The question basically is: What is a good game? Is a good game a game that delivers fun, a game that is technically flawless or a game that is extraordinarily progressive...
I myself think that its a mixture of the first two. I would not count "being innovative" as an argument of quality. I can invent a dozen new game mechanics in 20 minutes and build a game around it, but the final question is, is it fun, does it work? Thats the executioners blade for an entertainment product for me...
So I'll perfectly roll with "its fun" and "its technically near-flawless"...
""I don't give a tiny ant's crap about any reviews - but I preordered LOTRO after the closed beta, because IT IS GOOD for ME - and this is true for thousands of other players.
On the other hand, you sir must have a horrible, horrible life full of fear and hatred... it must be terrible and i feel bad for you!
DB""
Spoken like a true Turbine Fan. You can't find flaw in my argument, so you resort to personal attacks. I always take that as a sign of sound defeat, so thanks .
This is no conspiracy theory. This is the exact same thing that happened with AC2 and DDO just before release. Right now, the vast majority of buzz about the game is "OMG Best Game Ever". If you are lucky, and find the posts before they are deleted, you will see what people really think about the game though. In fact, before outright deleting a lot of the negative posts on the official LOTRO forums, the web guys simply made another forum called "First Impressions", and simply moved these posts there.
Look, I'm not saying the game is bad. I'm simply bringing to light that the Turbine advertising machine is deeply reliant upon viral marketing and shilling. My point is very simple... the people who Turbine invites to see "privileged" information and other such "secret" work, are already Turbine fans. There is little objectivity in the "information" put out by these types of people.
I've played Open Beta, I saw first-hand what the game was about, and to give it a 9.2 is absurd. Lets do a quick comparison of some other games rated 9+... more specifically, non-MMORPG.
To say that LOTRO is in the same league as these is complete hogwash. Sure, compared to games like Vanguard (which I'm discussing only by second hand information, I've never played it) LOTRO might seem good. But when you "review" a game, you aren't just comparing it to the latest round of bad MMORPG's out there. It has to stand on its own and show that it is superior in every way.
Simply put, LOTRO is not superior in every way. Its graphically splendid at first, but the underlying game is most certainly flawed. To those of you who have followed Turbines last two MMO attempts, AC2 and DDO, that comes as no surprise.
I fully expect a huge backlash about the game after about 3 months into retail, when the vast majority of players realize that once again, Turbine suckered them into opening their wallets.
Don't even get me started on the outright scam of the $199 "lifetime" subscription...
notice the definition of review that I highlighted does not say a critical evaluation of what could have been. Vanguard fans want reviews based on potential, and pie in the sky rhetoric by the developers. LoTRO fans are happy with what is being delivered.
On another note I don't see a lot of games out there with a functioning MvP system. or a player generated music system. do you?
You went to all that trouble of nit-picking definitions just to make that point?
I wasn't even chiding LOTRO for not doing something specific, just that it doesn't do anything truly revolutionary, and as such, we should reserve the 8-10 rankings for games that try something truly new and innovative. That way we could separate the new from the old.
But lets be honest with ourselves. That review was a piece of propaganda wrapped in sugar. It made LOTRO sound like the greatest thing since sliced bread. If anything, it will do a disservice to the game because people will have such high expectations only to find out the game, beneath the surface and the lore, really isn't delivering anything new.
Granted monster play and player generated music is a bit different, but I'm mainly referring to innovation when it comes to combat and crafting, and other core elements of gameplay. Quite frankly I just get fed up with people screaming they want something new and every time a game delivers something new and different no one wants to play it. Want something new and different go play Saga of Ryzom. Auto Assault, Roma Victor., The Matrix, Face of Mankind, or WWII online. All of those game will offer you tons of things new and different if that is really what you want of course.
I tend to take my reviews from first hand impression and trusted friends. And yes, they all said this game stands above all current MMORPGs in terms of fitting the casual and core-gamers needs. Its solid, its fun, I'm repeating myself but the trolls just can't stand quality, in-best-tradition MMOs I guess. This is not revolutionary, this is not sandbox, it is not "d00d I'm pwning so much"... It's JUST a fun game, how it develops in the endgame, I don't know. But the 50 bucks will have paid off loooooong before that happens...
Oh yea, so C&C3, units, maps, 50 hours for the campaigns, greeeeat.... those are solo-games, comparing sologames to MMORPGs is like comparing one-night-stands to marriage. Its just... not....
I tend to take my reviews from first hand impression and trusted friends. And yes, they all said this game stands above all current MMORPGs in terms of fitting the casual and core-gamers needs. Its solid, its fun, I'm repeating myself but the trolls just can't stand quality, in-best-tradition MMOs I guess. This is not revolutionary, this is not sandbox, it is not "d00d I'm pwning so much"... It's JUST a fun game, how it develops in the endgame, I don't know. But the 50 bucks will have paid off loooooong before that happens...
