It just goes to show just how desperate fanboys are right now.
I haven't even played the game yet.
Is that a requirement to be a fanboy or hater?
IT's never been a requirement for anything.
And in my experience, there is little difference between a fanboy and a hater. In fact they are typically the same people. The hat they wear is determined by the title of the game.
Originally posted by sunblabe stick with lotro, bro. it for ur own good. what the press does is purely the matter of fact about the game. nothing more or less
No they don't, dude. The press is anything but objective. It used to be that way, but it simply isn't anymore. Modern press outlets are nothing more than reviewers who are allowed to express their personal opinions and views about a game. They get away with this because they use factual information about said game as evidence to enforce their opinions. Let me give you an example:
1. "WoW sucks because it now gives you the ability to purchase max level chartacters."
2. "WoW is awesome now because you can purchase a max level character."
This is what the press does.
If they were being objective, they would simply say:
"WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters."
They simply don't do this. I have not read or seen a single TESO "review" of the beta that was actually honest and objective. I've only read personal opinions. And that goes for the good and the bad reviews. Still, I agree with the positive reviews because I think they're actually using better, more grounded reasoning. And yes, there does seem to be a drive to push this game under before it even gets started.
1. "WoW sucks because it now gives you the ability to purchase max level chartacters."
2. "WoW is awesome now because you can purchase a max level character."
This is what the press does.
If they were being objective, they would simply say:
"WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters."
Uhm.. both of the top statements provided you with the information from your 3rd statements. On top of that, both of those statements provided you with the additional information of the reviewers opinion of it - providing which is his job.
If you think about, the statement can be rephrased as:
1. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this sucks."
and
2. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this is awesome."
In effect, what you're asking for is that the person who's job it is provide you with his opinion, instead provides you ONLY with the same facts you can gleam from reading the back of the product's box. Every single review would be identical then - "Elder Scrolls online features 10 different races!".
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
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 dont care about the reviews. I have already bought so many bad mmorpgs at launch that right now I feel like Im buying ESO no matter its good or bad. If its good I will be happy and if its bad it will be another one for the list but I'm not missing in 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.
Actually, a lot of the ESO slamming came from people breaking NDA and crying out about how bad it was. A lot of gaming press likely IS more qualified then you. Be ignorant all you want about a game and how 'eh' its turning out to be, just don't come crying on the forums 1 month later after launch they have your money about how the game itself wasn't that great sicne you ignored the "Bad Press" and did not just wait to see how it would turn out.
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.
You are forgetting that WOW was made by Blizzard - and just like Apple, there are millions of fanboys around who will buy it without even reading one review. Then there's the extravagant marketing campaigns that these two companies are renowned for.
As for ESO, it should have learnt from all the other MMO flops. Release a game too early without having Blizzard's fan base and you can guarantee it's a recipe for disaster. Combine that with chunky combat, boring quests, terrible starting area's and the same old tired MMO design... including the ancient P2P model....
They have no one else to blame at this point but themselves.
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 want to talk about the part Angry Joe mentions about running quests in groups. How most don't share, if you are on a different part of the quest line, you can't group many times and do the content together. When a member is on a different part of the quest line they become invisible to others. That the worlds quests instances itself over top itself. Seeing people flocked around nothing you see as they see something different. What's up with all this? MMO should be group friendly, no?
Originally posted by HorrorScope I want to talk about the part Angry Joe mentions about running quests in groups. How most don't share, if you are on a different part of the quest line, you can't group many times and do the content together. When a member is on a different part of the quest line they become invisible to others. That the worlds quests instances itself over top itself. Seeing people flocked around nothing you see as they see something different. What's up with all this? MMO should be group friendly, no?
You are talking about the SINGLE player story quests. This is called phasing and all the new MMOs are doing 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.
1. "WoW sucks because it now gives you the ability to purchase max level chartacters."
2. "WoW is awesome now because you can purchase a max level character."
This is what the press does.
If they were being objective, they would simply say:
"WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters."
Uhm.. both of the top statements provided you with the information from your 3rd statements. On top of that, both of those statements provided you with the additional information of the reviewers opinion of it - providing which is his job.
