I like the option of having a last name-why dont more MMOs do that? Only lotro and guild wars have recently allowed you to do that.
Warhammer does too.
So does DAoC, EQ, EQ2, WoW, Horizons, and almost every other MMO I have played or tried.
WoW? Since when? The only last name I've seen in WoW is "Jenkins", or some other title - that's really what it is - from the Achievement thing. I think jim meant last names as in you can create your own. For instance, my Ironbreaker, Itchybeard Willnotshave. Not Itchybeard Jenkins.
The review isn't even from IGN. Seriously guys why are you OVERLY trying to promote this game? Everyone here has seen it and can make up their mind for themself. Tasos lies enough for everyone, why do you have to? It was from vault.
People like the game. What's your problem? This is the Darkfall forums. In a normal, troll-free world, this would be a place where people can actually come and talk about the game. The game is being promoted because the game is good. NUFF SAID!
I like the option of having a last name-why dont more MMOs do that? Only lotro and guild wars have recently allowed you to do that.
Warhammer does too.
So does DAoC, EQ, EQ2, WoW, Horizons, and almost every other MMO I have played or tried.
WoW? Since when? The only last name I've seen in WoW is "Jenkins", or some other title - that's really what it is - from the Achievement thing. I think jim meant last names as in you can create your own. For instance, my Ironbreaker, Itchybeard Willnotshave. Not Itchybeard Jenkins
Pretty sure the op meant last name from the start so like in real life people do have the same first names with different lastnames. Because thats how it is ,if you wanna be named Bob there can be 50 or 500 Bobs , all with different last names can you do that in ANY of them games that were listed?
Also you can do it with last names.Say you and your bud want to go in as family, you can do it different first names same last name.Have even seen guilds doing it with the last names as the guilds initials.
But anyway. I think alot of reactions from the sceptics are pretty pathetic if i may say so. Not all mind you. There's nothing wrong with being sceptic, its healthy actually. Im speaking of the bashers who seem to scream without thinking.
First off you open the thread to read the review and then complain about you'll be waiting for a review from a 'real' gaming site. In what way exactly do you think a "real" gaming site will have a much different first impression ? Its a first impression, get it ?
Then others come in and read the review and give comments about ill wait 3 months for the real reviews coz right now the game is shiny and new. Ill give you that. Yeah most things are more fun when they are new. Again though.... why do you come and read the review then, from a real gaming site or not ? Again its a first impression. Though to me it seems like if the game were bashed, first impression or not, you'd be a happy reader and not mention the above.
Why are so many contradicting themselves ?
Im also wondering what exactly it is that for those people makes a review or first impression from a 'real' gaming site so much better then any other well written first impression ? Coz they happen to work for a gaming site and get paid for writing their impressions and reviews ?
Ok so what makes those gaming site reviewers so special that they are like the pope with the holy bible. Anything they say is the truth ?
Im no expert but lemme think for a minute what would probably be the requirements of a gaming site staffmember who writes reviews;
1) Gaming has to be his hobby
2) Prob needs alot of experience with gaming to be able to be somewhat neutral when reviewing newer games. He has to have experience to review innovation, review by comparison to standards etc etc
3) He has to be able to write well
4) It would prob rock if he/she did some sort of journalism educational background or something simular but i doubt those are easy to get. No idea what they get paid but i can imagine they can get paid alot more with another job.
5) Has to work well with others. Has to follow the rules by which to review a game by and give it points following those rules.
6) Has to follow orders. No boss will ever want a rogue review writer that writes whatever he feels like writing. This works both ways. First off this prevents idiot reviewers to make a mess of a review and 2nd off it prevents reviewers to not follow dictated rules. You could think about reputation of the site and many other things.
Well add some more points if you can think of some more.
Anyway..... so what it comes down to when reviewing the difference between a professional review and a non professional review;
Professional review;
1) chances are he writes better. Im speaking of layout , grammar etc.
2) chances are he follows a fairly strict review table dictated by whoever's in charge and follows the company's vision etc. Thinking of possible important influences reputation etc.
3) ummmmm oh thats about it.... There's no 3rd. Except that for the professional reviewer his job is on the line if he doesnt please company he writes for. Thinking of possible important influences reputation + income.
