calls it one. Read the OP, first line. It`s MMORPG.com`s review, and they`re calling it a sandbox MMO, so therefore with respect to the game and the review, it is a sandbox MMO. If you want to get in a debate about this, start a thread and I`ll come dance with you over there.
The final score made me LOL a bit. A game like Fallen Earth has ten times the staying power as a game like Aion or Champions. Icarus seems to understand what makes a MMOG tick unlike so many failed attempts in recent years.
From a purely game design standpoint FE is a significant release. Its been a long time since we have seen a game with compelling crafting, an open world with no zoning, multiple factions with open world PvP between them, classless characters, and persistent vehicles/mounts. Its one the few MMOG's that seems to allow and encourage different play styles such as exploring while not requiring that the game be played in a specific way. We have certainly had enough acheivement focused games in recent years!
Depending on how Icarus handles post-release features and content this could be one of those steadily growing games like Eve. Even now it seems to be doing well and getting a lot of player recomendations. This is definitely the sleeper hit of 2009.
Much like Mokoleus I am starting to get interested in this game. I played Project: Entropia for a while and it took some getting used to but I liked the skill-based system. Another thing for me is the crafting! Wow do I drool every time I read about the crafting in this game. Good review that I felt was unbiased - just another player's perspective of their first foray into the game.
Please keep the FE information coming - I may be purchasing it soon.
Good review, however I disagree with 6.9 because you can tell he purposely avoided giving it a 7 (lol). An indie company took on the challenge of making an original, sandbox game (which is SO rare) and the game actually had a good launch. This is already quite remarkable. The difference in the community score and the reviewer`s score leaves a bad taste in my mouth, its as if the reviewer didn`t like the game much and scored according to that rather than the relatively neutral review he wrote.
FE isn't a sandbox game.
sanbox-ish / hybrid-sandbox but ya not a sandbox if it was i prolly wouln't play it but thats me
The following statement is false The previous statement is true
The reviewer can call a sheep a dog, but it will still be a dog. Fallen Earth is not a sandbox game and the economy is not player-driven. I'm having a blast in FE currently, but if you are going to put a label on it, to me, FE is a theme park. An open world, off the rails, theme park, but still a theme park. Your main mechanic for character progression are quests, so you have quest progression, quest hubs, open world exploration on a map that is divided into level ranges, all the characteristics of a theme park game. So, what about FE makes it more of a sandbox?
I would have to agree with IGN's review of 8.1, Impressive.
Yeah, the rating in no way matches what the review states. Aside from the lag, it was all positive.
When I played in the beta, it seemed difficult at first. But once you figure out how dual wield works, it seems on par with most MMO's.
My biggest issue was the animations. Seemed very "money for nothing". Fantasy settings, where the characters are more toony can get away with that sorta stuff, but more realistic games... it just doesn't work.
When they do a trial, I'll probably give it a shot. But for me, $60 was just way too much for this game. They should have gone the way Eve did, with a cheap, direct download client.
So the reviewer enjoys the game until he experiences lag, and then gives it a mediocre score? Reviews like this one is why I continue to rely on reviews from other sites instead of MMORPG.com. Every MMO reviewer should have to post in their first paragraph, MMO experience, age, education level, PC and internet specs, time spent playing and current MMO which they play.
So the reviewer enjoys the game until he experiences lag, and then gives it a mediocre score? Reviews like this one are why I continue to rely on reviews from other sites.
Have to agree with others posting here... the review does not match the score. Out of nine different "points," the author thought that 8 of them were either okay or very good.
It's too bad that a lot of people out there will only look at the score, because the review is really well written and says a hell of a lot more (obviously) than what the score and blips say.
Mediocre should be the rating for the reviewer, not the game. The 2 negatives is the lag, lag has been a problem on launch yes, but right now it's almost a non-issues.
I am a bit curious about the author's performance issues.
For one, his terminology is a bit misleading. Most people consider "lag" to be associated with server or internet performance. It was clear that his issue had to do with client performance more than anything else. Client performance is something that we have some control over.
Looking at his system he has Crossfire for two mediocre video cards. Does FE support Crossfire? If not then his system is performing much worse than a standard Nvidia 8800 GTX would provide. That is pretty low by today's standards. Also, two gigs of ram is also on the low side of today's standards. In other words he is using a system that would have been good two years ago on a game released very recently. Most up to date systems can perform twice as good as his system.
I know that not everyone has the luxory of a modern system and that FE's graphic detail doesn't necessarily warant high end systems, but Icarus didn't licence a major 3D engine, they are a smaller dev studio, and there is nothing particularly wrong with assuming that people upgrade their system every couple years.