If you think about, the statement can be rephrased as:
1. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this sucks."
and
2. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this is awesome."
In effect, what you're asking for is that the person who's job it is provide you with his opinion, instead provides you ONLY with the same facts you can gleam from reading the back of the product's box. Every single review would be identical then - "Elder Scrolls online features 10 different races!".
No. The point of the review isn't to express the writer's opinion. The point of the review is to sway YOUR opinion as the potential buyer. If you knew anything about Communication and Rhetoric, you would understand this.
It's one thing to say a game has features x, y, and z. Like you say, the box can tell you that.
It's another thing to say if the game has features x, y, and z, and if they actually work the way they're supposed to, and what, if any, are the reasons behind interesting or curious design choices quoted directly from the horse's mouth. Boxes don't tell you that.
It's something entirely different if you say the game has features x, y, and z, and then to say if you like or dislike each feature, and then say why. That isn't news. That isn't press. That's an argument - it's rhetoric. Arguments have to have counterarguments. Without the counterargument or some sort of an apologist viewpoint (a defense) then what you have is propaganda - advertisement - promotional agenda.
I don't care why these people like or dislike features or games. I don't even care if they DO or DO NOT like the game. All I want to know is what the features are and if the features are working or if they are not working. And if they can give some sort of objective explanation thereof without going into personal feelings like, "It's not working because I prefer the way this other game does it, because it's better." which is again, more subjective advertisement and is frankly, amateur - then okay. But... they simply don't do this.
You are forgetting that WOW was made by Blizzard - and just like Apple, there are millions of fanboys around who will buy it without even reading one review. Then there's the extravagant marketing campaigns that these two companies are renowned for.
As for ESO, it should have learnt from all the other MMO flops. Release a game too early without having Blizzard's fan base and you can guarantee it's a recipe for disaster. Combine that with chunky combat, boring quests, terrible starting area's and the same old tired MMO design... including the ancient P2P model....
They have no one else to blame at this point but themselves.
The previews are not looking too great. However, this could all change. It's only a few opinions at the moment. It's just a large amount of negativity that's starting to become an issue for the game.
I feel like they would have to redo a lot of the level 2-9 content to stop the bad reviews and it seems way too late for that... or just provide the press/beta testers with level 10-15 characters which would be odd in a game where skills are leveled/unlocked.
1. "WoW sucks because it now gives you the ability to purchase max level chartacters."
2. "WoW is awesome now because you can purchase a max level character."
This is what the press does.
If they were being objective, they would simply say:
"WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters."
Uhm.. both of the top statements provided you with the information from your 3rd statements. On top of that, both of those statements provided you with the additional information of the reviewers opinion of it - providing which is his job.
If you think about, the statement can be rephrased as:
1. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this sucks."
and
2. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this is awesome."
In effect, what you're asking for is that the person who's job it is provide you with his opinion, instead provides you ONLY with the same facts you can gleam from reading the back of the product's box. Every single review would be identical then - "Elder Scrolls online features 10 different races!".
Yeah, at that point you're not reviewing a product you're simply just reporting on it.
Here's an idea - a report that gives you an open ended conclusion. This means you're actually able to make your own opinion based on the actual report, without being swayed by impersonal opinion.
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.
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.
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.
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)
I was in WOW beta and I agree with this last comment^^^.
You are forgetting that WOW was made by Blizzard - and just like Apple, there are millions of fanboys around who will buy it without even reading one review. Then there's the extravagant marketing campaigns that these two companies are renowned for.
As for ESO, it should have learnt from all the other MMO flops. Release a game too early without having Blizzard's fan base and you can guarantee it's a recipe for disaster. Combine that with chunky combat, boring quests, terrible starting area's and the same old tired MMO design... including the ancient P2P model....
They have no one else to blame at this point but themselves.
The previews are not looking too great. However, this could all change. It's only a few opinions at the moment. It's just a large amount of negativity that's starting to become an issue for the game.
I feel like they would have to redo a lot of the level 2-9 content to stop the bad reviews and it seems way too late for that... or just provide the press/beta testers with level 10-15 characters which would be odd in a game where skills are leveled/unlocked.