So what do both unprofessional and professional reviewers have in common. Gaming experience and gaming enthousiasm, hobby. What do they not have in common. The professional reviewer might give more neutral reviews following a stricter table which to use during reviews. Thinking of set standards, innovation etc.
Now lets break it down to your experience with games that professional reviewers reviewed for you and im speaking of the average review of a bunch of professional reviews you've read before buying a game. Specifically an mmo game.
1) Any time they say a game rocks it does indeed rock for months to come? Helllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll no ! Lol may i laugh. You are kidding me right ?
2) When reviewing a new mmorpg their experience with this new mmorpg is so thorough that they've seen it all and whatever they say is based on alot of experience playing the game for everything it has to offer. Lol sorry but i gotta laugh again.
How many times do gaming sites race to get the first review out before the other competing sites do (its all about viewers/visitors remember). How many times nowadays this is getting so much out of hand that its becomming a standard that sites do a 2nd or even 3rd review. Why do they do this ? To keep attracting visitors/readers for popular titles or they are getting paid to re-review a game by the company who made the game and has improved it in the mean time. They also do this coz their first review might have been called a review but basically was nothing more then a first impression and they know this.
Ok so whats special again about these professional gaming reviewers that makes their word like the pope preaching the holy bible ? I mean are you people really this stupid ?
The only differences between such reviewers and any well written review, in this case we are speaking of a first impression, is that one gets paid for it and the other doesnt. The other most important difference is a neutral perspective before reviewing the game. How neutral are professional reviewers really though ? Do they have the freedom a non professional reviewer has ? Here im thinking about how neutral a professional reviewer can be when they need to think about their visiting population, sponsoring companies, reputation, income for the site/company, salary for the reviewer. Even for something as small, though very important for a site, as reputation means the review is likely to be under influence by previous reviews from the same site since their way of reviewing means they have a following of visitors.
The professional reviewer definately isnt nescesarily smarter then a non prof reviewer. The professional reviewer definately isnt nescesarily a better writer then a non reviewer. They both definately have the same hobby, we can assume. They both definately have the same experience with gaming, we can assume. We can assume this by simply reading their reviews, or first impressions, coz we have the brains to be able to tell if this is the case or not by simply reading what they wrote.
Anyway to make a long story short.....
If i were a psychologist and i'd say yer a bunch of dumbasses then would this mean im right because i happen to have studied psychology and get paid for putting it to practice ? They way you people reason i'd be right. I'd be neutral in my profession and based on the profile i use i'd say yer dumbasses since the logic you use is simply retarted.
Don't get me wrong. I too view/read reviews, and first impressions, on professional sites but they are by no means the deciding factor for me. The only thing i pay attention about is how well written it is and the arguments for why something is good and why something is bad.
Basically the only real reviewer is always the reader, not the one writing the review. You, the reader, are the one deciding what to do with the information given by the reviewer. You are the one capable, or not capable, of seeing the truth in a review. You are the one who's intelligence, and logic, is applied to finding this truth. Its always your pespective which is the deciding factor and your perspective is always under influence of yourself, your own emotions. The only thing the reviewer does is try influence your perspective, your emotions, towards the game. The decision is always ultimately yours. How your decision is influenced is dependant on how eager you are to try this new shiny game, how well written the review is but also what content is reviewed, how smart you are yourself in finding the truth in a review and what you are looking for in the review.
Most of all though its your emotions being the ultimate deciding factor towards bying or not to buy. This exact same factor is what often makes professional reviewers biased. They are human just like you. Look at warhammer or age of conan and the reviews for those 2 games given by enthousiastic anticipating gaming professional reviewers. Hell i've even see a trio doing a review of warhammer and all 3 of m with a huge smile on their face. They didnt even have to review the game coz their emotions got in the way and their enthousiasm for the new game spoke for itself. I wonder if they are still this enthousiastic lol.
There you have it. Thats why some of you act like total dumbasses. You dont think before you speak. Im always amazed how people value the so called "professionals" in whatever field. Simply because you cant think for yourself. What a joke.
"Combat may turn some people off of Darkfall. If you are looking for a deep, complex combat system, Darkfall probably will not fulfill that desire."
I'm glad SOME people actually are willing to tell the truth instead of pretending the game requires skill this is a game for people who want the freedom to gank and thats it really.