Oh yea, so C&C3, units, maps, 50 hours for the campaigns, greeeeat.... those are solo-games, comparing sologames to MMORPGs is like comparing one-night-stands to marriage. Its just... not....
Meridion
Comparing is always acceptable, if you can make a good argument for it.
Lets say, God of War 2 vs LOTRO. In both games, you play a main character. You travel through different environments defeating enemies and solving puzzles. You aquire new items and abilities, and increase your skills with these.
See? Not hard at all. If you want to limit yourself to simply comparing an MMO to another MMO, then that curtails your ability to make critical observations. Of course, thats what some people want. I've heard arguments that say you really can't compare such and such a game with *any* other game. Great for those who like to live with their head in the sand, or just have tunnel vision.
So, by your logic, there must be a completely separate review scale just for MMO's. An MMO with a rating of 9 would then equate to a console action game with a rating of what?? Or are there separate review scales for all genre's of games? A 9 rating for a Racing sim only equals a 5 rating for a Sports sim?? Who knows.
I was under the impression that review scales were based on similar criteria for any game being reviewed... graphics, gameplay, technical, etc. It seems to me that the graphics portion of the review scale is all that matters when discussing LOTRO, though. I've said it myself that the game looks very nice. But once you look beyond the graphics, and get to the actual mechanics of the game, thats when you realize that a 9.2 just doesn't make sense at all.
Many people who post are definitely smitten by the look of the game. It is very appealing. But pretty water reflections and detailed environmental textures just don't warrant such high ratings, especially in an MMO, where the most important factors in its success are long term character progression, end game dynamics, and game play mechanics.
I know this would be a hell of a concept but suppose the reviewer just thought the game was fun. Amazing isn't it, a game being fun! I would give it a 9.2 simply because I enjoy it.
"I played the open beta and found the game a bit too linear and the world too small for my taste"
How in the world can you say this game is small when it is still in beta and you can't level a character above level 15, hence cannot even enter most of the areas.
Turbine has promised to add new areas as needed and I am sure they are working on them now. At least this game works, not like Vanguard with the huge world that is a big flop.
I know this would be a hell of a concept but suppose the reviewer just thought the game was fun. Amazing isn't it, a game being fun! I would give it a 9.2 simply because I enjoy it.
Fun is subjective. A review is supposed to give information about the condition of many aspects of a game, so that someone reading it can make an informed decision on the product.
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented.
I know this would be a hell of a concept but suppose the reviewer just thought the game was fun. Amazing isn't it, a game being fun! I would give it a 9.2 simply because I enjoy it.
Fun is subjective. A review is supposed to give information about the condition of many aspects of a game, so that someone reading it can make an informed decision on the product.
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented. amazing simply amazing, here all these years I thought that these games were meant to be entertaining and fun and that was pretty much the end all and be all of judging whether a game was good or not. Thank you for opening my eyes.
heres a concept for you to consider. All reviews and all opinions as to whether a game is good or not are subjective, including yours and mine.
I know this would be a hell of a concept but suppose the reviewer just thought the game was fun. Amazing isn't it, a game being fun! I would give it a 9.2 simply because I enjoy it.
Fun is subjective. A review is supposed to give information about the condition of many aspects of a game, so that someone reading it can make an informed decision on the product.
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented. amazing simply amazing, here all these years I thought that these games were meant to be entertaining and fun and that was pretty much the end all and be all of judging whether a game was good or not. Thank you for opening my eyes.
heres a concept for you to consider. All reviews and all opinions as to whether a game is good or not are subjective, including yours and mine.
You can skirt around the issue all you want, the review in question is still highly biased and uninformative. And that is an objective observation .
You seem to be taking this personally. Don't. Read the review again. Now pretend its a game you have no experience with. Would you purchase said game based on that review?
I know this would be a hell of a concept but suppose the reviewer just thought the game was fun. Amazing isn't it, a game being fun! I would give it a 9.2 simply because I enjoy it.
Fun is subjective. A review is supposed to give information about the condition of many aspects of a game, so that someone reading it can make an informed decision on the product.
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented. amazing simply amazing, here all these years I thought that these games were meant to be entertaining and fun and that was pretty much the end all and be all of judging whether a game was good or not. Thank you for opening my eyes.
heres a concept for you to consider. All reviews and all opinions as to whether a game is good or not are subjective, including yours and mine.
You can skirt around the issue all you want, the review in question is still highly biased and uninformative. And that is an objective observation .
You seem to be taking this personally. Don't. Read the review again. Now pretend its a game you have no experience with. Would you purchase said game based on that review? news flash spanky, your opinion is just as biased and uninformative as the reviewers
So Jack how do you enjoy it? I mean you were the first to jump on the VG lovers and continue to post your hate no matter what. Now you are on the other side. The irony that someone wouldnt like your very small lil gameworld. How dare they not agree with you!.
just love it Parrotpholk , in particular when this same site gave Vanguard a a 4 point something review.