I agree that they should have shown the strengths, not the learning area for console players or beginners that never played an MMO. Start off at a higher level where the world opens up a whole lot more, show them the adventure zones or master dungeons, show them the 50+ PVE content where you can roam anywhere within a faction, show them level 50 PVP. I bet you some of the negative impressions would have been a lot less negative despite the payment model which should be lowered to 7.99 a month :-) lol.
You are forgetting that WOW was made by Blizzard - and just like Apple, there are millions of fanboys around who will buy it without even reading one review. Then there's the extravagant marketing campaigns that these two companies are renowned for.
As for ESO, it should have learnt from all the other MMO flops. Release a game too early without having Blizzard's fan base and you can guarantee it's a recipe for disaster. Combine that with chunky combat, boring quests, terrible starting area's and the same old tired MMO design... including the ancient P2P model....
They have no one else to blame at this point but themselves.
The previews are not looking too great. However, this could all change. It's only a few opinions at the moment. It's just a large amount of negativity that's starting to become an issue for the game.
I feel like they would have to redo a lot of the level 2-9 content to stop the bad reviews and it seems way too late for that... or just provide the press/beta testers with level 10-15 characters which would be odd in a game where skills are leveled/unlocked.
I agree that they should have shown the strengths, not the learning area for console players or beginners that never played an MMO. Start off at a higher level where the world opens up a whole lot more, show them the adventure zones or master dungeons, show them the 50+ PVE content where you can roam anywhere within a faction, show them level 50 PVP. I bet you some of the negative impressions would have been a lot less negative despite the payment model which should be lowered to 7.99 a month :-) lol.
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.
1. "WoW sucks because it now gives you the ability to purchase max level chartacters."
2. "WoW is awesome now because you can purchase a max level character."
This is what the press does.
If they were being objective, they would simply say:
"WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters."
Uhm.. both of the top statements provided you with the information from your 3rd statements. On top of that, both of those statements provided you with the additional information of the reviewers opinion of it - providing which is his job.
If you think about, the statement can be rephrased as:
1. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this sucks."
and
2. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this is awesome."
In effect, what you're asking for is that the person who's job it is provide you with his opinion, instead provides you ONLY with the same facts you can gleam from reading the back of the product's box. Every single review would be identical then - "Elder Scrolls online features 10 different races!".
No. The point of the review isn't to express the writer's opinion. The point of the review is to sway YOUR opinion as the potential buyer. If you knew anything about Communication and Rhetoric, you would understand this.
It's one thing to say a game has features x, y, and z. Like you say, the box can tell you that.
It's another thing to say if the game has features x, y, and z, and if they actually work the way they're supposed to, and what, if any, are the reasons behind interesting or curious design choices quoted directly from the horse's mouth. Boxes don't tell you that.
It's something entirely different if you say the game has features x, y, and z, and then to say if you like or dislike each feature, and then say why. That isn't news. That isn't press. That's an argument - it's rhetoric. Arguments have to have counterarguments. Without the counterargument or some sort of an apologist viewpoint (a defense) then what you have is propaganda - advertisement - promotional agenda.
I don't care why these people like or dislike features or games. I don't even care if they DO or DO NOT like the game. All I want to know is what the features are and if the features are working or if they are not working. And if they can give some sort of objective explanation thereof without going into personal feelings like, "It's not working because I prefer the way this other game does it, because it's better." which is again, more subjective advertisement and is frankly, amateur - then okay. But... they simply don't do this.
I personally believe a review is to both express your opinion and then sway the reader(s) into making their final decision.
Your personal feelings on the matter have nothing to do with what people actually need to know. The reviewer's personal feelings also have nothing to do with what people actually need to know.
If you want entertainment - find a blog or a weekly column. Opinions do well there because those sorts of outlets are designed for discussing theory. That format has no place in an actual news outlet.
Comments
IT's never been a requirement for anything.
And in my experience, there is little difference between a fanboy and a hater. In fact they are typically the same people. The hat they wear is determined by the title of the game.