Quoting people doesn't make you clever, in fact, it makes you all the more stupid for not bothering to read the quotes you post in the first place.
for a professional review... that was really fanboish, but it might have been because his expectations were rock bottom (he didn't think the game would ever be released).
And it brings up an interesting point, none of the reviewers that will review this game have been following DF for very long and they don't notice what huge amount of material has been cut. This will make them appreciate the game for what it is, and maybe even give the game good reviews. This doesn't mean that the game WONT bomb, look at AoC, it had good content, given a 9, but it destroyed expectations, and thus tanked.
AoC is still alive and growing, actually.
That's not really the point though. Aventurine didn't meet expectations because they didn't have the funds to do so. They, obviously so, fully intend to implement them in the near future. They've straight up said many times they're making this game not just for us, but for them too, as they're gamers as well. They want a real MMORPG.
"Combat may turn some people off of Darkfall. If you are looking for a deep, complex combat system, Darkfall probably will not fulfill that desire." I'm glad SOME people actually are willing to tell the truth instead of pretending the game requires skill this is a game for people who want the freedom to gank and thats it really.
Well, it requires far more skill than any other MMORPG on the market, but not as much as a pure FPS game. This was to be expected to be honest.
If games like Planetside, Huxley and WW2 Online can be made as MMO's then I don't see whats stopping games like Age of Chivalry or Mirror's Edge from happening too.
p.s. I would kill for a Mirror's Edge or Age of Chivalry style MMO.
Quoting people doesn't make you clever, in fact, it makes you all the more stupid for not bothering to read the quotes you post in the first place.
"Combat may turn some people off of Darkfall. If you are looking for a deep, complex combat system, Darkfall probably will not fulfill that desire." I'm glad SOME people actually are willing to tell the truth instead of pretending the game requires skill this is a game for people who want the freedom to gank and thats it really.
Please give the full context of the quote. Then everyone will notice what he is talking about.
"Combat may turn some people off of Darkfall. If you are looking for a deep, complex combat system, Darkfall probably will not fulfill that desire. I have two 'swings' that I can use during combat. A side to side slice or an overhead bludgeon."
and continues
"Mounted combat is very well done in Darkfall, with the ability to 'lean' over the side of your mount and bring your weapon down hard across anyone in your path. Of course, combat in Darkfall in the bigger scheme of things is much larger than how many different style of attacks a player has."
It is clearly for me and everyone i think see it. He speaks about mellee combat only in your quote . The review also stated he was mainly craftinng/gathering and used combat a lot less during his online time.
He may hve this impression from melee combat. But putting ranged, mounted, magic combat together Darkfalls combat is a strong point of the game. The vast majority of people playing tell it is fun..some say it is the most fun combat in an MMO they had..
-----MY-TERMS-OF-USE-------------------------------------------------- $OE - eternal enemy of online gaming -We finally WON !!!! 2011 $OE accepted that they have been fired 2005 by the playerbase and closed down ridiculous NGE !!
"There was suppression of speech and all kinds of things between disturbing and fascistic." Raph Koster (parted $OE)
Sorry but I refuse to accept that this half-assed version of Age of Chivalry as a full game.
Being able to do two swings in a game is NOT complex, being able to lean side to side is okay but it is NOT complex and your average FPS has been able to do aiming for years now online, it doesn't matter how much crap you make, crap is still crap.
The only thing I will admit to being impressed by is archery because that had a proper form of gravity in it and you could even aim the arrow in the air and it would come down as expected albeit rather badly.
Until I see games attempting to do things as well as Mirror's Edge which I will point out is a game PUBLISHED by EA then I refuse to accept any of the crap out there currently.
In my games I want to have fun, in my games I want to have freedom, Darkfall offers niether with its crappy combat system, artifical protection on players through stats, all seeing shoot anywhere guard towers and crappy turret-like movement.
Quoting people doesn't make you clever, in fact, it makes you all the more stupid for not bothering to read the quotes you post in the first place.