Review was fair .. score a bit off. And one thing: "I am running AoC with Windows Vista Ultimate on a Dual Core E6750 @2.66, Dual ATI Radeon HD 3850, 2 Gig Corsair RAM and cable modem." Your system has not the Minimum Hardware Requirements for Vista: http://www.fallenearth.com/node/16 So this is definitelly something you shoudl ahve mentioned in your Review! Cu Rascil
I still think the Alpha version of the game was much better.
"As boasted on the website and mentioned a numerous times, the best items in game are crafted. "
this is not true at all, the best items in game come from death toll npc merchants. The pvp items they sell are far better then anything that can be crafted, even at the highest lvl of crafting.
Review was fair .. score a bit off. And one thing: "I am running AoC with Windows Vista Ultimate on a Dual Core E6750 @2.66, Dual ATI Radeon HD 3850, 2 Gig Corsair RAM and cable modem." Your system has not the Minimum Hardware Requirements for Vista: http://www.fallenearth.com/node/16 So this is definitelly something you shoudl ahve mentioned in your Review! Cu Rascil
When does that matter in a MMORPG.com review?
Heh...the man does have a point.
When a reviewer doesnt even meet the minimum system requirements to play the game, and then issues a low score do to perfotmance issues...well...
Review was fair .. score a bit off. And one thing: "I am running AoC with Windows Vista Ultimate on a Dual Core E6750 @2.66, Dual ATI Radeon HD 3850, 2 Gig Corsair RAM and cable modem." Your system has not the Minimum Hardware Requirements for Vista: http://www.fallenearth.com/node/16 So this is definitelly something you shoudl ahve mentioned in your Review! Cu Rascil
Comments
This review proves once again just how different a game's rating can turn out depending on who writes the article. Overall I have to give you kudos for the information you provide in your review. It was fair without leaning too far in either direction. The lag can be reduced by making some 'tweak's' to your system settings to optimize the game but even then there's still some lag issues. I know there are those that are not having this problem right now but the larger player base still has trouble. The game has a steep learning curve to some degree and will take time for players to 'figure out'. I still think it deserves better than a 6.9 rating but I won't hammer your review based on just that number.
"I am running AoC with Windows Vista Ultimate on a Dual Core E6750 @2.66, Dual ATI Radeon HD 3850, 2 Gig Corsair RAM and cable modem." thats great, now what are you playing fallen earth with??
ok, joking aside, that review actually had a decent amount of info. the more i read about the game, the more i want to try it. i was pretty confused with the rating, until i got to the paragraph about the lag.... i hope icarus can get that cleared up, because this is really starting to sound like my alternate mmo, for when i need some time out of middle earth....
Good review(EDITED: Bad review, see his system specs.), however I disagree with 6.9 because you can tell he purposely avoided giving it a 7 (lol).
An indie company took on the challenge of making an original, sandbox game (which is SO rare) and the game actually had a good launch. This is already quite remarkable. The difference in the community score and the reviewer`s score leaves a bad taste in my mouth, its as if the reviewer didn`t like the game much and scored according to that rather than the relatively neutral review he wrote.
Waaaait a minute... so Aion is the best MMORPG that was ever reviewed here, while FE is mediocre? Oh my... What probably happened, in my opinion, was that they read the complains about the Aion review, and then decided to give the next game a worse rating, to show they can't be bribed by each company (especially not by smaller ones).
Seriously:
The only thing the author actually complained about is lag he experienced and that he considered the game to be too difficult for him. Well, about the lag: I play from Europe, and even during times when lots of people are online I have no latency problems since they implemented the server performance patches. Sometimes I even upload stuff to youtube and still play FE at the same time without problems. So I don't know what the author was doing with his computer.
Maybe he is confusing latency with FPS, because sometimes 2GB RAM can be a bit on the low end.
And about the game difficulty:
Not everyone likes to mindlessly grind through hordes of monsters without paying attention, while actually watching tv at the same time. If you don't like a challenging game then that doesn't mean that the game is bad.
I don't say FE is perfect, it got it's issues. But it is the only MMORPG since years that really keeps me motivated to play on, and many other people feel that way. Saying it is worse than Aion, Champions Online and the other stuff simply doesn't do the game justices. Maybe it is because FE targets an audience a bit more mature than the typical MMORPG crowd, I don't know.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
Yeah, I don't judge a review based on the number given either. The number is something that is highly relative and subjective, whereas a review if written right contains factual information that can help people decide if the game is right for them. This was a good review. Everything seemed spot on. I would have mentioned that crafting is done in real time, because that's a big deal to some, but it's not a major ommission.
FE isn't a sandbox game.
MMORPG.com calls it one. Read the OP, first line. It`s MMORPG.com`s review, and they`re calling it a sandbox MMO, so therefore with respect to the game and the review, it is a sandbox MMO. If you want to get in a debate about this, start a thread and I`ll come dance with you over there.
The final score made me LOL a bit. A game like Fallen Earth has ten times the staying power as a game like Aion or Champions. Icarus seems to understand what makes a MMOG tick unlike so many failed attempts in recent years.