I know this would be a hell of a concept but suppose the reviewer just thought the game was fun. Amazing isn't it, a game being fun! I would give it a 9.2 simply because I enjoy it.
Fun is subjective. A review is supposed to give information about the condition of many aspects of a game, so that someone reading it can make an informed decision on the product.
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented. amazing simply amazing, here all these years I thought that these games were meant to be entertaining and fun and that was pretty much the end all and be all of judging whether a game was good or not. Thank you for opening my eyes.
heres a concept for you to consider. All reviews and all opinions as to whether a game is good or not are subjective, including yours and mine.
You can skirt around the issue all you want, the review in question is still highly biased and uninformative. And that is an objective observation .
You seem to be taking this personally. Don't. Read the review again. Now pretend its a game you have no experience with. Would you purchase said game based on that review? news flash spanky, your opinion is just as biased and uninformative as the reviewers While your condescending name calling may make you feel you have the upper hand in the debate, my opinion isn't in question here. This is a supposedly professional review from a supposedly respected gaming website.
Again, if you actually read the review, you will come away with the knowledge that the graphics are well done, there are 4 races and some "staple" classes, you can group, and there is a "nice" community.
and LoTRO has been #1 at those sites for how many weeks now.
oh by the way why don't see if you can dig up a bad review or preview on any professional gaming site about LoTRO since this guy was so biased. I bet I can find more positive ones, can you find any negative ones at all?
This would be my first post on these forums, but I was just itching to comment after seeing what I'm seeing. I'm going to have to agree with JackDog here. For one thing, so what if CVG gave the game a 9.2, they have that right to write a review based on how they felt about the time with the game...hence that is a review. Now, lets get one thing out of the way. Ive spent a lot of time reading through these forums day in and day out, and I must say I'm very dissapointed with the comments that StanlyManly makes to other posters. I believe JackDog has just as much right to like LOTRO and any credibilty given to it just as much as he can dislike a game such as Vanguard.
If you want to get right down to business with sites giving their 2 cents on a game, we could go back to a review written by Gamespot on a little known game called Zelda: Twighlight Princess. They were given so much flack for not "fitting in" with their review, since they gave it a high "8's" rating and every other site gave it "9's to 10's" yet, their points for docking the game so much were quite valid...Therefore CVG's review is THEIR opinion, and THEIR right also to say why they, whats the word again? Oh yea, had FUN playing it. Thanks.
and LoTRO has been #1 at those sites for how many weeks now.
oh by the way why don't see if you can dig up a bad review or preview on any professional gaming site about LoTRO since this guy was so biased. I bet I can find more positive ones, can you find any negative ones at all?
Contrary to your "statement", I do know what really matters in the long run. Character progression, end game dynamics, and game play mechanics, as I have mentioned earlier.
I'm well aware of the sales charts. How this translates into real numbers has yet to be seen though. Also to take into consideration is that the only way to buy LOTRO atm is through online sources. You cannot pick it up at a "brick and mortar" location at this time. Does that mean that LOTRO has sold more overall copies than say The Burning Crusade at #3. No. The vast majority of sales for these items comes from retail outlets, not online outlets. So while the sales charts show LOTRO "winning", it is not indicative of the games success, or lack thereof.
Oh, and does the addition of 7 smiley faces mean anything significant? Would 2 or 3 have sufficed?
A bad review of LOTRO won't happen. Just as AC2 garnered scores of 8+, its not immediately apparent to reviewers why LOTRO isn't as good as they will perceive at first glance. One thing LOTRO does fairly well is give an initial impression of quality.
What will happen (you can call it speculation if you want), is the mild annoyances and quirks that people are experiencing now, will blossom into full fledged game breakers after players get over their initial rapture with the game's graphics. Feel free to quote me on that. Turnover rate will be the game's undoing, just as it was with AC2 and DDO.
EDIT: One other thing I would like to point out in regards to the sales figures for LOTRO. Pre-ordering gives access to the open beta. In addition, there were a reported 600k to 1.6million (depending on your interpretation) open beta keys distributed. Between pre-orders and the keys given out, there are a total of 11 servers currently up for LOTRO. 11. Do the math and draw your own conclusions.
Like I said, this is the steroid era of rating games. No game deserves a score that high because that indicates it is almost perfect which is not the case. Every MMORPG has balance issues, lag issues, among many other things.
If 10/10 is perfect then 9/10 is damn near perfect, which is wrong for this game, or any other MMORPG currently out.
and LoTRO has been #1 at those sites for how many weeks now.
oh by the way why don't see if you can dig up a bad review or preview on any professional gaming site about LoTRO since this guy was so biased. I bet I can find more positive ones, can you find any negative ones at all?