The screen shots back up this author's claims about a beautiful game world. I think you are trying to hard to dislike this game. Let it go man. Deep breaths.
prestige classes, personal housing, housing that is totally customizable, crafting system that is non-repetitive, in-game trade boards?, prompt and swift customer service, advanced features & technologies never before seen in online games, next generation, farming - setting snares - hunting animals?, sophisticated trading system that works in and out of game, pets and npc hirelings - ranging from tamed animals to monsters - to summoned skeletons - charmed animals and monsters - hired npc merchants - hired npc guards - etc.
trying hard? or did IGN have no clue what's been cut from the game, BUT is still listed on the website. all of the above is still on the website as of NOW, as is "hi we're beta testing, come join the beta".
please.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
for a professional review... that was really fanboish, but it might have been because his expectations were rock bottom (he didn't think the game would ever be released).
And it brings up an interesting point, none of the reviewers that will review this game have been following DF for very long and they don't notice what huge amount of material has been cut. This will make them appreciate the game for what it is, and maybe even give the game good reviews. This doesn't mean that the game WONT bomb, look at AoC, it had good content, given a 9, but it destroyed expectations, and thus tanked.
AoC is still alive and growing, actually.
That's not really the point though. Aventurine didn't meet expectations because they didn't have the funds to do so. They, obviously so, fully intend to implement them in the near future. They've straight up said many times they're making this game not just for us, but for them too, as they're gamers as well. They want a real MMORPG.
i keep reading that... proof or stfu please, in regards to av didn't have the funds.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
trying hard? or did IGN have no clue what's been cut from the game, BUT is still listed on the website. all of the above is still on the website as of NOW, as is "hi we're beta testing, come join the beta". please.
Again, this is not an IGN.com review. It is an article on Vault Network.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Its amazing some people can praise the combat system with a straight face when the camera system is biorked, the animation is HORRID and the number of options you actually have in a fight is terribly limited. Its like people praising UO's combat system by todays standards, when it was 2 frames of animation, mouse point & clicking and a small handfull of worthwhile abilities. DF's combat should turn ANYONE off that actually enjoys combat!!! To say its deep, is like saying Karate Champ is deep compared to VF5. YES, I played the beta and it didn't take long to realize that the list of skills I'll never see won't change a darn thing. Bad latency didn't help the aiming either. It was like playing a really, really BAD FPS with 2 attacks. Are people still THAT impressed when a game lets you aim? I guess its the same reason people enjoyed AC. Same problem.
If you expectations or standards are THAT low, you could claim PONG is deep=) Hey, if people are enjoying it, all the power to them. People think Eve is exciting, so what are gonna do=)
Like other said, this review is not really official. Its no better then someone posting one here. He gives the game far too much credit though. He might as well said, "its really good for a really bad game".
Its like people praising UO's combat system by todays standards, when it was 2 frames of animation, mouse point & clicking and a small handfull of worthwhile abilities.
I think you're confusing the animation system with the combat system. The animation is 2D suckiness. I'm a die-hard UO fan and i will readily admit that. The combat is by far one of the best systems out there for people that like strategy and planning in combat.
UO, like EVE Online, has a combat system unlike most class-restricted, level-based MMOs. Players have chests of armor and weapons that they keep for specific engagements and scenarios. The character gear and player tactics you use aren't artificially restricted. True, artifacts were added that f'd the whole system up a lot, but combat includes various aspects that EQ/WOW-style MMOs just don't have.
-identifying your oppents strengths and weaknesses
- identifying their skills
- item loss
- changing your gear/tactics to match the opponents
- identifying your team's strengths and building an attack based on that
- planning for loss and recorvery
I am not saying these features are superior. It is a different style of gameplay and it adds depth to the game for those who prefer that playstyle. People who enjoy playing max level class-regulated combat in epic gear, due to the mechanics of the game they play, usually do not like some or all of those aspects. Also, many of those aspects are often foreign to them - for the UOers, it's like a Trammel player stepping foot into Fel for the first time.
To the EQ/WOW-style MMO gamer, Darkfall combat seems like a 2-swing 2-button limited engagement. To them, the battle started the minute someone to the first swing. In that light, I can see how they would perceive DF PvP to be very limited.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
To the EQ/WOW-style MMO gamer, Darkfall combat seems like a 2-swing 2-button limited engagement. To them, the battle started the minute someone to the first swing. In that light, I can see how they would perceive DF PvP to be very limited.
Of course, the game is new and as such almost all the players are relatively low skill level, even the macroers simply now have lopsided skills.