From a purely game design standpoint FE is a significant release. Its been a long time since we have seen a game with compelling crafting, an open world with no zoning, multiple factions with open world PvP between them, classless characters, and persistent vehicles/mounts. Its one the few MMOG's that seems to allow and encourage different play styles such as exploring while not requiring that the game be played in a specific way. We have certainly had enough acheivement focused games in recent years!
Depending on how Icarus handles post-release features and content this could be one of those steadily growing games like Eve. Even now it seems to be doing well and getting a lot of player recomendations. This is definitely the sleeper hit of 2009.
Much like Mokoleus I am starting to get interested in this game. I played Project: Entropia for a while and it took some getting used to but I liked the skill-based system. Another thing for me is the crafting! Wow do I drool every time I read about the crafting in this game. Good review that I felt was unbiased - just another player's perspective of their first foray into the game.
Please keep the FE information coming - I may be purchasing it soon.
FE isn't a sandbox game.
sanbox-ish / hybrid-sandbox but ya not a sandbox if it was i prolly wouln't play it but thats me
The following statement is false
The previous statement is true
FE sucks! I would not give it more than 4.0.
What an insightful and informative post.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling"
Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
The reviewer can call a sheep a dog, but it will still be a dog. Fallen Earth is not a sandbox game and the economy is not player-driven. I'm having a blast in FE currently, but if you are going to put a label on it, to me, FE is a theme park. An open world, off the rails, theme park, but still a theme park. Your main mechanic for character progression are quests, so you have quest progression, quest hubs, open world exploration on a map that is divided into level ranges, all the characteristics of a theme park game. So, what about FE makes it more of a sandbox?
I would have to agree with IGN's review of 8.1, Impressive.
Translation "look at me, someone pay attention to me"
The following statement is false
The previous statement is true
Yeah, the rating in no way matches what the review states. Aside from the lag, it was all positive.
When I played in the beta, it seemed difficult at first. But once you figure out how dual wield works, it seems on par with most MMO's.
My biggest issue was the animations. Seemed very "money for nothing". Fantasy settings, where the characters are more toony can get away with that sorta stuff, but more realistic games... it just doesn't work.
When they do a trial, I'll probably give it a shot. But for me, $60 was just way too much for this game. They should have gone the way Eve did, with a cheap, direct download client.
So the reviewer enjoys the game until he experiences lag, and then gives it a mediocre score? Reviews like this one is why I continue to rely on reviews from other sites instead of MMORPG.com. Every MMO reviewer should have to post in their first paragraph, MMO experience, age, education level, PC and internet specs, time spent playing and current MMO which they play.
Have to agree with others posting here... the review does not match the score. Out of nine different "points," the author thought that 8 of them were either okay or very good.
It's too bad that a lot of people out there will only look at the score, because the review is really well written and says a hell of a lot more (obviously) than what the score and blips say.
Mediocre should be the rating for the reviewer, not the game. The 2 negatives is the lag, lag has been a problem on launch yes, but right now it's almost a non-issues.
Review was fair .. score a bit off.
And one thing:
"I am running AoC with Windows Vista Ultimate on a Dual Core E6750 @2.66, Dual ATI Radeon HD 3850, 2 Gig Corsair RAM and cable modem."
Your system has not the Minimum Hardware Requirements for Vista:
http://www.fallenearth.com/node/16
So this is definitelly something you shoudl ahve mentioned in your Review!
Cu
Rascil
I am a bit curious about the author's performance issues.
For one, his terminology is a bit misleading. Most people consider "lag" to be associated with server or internet performance. It was clear that his issue had to do with client performance more than anything else. Client performance is something that we have some control over.
Looking at his system he has Crossfire for two mediocre video cards. Does FE support Crossfire? If not then his system is performing much worse than a standard Nvidia 8800 GTX would provide. That is pretty low by today's standards. Also, two gigs of ram is also on the low side of today's standards. In other words he is using a system that would have been good two years ago on a game released very recently. Most up to date systems can perform twice as good as his system.
I know that not everyone has the luxory of a modern system and that FE's graphic detail doesn't necessarily warant high end systems, but Icarus didn't licence a major 3D engine, they are a smaller dev studio, and there is nothing particularly wrong with assuming that people upgrade their system every couple years.
When does that matter in a MMORPG.com review?
I still think the Alpha version of the game was much better.
"As boasted on the website and mentioned a numerous times, the best items in game are crafted. "
this is not true at all, the best items in game come from death toll npc merchants. The pvp items they sell are far better then anything that can be crafted, even at the highest lvl of crafting.
When does that matter in a MMORPG.com review?
Heh...the man does have a point.
When a reviewer doesnt even meet the minimum system requirements to play the game, and then issues a low score do to perfotmance issues...well...
Good catch!
In Vista, 2 gig is bare minimum...