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Edit: OMG- Wow is still #9 on amazon's best seller list after 2 years. Lol
and LoTRO has been #1 at those sites for how many weeks now.
oh by the way why don't see if you can dig up a bad review or preview on any professional gaming site about LoTRO since this guy was so biased. I bet I can find more positive ones, can you find any negative ones at all?
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Congratulations on bringing in a over-used red herring to the debate.
I dont get WoW arguments anymore, I really dont...depending on whatever the OP posts, trolls either use the same arguments FOR or AGAINST depending on what type of urine found its way into their cornflakes.
Argument based Fact: WoW's sales are un-challenged and legendary;
Argument # 1: "Well McDonalds sells millions of burgers are they quality?" Oooh touche young troll
Trolls Argument #2: "Yeah because 6 million people are wrong"
If 6 million people enjoy playing WoW, great! I should hope they are paying for something they enjoy.
The only comparison that should be made between the two games is this, if you have to pay initially, then a monthly subscription, enjoy it and it will be worth the money.
"Why try to make another game, it will not sell as well as WoW"
and LoTRO has been #1 at those sites for how many weeks now.
oh by the way why don't see if you can dig up a bad review or preview on any professional gaming site about LoTRO since this guy was so biased. I bet I can find more positive ones, can you find any negative ones at all?
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Congratulations on bringing in a over-used red herring to the debate.
I dont get WoW arguments anymore, I really dont...depending on whatever the OP posts, trolls either use the same arguments FOR or AGAINST depending on what type of urine found its way into their cornflakes.
Argument based Fact: WoW's sales are un-challenged and legendary;
Argument # 1: "Well McDonalds sells millions of burgers are they quality?" Oooh touche young troll
Trolls Argument #2: "Yeah because 6 million people are wrong"
If 6 million people enjoy playing WoW, great! I should hope they are paying for something they enjoy.
The only comparison that should be made between the two games is this, if you have to pay initially, then a monthly subscription, enjoy it and it will be worth the money.
And my point was.. Do not start talking sales inless you want to get burned by the mother load that has sold millions of copies of their product before your product even had training weels..
Thats like someone saying.. Look this new os will rock because it is selling thousands when Microsoft has sold millions.
and LoTRO has been #1 at those sites for how many weeks now.
oh by the way why don't see if you can dig up a bad review or preview on any professional gaming site about LoTRO since this guy was so biased. I bet I can find more positive ones, can you find any negative ones at all?
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Congratulations on bringing in a over-used red herring to the debate.
I dont get WoW arguments anymore, I really dont...depending on whatever the OP posts, trolls either use the same arguments FOR or AGAINST depending on what type of urine found its way into their cornflakes.
Argument based Fact: WoW's sales are un-challenged and legendary;
Argument # 1: "Well McDonalds sells millions of burgers are they quality?" Oooh touche young troll
Trolls Argument #2: "Yeah because 6 million people are wrong"
If 6 million people enjoy playing WoW, great! I should hope they are paying for something they enjoy.
The only comparison that should be made between the two games is this, if you have to pay initially, then a monthly subscription, enjoy it and it will be worth the money.
And my point was.. Do not start talking sales inless you want to get burned by the mother load that has sold millions of copies of their product before your prodoct even had training weels..
Thats like someone saying.. Look this new os will rock because it is selling thousands when Microsoft has sold millions.
Get the picture yet?
As I noted earlier, yes, I completely see the red herring argument you bring into the mix. I think the fact that he was trying to make with sales, is that in the end, even if the review was biased by one member, there is at least a founding core of players who will kickstart the game, whether it be pleasurable for a few months or years.
Please do throw more misspelled arguments and cute emotes back at me, I quite enjoy them.
wait...OH I got his point...
WoW...has sold millions?
Good lord, millions upon millions...
Everyone, please, I retract everything, cancel your pre-orders, there is no way their sales can compete with WoW, your enjoyment is second place to WoW's sales.
This rebuttal was brought to you, and influenced by captain "burn you" obvious
So Jack how do you enjoy it? I mean you were the first to jump on the VG lovers and continue to post your hate no matter what. Now you are on the other side. The irony that someone wouldnt like your very small lil gameworld. How dare they not agree with you!.
just love it Parrotpholk , in particular when this same site gave Vanguard a a 4 point something review.
Actually I thought the 4.5 they gave Vanguard was too high.
and LoTRO has been #1 at those sites for how many weeks now.
oh by the way why don't see if you can dig up a bad review or preview on any professional gaming site about LoTRO since this guy was so biased. I bet I can find more positive ones, can you find any negative ones at all?
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Congratulations on bringing in a over-used red herring to the debate.
I dont get WoW arguments anymore, I really dont...depending on whatever the OP posts, trolls either use the same arguments FOR or AGAINST depending on what type of urine found its way into their cornflakes.