Ok my bad. DIdnt pay attention. But anyway. I think alot of reactions from the sceptics are pretty pathetic if i may say so. Not all mind you. There's nothing wrong with being sceptic, its healthy actually. Im speaking of the bashers who seem to scream without thinking. First off you open the thread to read the review and then complain about you'll be waiting for a review from a 'real' gaming site. In what way exactly do you think a "real" gaming site will have a much different first impression ? Its a first impression, get it ? Then others come in and read the review and give comments about ill wait 3 months for the real reviews coz right now the game is shiny and new. Ill give you that. Yeah most things are more fun when they are new. Again though.... why do you come and read the review then, from a real gaming site or not ? Again its a first impression. Though to me it seems like if the game were bashed, first impression or not, you'd be a happy reader and not mention the above. Why are so many contradicting themselves ? Im also wondering what exactly it is that for those people makes a review or first impression from a 'real' gaming site so much better then any other well written first impression ? Coz they happen to work for a gaming site and get paid for writing their impressions and reviews ? Ok so what makes those gaming site reviewers so special that they are like the pope with the holy bible. Anything they say is the truth ? Im no expert but lemme think for a minute what would probably be the requirements of a gaming site staffmember who writes reviews; 1) Gaming has to be his hobby 2) Prob needs alot of experience with gaming to be able to be somewhat neutral when reviewing newer games. He has to have experience to review innovation, review by comparison to standards etc etc 3) He has to be able to write well 4) It would prob rock if he/she did some sort of journalism educational background or something simular but i doubt those are easy to get. No idea what they get paid but i can imagine they can get paid alot more with another job. 5) Has to work well with others. Has to follow the rules by which to review a game by and give it points following those rules. 6) Has to follow orders. No boss will ever want a rogue review writer that writes whatever he feels like writing. This works both ways. First off this prevents idiot reviewers to make a mess of a review and 2nd off it prevents reviewers to not follow dictated rules. You could think about reputation of the site and many other things. Well add some more points if you can think of some more. Anyway..... so what it comes down to when reviewing the difference between a professional review and a non professional review; Professional review; 1) chances are he writes better. Im speaking of layout , grammar etc. 2) chances are he follows a fairly strict review table dictated by whoever's in charge and follows the company's vision etc. Thinking of possible important influences reputation etc. 3) ummmmm oh thats about it.... There's no 3rd. Except that for the professional reviewer his job is on the line if he doesnt please company he writes for. Thinking of possible important influences reputation + income. So what do both unprofessional and professional reviewers have in common. Gaming experience and gaming enthousiasm, hobby. What do they not have in common. The professional reviewer might give more neutral reviews following a stricter table which to use during reviews. Thinking of set standards, innovation etc.
A professional writer, which is likely what review writers are for reputable websites, likly have an educational background in journalism. Believe it or not, college educated people, writers or not, have A LOT of experience writing academic papers without bias, know how to be objective, and is a lot better at articulating their thoughts.
If you think gaming websites color their reviews to please a game company, you're assuming a company has bad business practices. That company wouldn't be in business for long, since readers can clearly see quality work versus half assed work. I don't know IGN well, but their name is everywhere so they must be doing something right.
I didn't read past here, because you're written proof that just anyone shouldn't be taken seriously when they write. You went on a long, non coherent rant and then expected people to take what you said to heart. That blog writer, writing his first impression probably wrote one of the best First Impressions written by an ordinary player I've ever seen, but he's still an ordinary player and you can tell with the amount of bias in his writing.
Sorry but I refuse to accept that this half-assed version of Age of Chivalry as a full game. Being able to do two swings in a game is NOT complex (there are ton of magic spells and there is ranged, there is cannons to fire, battle spikes to throw, mounted combat) , being able to lean side to side is okay but it is NOT complex and your average FPS has been able to do aiming for years now online, it doesn't matter how much crap you make, crap is still crap (just your opinion, crap is that you try to turn in to fact) . The only thing I will admit to being impressed by is archery because that had a proper form of gravity in it and you could even aim the arrow in the air and it would come down as expected albeit rather badly.(isn't iut nice ? the best ranged bow combat in an MMORPG) Until I see games attempting to do things as well as Mirror's Edge which I will point out is a game PUBLISHED by EA then I refuse to accept any of the crap out there currently. In my games I want to have fun, in my games I want to have freedom, Darkfall offers niether with its crappy combat system, artifical protection on players through stats, all seeing shoot anywhere guard towers and crappy turret-like movement.