No they don't, dude. The press is anything but objective. It used to be that way, but it simply isn't anymore. Modern press outlets are nothing more than reviewers who are allowed to express their personal opinions and views about a game. They get away with this because they use factual information about said game as evidence to enforce their opinions. Let me give you an example:
1. "WoW sucks because it now gives you the ability to purchase max level chartacters."
2. "WoW is awesome now because you can purchase a max level character."
This is what the press does.
If they were being objective, they would simply say:
"WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters."
They simply don't do this. I have not read or seen a single TESO "review" of the beta that was actually honest and objective. I've only read personal opinions. And that goes for the good and the bad reviews. Still, I agree with the positive reviews because I think they're actually using better, more grounded reasoning. And yes, there does seem to be a drive to push this game under before it even gets started.
Uhm.. both of the top statements provided you with the information from your 3rd statements. On top of that, both of those statements provided you with the additional information of the reviewers opinion of it - providing which is his job.
If you think about, the statement can be rephrased as:
1. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this sucks."
and
2. "WoW now provides you the ability to purchase max rank characters and this is awesome."
In effect, what you're asking for is that the person who's job it is provide you with his opinion, instead provides you ONLY with the same facts you can gleam from reading the back of the product's box. Every single review would be identical then - "Elder Scrolls online features 10 different races!".
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
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.
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.
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.
You are forgetting that WOW was made by Blizzard - and just like Apple, there are millions of fanboys around who will buy it without even reading one review. Then there's the extravagant marketing campaigns that these two companies are renowned for.
As for ESO, it should have learnt from all the other MMO flops. Release a game too early without having Blizzard's fan base and you can guarantee it's a recipe for disaster. Combine that with chunky combat, boring quests, terrible starting area's and the same old tired MMO design... including the ancient P2P model....
They have no one else to blame at this point but themselves.
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.
You are talking about the SINGLE player story quests. This is called phasing and all the new MMOs are doing 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.
No. The point of the review isn't to express the writer's opinion. The point of the review is to sway YOUR opinion as the potential buyer. If you knew anything about Communication and Rhetoric, you would understand this.
It's one thing to say a game has features x, y, and z. Like you say, the box can tell you that.
It's another thing to say if the game has features x, y, and z, and if they actually work the way they're supposed to, and what, if any, are the reasons behind interesting or curious design choices quoted directly from the horse's mouth. Boxes don't tell you that.
It's something entirely different if you say the game has features x, y, and z, and then to say if you like or dislike each feature, and then say why. That isn't news. That isn't press. That's an argument - it's rhetoric. Arguments have to have counterarguments. Without the counterargument or some sort of an apologist viewpoint (a defense) then what you have is propaganda - advertisement - promotional agenda.
I don't care why these people like or dislike features or games. I don't even care if they DO or DO NOT like the game. All I want to know is what the features are and if the features are working or if they are not working. And if they can give some sort of objective explanation thereof without going into personal feelings like, "It's not working because I prefer the way this other game does it, because it's better." which is again, more subjective advertisement and is frankly, amateur - then okay. But... they simply don't do this.
I feel like they would have to redo a lot of the level 2-9 content to stop the bad reviews and it seems way too late for that... or just provide the press/beta testers with level 10-15 characters which would be odd in a game where skills are leveled/unlocked.
Here's an idea - a report that gives you an open ended conclusion. This means you're actually able to make your own opinion based on the actual report, without being swayed by impersonal opinion.
Wouldn't that be great?
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.
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.
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 was in WOW beta and I agree with this last comment^^^.
There Is Always Hope!
I agree that they should have shown the strengths, not the learning area for console players or beginners that never played an MMO. Start off at a higher level where the world opens up a whole lot more, show them the adventure zones or master dungeons, show them the 50+ PVE content where you can roam anywhere within a faction, show them level 50 PVP. I bet you some of the negative impressions would have been a lot less negative despite the payment model which should be lowered to 7.99 a month :-) lol.
There Is Always Hope!
Lower monthly... now there's an idea!
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.
Your personal feelings on the matter have nothing to do with what people actually need to know. The reviewer's personal feelings also have nothing to do with what people actually need to know.
If you want entertainment - find a blog or a weekly column. Opinions do well there because those sorts of outlets are designed for discussing theory. That format has no place in an actual news outlet.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.