Argument based Fact: WoW's sales are un-challenged and legendary;
Argument # 1: "Well McDonalds sells millions of burgers are they quality?" Oooh touche young troll
Trolls Argument #2: "Yeah because 6 million people are wrong"
If 6 million people enjoy playing WoW, great! I should hope they are paying for something they enjoy.
The only comparison that should be made between the two games is this, if you have to pay initially, then a monthly subscription, enjoy it and it will be worth the money.
And my point was.. Do not start talking sales inless you want to get burned by the mother load that has sold millions of copies of their product before your prodoct even had training weels..
Thats like someone saying.. Look this new os will rock because it is selling thousands when Microsoft has sold millions.
Get the picture yet?
As I noted earlier, yes, I completely see the red herring argument you bring into the mix. I think the fact that he was trying to make with sales, is that in the end, even if the review was biased by one member, there is at least a founding core of players who will kickstart the game, whether it be pleasurable for a few months or years.
Please do throw more misspelled arguments and cute emotes back at me, I quite enjoy them.
This rebuttal was brought to you, and influenced, by captain "burn you" obvious
Again my point was not to even go there period inless you are ready to face the facts and the obvious. It seems you are out of steam and are going to plan b of the argument by insulting the poster rather then staying on topic..
Way to go to bring another so called "red harring argument" into the mix.. woot all hail the master of insults.
Funny how i just stated a fact and then here comes the toll arguments just like a good little fanboi.. I never once stated my opinion about wow or lotro. I just stated that if you want to take the topic into the market sales area then you better be ready to compete with the products that have already and still do sell millions..
Oh and by the way. With amazon you can cancle your pre-order.. I know because i have done it. :P I actually pre-ordered twice and wanted to cancle one order so amazon let me do it. So some of their pre-sales may be slightly jaded. The real question is how well will this game do once its released.. Pre-sales can always be misinformed and even if they are not for this game to continue to grow it will need more then just some founding core members..
I mean Horizens had its founding core members and look what happened there.. Was kinda sad too because that was the first mmo (to my knowledge) to have dragons as a pc race. Yea overraited but was still a nice change.
Comments
I myself think that its a mixture of the first two. I would not count "being innovative" as an argument of quality. I can invent a dozen new game mechanics in 20 minutes and build a game around it, but the final question is, is it fun, does it work? Thats the executioners blade for an entertainment product for me...
So I'll perfectly roll with "its fun" and "its technically near-flawless"...
""I don't give a tiny ant's crap about any reviews - but I preordered LOTRO after the closed beta, because IT IS GOOD for ME - and this is true for thousands of other players.
On the other hand, you sir must have a horrible, horrible life full of fear and hatred... it must be terrible and i feel bad for you!
DB""Spoken like a true Turbine Fan. You can't find flaw in my argument, so you resort to personal attacks. I always take that as a sign of sound defeat, so thanks
This is no conspiracy theory. This is the exact same thing that happened with AC2 and DDO just before release. Right now, the vast majority of buzz about the game is "OMG Best Game Ever". If you are lucky, and find the posts before they are deleted, you will see what people really think about the game though. In fact, before outright deleting a lot of the negative posts on the official LOTRO forums, the web guys simply made another forum called "First Impressions", and simply moved these posts there.
Look, I'm not saying the game is bad. I'm simply bringing to light that the Turbine advertising machine is deeply reliant upon viral marketing and shilling. My point is very simple... the people who Turbine invites to see "privileged" information and other such "secret" work, are already Turbine fans. There is little objectivity in the "information" put out by these types of people.
I've played Open Beta, I saw first-hand what the game was about, and to give it a 9.2 is absurd. Lets do a quick comparison of some other games rated 9+... more specifically, non-MMORPG.
http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/okami/index.html?tag=topten;rating;title;2
http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/godofwar2/index.html?tag=topten;rating;title;0
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/galacticcivilizations2darkavatar/index.html?tag=topten;rating;title;1
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/commandconquer3/index.html?tag=topten;rating;title;3
To say that LOTRO is in the same league as these is complete hogwash. Sure, compared to games like Vanguard (which I'm discussing only by second hand information, I've never played it) LOTRO might seem good. But when you "review" a game, you aren't just comparing it to the latest round of bad MMORPG's out there. It has to stand on its own and show that it is superior in every way.
Simply put, LOTRO is not superior in every way. Its graphically splendid at first, but the underlying game is most certainly flawed. To those of you who have followed Turbines last two MMO attempts, AC2 and DDO, that comes as no surprise.
I fully expect a huge backlash about the game after about 3 months into retail, when the vast majority of players realize that once again, Turbine suckered them into opening their wallets.
Don't even get me started on the outright scam of the $199 "lifetime" subscription...
Equal opportunity troll.
You went to all that trouble of nit-picking definitions just to make that point?
I wasn't even chiding LOTRO for not doing something specific, just that it doesn't do anything truly revolutionary, and as such, we should reserve the 8-10 rankings for games that try something truly new and innovative. That way we could separate the new from the old.
But lets be honest with ourselves. That review was a piece of propaganda wrapped in sugar. It made LOTRO sound like the greatest thing since sliced bread. If anything, it will do a disservice to the game because people will have such high expectations only to find out the game, beneath the surface and the lore, really isn't delivering anything new.
Granted monster play and player generated music is a bit different, but I'm mainly referring to innovation when it comes to combat and crafting, and other core elements of gameplay. Quite frankly I just get fed up with people screaming they want something new and every time a game delivers something new and different no one wants to play it. Want something new and different go play Saga of Ryzom. Auto Assault, Roma Victor., The Matrix, Face of Mankind, or WWII online. All of those game will offer you tons of things new and different if that is really what you want of course.
I miss DAoC
Oh yea, so C&C3, units, maps, 50 hours for the campaigns, greeeeat.... those are solo-games, comparing sologames to MMORPGs is like comparing one-night-stands to marriage. Its just... not....
Meridion
Comparing is always acceptable, if you can make a good argument for it.
Lets say, God of War 2 vs LOTRO. In both games, you play a main character. You travel through different environments defeating enemies and solving puzzles. You aquire new items and abilities, and increase your skills with these.
See? Not hard at all. If you want to limit yourself to simply comparing an MMO to another MMO, then that curtails your ability to make critical observations. Of course, thats what some people want. I've heard arguments that say you really can't compare such and such a game with *any* other game. Great for those who like to live with their head in the sand, or just have tunnel vision.
So, by your logic, there must be a completely separate review scale just for MMO's. An MMO with a rating of 9 would then equate to a console action game with a rating of what?? Or are there separate review scales for all genre's of games? A 9 rating for a Racing sim only equals a 5 rating for a Sports sim?? Who knows.
I was under the impression that review scales were based on similar criteria for any game being reviewed... graphics, gameplay, technical, etc. It seems to me that the graphics portion of the review scale is all that matters when discussing LOTRO, though. I've said it myself that the game looks very nice. But once you look beyond the graphics, and get to the actual mechanics of the game, thats when you realize that a 9.2 just doesn't make sense at all.
Many people who post are definitely smitten by the look of the game. It is very appealing. But pretty water reflections and detailed environmental textures just don't warrant such high ratings, especially in an MMO, where the most important factors in its success are long term character progression, end game dynamics, and game play mechanics.
Equal opportunity troll.
I miss DAoC
"I played the open beta and found the game a bit too linear and the world too small for my taste"
How in the world can you say this game is small when it is still in beta and you can't level a character above level 15, hence cannot even enter most of the areas.
Turbine has promised to add new areas as needed and I am sure they are working on them now. At least this game works, not like Vanguard with the huge world that is a big flop.
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented.
Equal opportunity troll.
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented. amazing simply amazing, here all these years I thought that these games were meant to be entertaining and fun and that was pretty much the end all and be all of judging whether a game was good or not. Thank you for opening my eyes.
heres a concept for you to consider. All reviews and all opinions as to whether a game is good or not are subjective, including yours and mine.
I miss DAoC
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented. amazing simply amazing, here all these years I thought that these games were meant to be entertaining and fun and that was pretty much the end all and be all of judging whether a game was good or not. Thank you for opening my eyes.
heres a concept for you to consider. All reviews and all opinions as to whether a game is good or not are subjective, including yours and mine.
You can skirt around the issue all you want, the review in question is still highly biased and uninformative. And that is an objective observation
You seem to be taking this personally. Don't. Read the review again. Now pretend its a game you have no experience with. Would you purchase said game based on that review?
Equal opportunity troll.
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented. amazing simply amazing, here all these years I thought that these games were meant to be entertaining and fun and that was pretty much the end all and be all of judging whether a game was good or not. Thank you for opening my eyes.
heres a concept for you to consider. All reviews and all opinions as to whether a game is good or not are subjective, including yours and mine.
You can skirt around the issue all you want, the review in question is still highly biased and uninformative. And that is an objective observation
You seem to be taking this personally. Don't. Read the review again. Now pretend its a game you have no experience with. Would you purchase said game based on that review? news flash spanky, your opinion is just as biased and uninformative as the reviewers
I miss DAoC
I miss DAoC
I'm not telling you what you should think of the game. I'm simply stating that this "review" is highly biased, and very little actual information about the game is presented. amazing simply amazing, here all these years I thought that these games were meant to be entertaining and fun and that was pretty much the end all and be all of judging whether a game was good or not. Thank you for opening my eyes.
heres a concept for you to consider. All reviews and all opinions as to whether a game is good or not are subjective, including yours and mine.
You can skirt around the issue all you want, the review in question is still highly biased and uninformative. And that is an objective observation
You seem to be taking this personally. Don't. Read the review again. Now pretend its a game you have no experience with. Would you purchase said game based on that review? news flash spanky, your opinion is just as biased and uninformative as the reviewers While your condescending name calling may make you feel you have the upper hand in the debate, my opinion isn't in question here. This is a supposedly professional review from a supposedly respected gaming website.
Again, if you actually read the review, you will come away with the knowledge that the graphics are well done, there are 4 races and some "staple" classes, you can group, and there is a "nice" community.
Explain to me how that is a professional review?
Equal opportunity troll.
www.ebgames.com/default.asp
and
www.amazon.com/b/ref=amb_link_1510492_40/102-1315735-2094523
and LoTRO has been #1 at those sites for how many weeks now.
oh by the way why don't see if you can dig up a bad review or preview on any professional gaming site about LoTRO since this guy was so biased. I bet I can find more positive ones, can you find any negative ones at all?
I miss DAoC
This would be my first post on these forums, but I was just itching to comment after seeing what I'm seeing. I'm going to have to agree with JackDog here. For one thing, so what if CVG gave the game a 9.2, they have that right to write a review based on how they felt about the time with the game...hence that is a review. Now, lets get one thing out of the way. Ive spent a lot of time reading through these forums day in and day out, and I must say I'm very dissapointed with the comments that StanlyManly makes to other posters. I believe JackDog has just as much right to like LOTRO and any credibilty given to it just as much as he can dislike a game such as Vanguard.
If you want to get right down to business with sites giving their 2 cents on a game, we could go back to a review written by Gamespot on a little known game called Zelda: Twighlight Princess. They were given so much flack for not "fitting in" with their review, since they gave it a high "8's" rating and every other site gave it "9's to 10's" yet, their points for docking the game so much were quite valid...Therefore CVG's review is THEIR opinion, and THEIR right also to say why they, whats the word again? Oh yea, had FUN playing it. Thanks.
I'm well aware of the sales charts. How this translates into real numbers has yet to be seen though. Also to take into consideration is that the only way to buy LOTRO atm is through online sources. You cannot pick it up at a "brick and mortar" location at this time. Does that mean that LOTRO has sold more overall copies than say The Burning Crusade at #3. No. The vast majority of sales for these items comes from retail outlets, not online outlets. So while the sales charts show LOTRO "winning", it is not indicative of the games success, or lack thereof.
Oh, and does the addition of 7 smiley faces mean anything significant? Would 2 or 3 have sufficed?
A bad review of LOTRO won't happen. Just as AC2 garnered scores of 8+, its not immediately apparent to reviewers why LOTRO isn't as good as they will perceive at first glance. One thing LOTRO does fairly well is give an initial impression of quality.
What will happen (you can call it speculation if you want), is the mild annoyances and quirks that people are experiencing now, will blossom into full fledged game breakers after players get over their initial rapture with the game's graphics. Feel free to quote me on that. Turnover rate will be the game's undoing, just as it was with AC2 and DDO.
EDIT: One other thing I would like to point out in regards to the sales figures for LOTRO. Pre-ordering gives access to the open beta. In addition, there were a reported 600k to 1.6million (depending on your interpretation) open beta keys distributed. Between pre-orders and the keys given out, there are a total of 11 servers currently up for LOTRO. 11. Do the math and draw your own conclusions.
Equal opportunity troll.
Like I said, this is the steroid era of rating games. No game deserves a score that high because that indicates it is almost perfect which is not the case. Every MMORPG has balance issues, lag issues, among many other things.
If 10/10 is perfect then 9/10 is damn near perfect, which is wrong for this game, or any other MMORPG currently out.
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Edit: OMG- Wow is still #9 on amazon's best seller list after 2 years. Lol
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Congratulations on bringing in a over-used red herring to the debate.
I dont get WoW arguments anymore, I really dont...depending on whatever the OP posts, trolls either use the same arguments FOR or AGAINST depending on what type of urine found its way into their cornflakes.
Argument based Fact: WoW's sales are un-challenged and legendary;
Argument # 1: "Well McDonalds sells millions of burgers are they quality?" Oooh touche young troll
Trolls Argument #2: "Yeah because 6 million people are wrong"
If 6 million people enjoy playing WoW, great! I should hope they are paying for something they enjoy.
The only comparison that should be made between the two games is this, if you have to pay initially, then a monthly subscription, enjoy it and it will be worth the money.
"Why try to make another game, it will not sell as well as WoW"
Variety is the spice of life perhaps?
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Congratulations on bringing in a over-used red herring to the debate.
I dont get WoW arguments anymore, I really dont...depending on whatever the OP posts, trolls either use the same arguments FOR or AGAINST depending on what type of urine found its way into their cornflakes.
Argument based Fact: WoW's sales are un-challenged and legendary;
Argument # 1: "Well McDonalds sells millions of burgers are they quality?" Oooh touche young troll
Trolls Argument #2: "Yeah because 6 million people are wrong"
If 6 million people enjoy playing WoW, great! I should hope they are paying for something they enjoy.
The only comparison that should be made between the two games is this, if you have to pay initially, then a monthly subscription, enjoy it and it will be worth the money.
And my point was.. Do not start talking sales inless you want to get burned by the mother load that has sold millions of copies of their product before your product even had training weels..
Thats like someone saying.. Look this new os will rock because it is selling thousands when Microsoft has sold millions.
Get the picture yet?
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Congratulations on bringing in a over-used red herring to the debate.
I dont get WoW arguments anymore, I really dont...depending on whatever the OP posts, trolls either use the same arguments FOR or AGAINST depending on what type of urine found its way into their cornflakes.
Argument based Fact: WoW's sales are un-challenged and legendary;
Argument # 1: "Well McDonalds sells millions of burgers are they quality?" Oooh touche young troll
Trolls Argument #2: "Yeah because 6 million people are wrong"
If 6 million people enjoy playing WoW, great! I should hope they are paying for something they enjoy.
The only comparison that should be made between the two games is this, if you have to pay initially, then a monthly subscription, enjoy it and it will be worth the money.
And my point was.. Do not start talking sales inless you want to get burned by the mother load that has sold millions of copies of their product before your prodoct even had training weels..
Thats like someone saying.. Look this new os will rock because it is selling thousands when Microsoft has sold millions.
Get the picture yet?
As I noted earlier, yes, I completely see the red herring argument you bring into the mix. I think the fact that he was trying to make with sales, is that in the end, even if the review was biased by one member, there is at least a founding core of players who will kickstart the game, whether it be pleasurable for a few months or years.
Please do throw more misspelled arguments and cute emotes back at me, I quite enjoy them.
wait...OH I got his point...
WoW...has sold millions?
Good lord, millions upon millions...
Everyone, please, I retract everything, cancel your pre-orders, there is no way their sales can compete with WoW, your enjoyment is second place to WoW's sales.
This rebuttal was brought to you, and influenced by captain "burn you" obvious
Actually I thought the 4.5 they gave Vanguard was too high.
Wow- I had to make this my second post by saying..
How many copies did world of warcraft the buring crusade sell on release day?
Ouch i hope that didnt hurt too badly..
Sorry, but intill a MMO sells as many copies as wow and the expansion then no MMO will compare in sales.
Congratulations on bringing in a over-used red herring to the debate.
I dont get WoW arguments anymore, I really dont...depending on whatever the OP posts, trolls either use the same arguments FOR or AGAINST depending on what type of urine found its way into their cornflakes.
Argument based Fact: WoW's sales are un-challenged and legendary;
Argument # 1: "Well McDonalds sells millions of burgers are they quality?" Oooh touche young troll
Trolls Argument #2: "Yeah because 6 million people are wrong"
If 6 million people enjoy playing WoW, great! I should hope they are paying for something they enjoy.
The only comparison that should be made between the two games is this, if you have to pay initially, then a monthly subscription, enjoy it and it will be worth the money.
And my point was.. Do not start talking sales inless you want to get burned by the mother load that has sold millions of copies of their product before your prodoct even had training weels..
Thats like someone saying.. Look this new os will rock because it is selling thousands when Microsoft has sold millions.
Get the picture yet?
As I noted earlier, yes, I completely see the red herring argument you bring into the mix. I think the fact that he was trying to make with sales, is that in the end, even if the review was biased by one member, there is at least a founding core of players who will kickstart the game, whether it be pleasurable for a few months or years.
Please do throw more misspelled arguments and cute emotes back at me, I quite enjoy them.
This rebuttal was brought to you, and influenced, by captain "burn you" obvious
Again my point was not to even go there period inless you are ready to face the facts and the obvious. It seems you are out of steam and are going to plan b of the argument by insulting the poster rather then staying on topic..
Way to go to bring another so called "red harring argument" into the mix.. woot all hail the master of insults.
Funny how i just stated a fact and then here comes the toll arguments just like a good little fanboi.. I never once stated my opinion about wow or lotro. I just stated that if you want to take the topic into the market sales area then you better be ready to compete with the products that have already and still do sell millions..
Oh and by the way. With amazon you can cancle your pre-order.. I know because i have done it. :P I actually pre-ordered twice and wanted to cancle one order so amazon let me do it. So some of their pre-sales may be slightly jaded. The real question is how well will this game do once its released.. Pre-sales can always be misinformed and even if they are not for this game to continue to grow it will need more then just some founding core members..
I mean Horizens had its founding core members and look what happened there.. Was kinda sad too because that was the first mmo (to my knowledge) to have dragons as a pc race.
Yea overraited but was still a nice change.