You dont like the game..fine ..it is not for everyone...
Darkfall offer for me freedom , fun, one of the most beutiful online wordls , the best combat of an MMORPG today ..
All good reasons to be my favorite game..
-----MY-TERMS-OF-USE-------------------------------------------------- $OE - eternal enemy of online gaming -We finally WON !!!! 2011 $OE accepted that they have been fired 2005 by the playerbase and closed down ridiculous NGE !!
"There was suppression of speech and all kinds of things between disturbing and fascistic." Raph Koster (parted $OE)
This is NOT a review from IGN. It is a review written by a normal player and posted on the IGN site. IGN has not done any official reviews of DF yet, and probably won't
If they don't review an MMO thats kicked up as much fuss as Darkfall has, we can safely say IGN aren't true gamers.
for a professional review... that was really fanboish, but it might have been because his expectations were rock bottom (he didn't think the game would ever be released).
And it brings up an interesting point, none of the reviewers that will review this game have been following DF for very long and they don't notice what huge amount of material has been cut. This will make them appreciate the game for what it is, and maybe even give the game good reviews. This doesn't mean that the game WONT bomb, look at AoC, it had good content, given a 9, but it destroyed expectations, and thus tanked.
AoC is still alive and growing, actually.
That's not really the point though. Aventurine didn't meet expectations because they didn't have the funds to do so. They, obviously so, fully intend to implement them in the near future. They've straight up said many times they're making this game not just for us, but for them too, as they're gamers as well. They want a real MMORPG.
i keep reading that... proof or stfu please, in regards to av didn't have the funds.
they dudnt have abeter account mangmeant i think thats pretty proof enough
It is a good review if you are willing to look over everything that is bad and just focus on the good. In other words, it was, as stated, a fanboy review. The UI does not always scale with monitor size? Wow.... http://vnmedia.ign.com/screenshots/vnhub/62527895.jpg Talk about annoying.
never had issues with that except the ui you have to make bigger a tleas tthe webpage windows
After seeing the professional reviews from this site on Warhammer last year and the high marks around the industry journals/sites, and then seeing reality of the actual game for myself, its obvious that the only difference in most cases between a pro writer and a blogger both playing any game and giving reviews is PAY. One gets paid, one doesn't. That does not mean that one knows more than the other. When professional review after review rates Warhammer so high, then you watch as it consistently loses subscriptions from 750k down to under 300k about now and almost 50 server closing later, you realize either:
A) Hundreds of thousands of people simply "didn't get it" and never saw the awesomeness that was Warhammer professional writers saw OR:
Professional reviewers don't know more than anyone else when it comes to measuring "fun".
Sure, they know technical jargon; they can tell you how many FPS you get with what rig setup, whether the anti-aliasing is good or not, what engine a company used, and loads of other useless facts and stats about the physical structure of a game.
But what they cannot tell you and what you will never know until you try it for yourself, is just how FUN any game is. Their idea of fun apparently was different than hundreds of thousands of others last year, because they sure didn't see much wrong when they submitted their reviews. I dare anyone to go back and reread some of the reviews this site, or ANY site gave on Warhammer, then gauge that against the actual PAYING customers and what they think/said.
Some of you are just haters of the game or their fans, and even if 9.9 out of 10 professional reviewers say Darkfall is worth the money and great fun for the buck, we all know you will still sit on the side not subbing, but still throwing bricks. Your argument will be just like the one given towards the Noob Comic author (the friend of Tasos) who said the game was fun, and you said "Well, of course SHE says that. She's his friend." Now bloggers all over different sites, who are actually PLAYING the game, are saying, "The game is fun; not perfect, but fun" and you say "Bleh.. I'll wait for the pros to review it. Those of you in this thread saying "I'll wait for the pros" and expecting that they will have an idea of what fun you like more than yourself, you have got to be kidding yourself.
To have us all believe that you are somehow sitting around waiting for a pro to tell you to go buy Darkfall is really, really laughable.
Ok my bad. DIdnt pay attention. But anyway. I think alot of reactions from the sceptics are pretty pathetic if i may say so. Not all mind you. There's nothing wrong with being sceptic, its healthy actually. Im speaking of the bashers who seem to scream without thinking. First off you open the thread to read the review and then complain about you'll be waiting for a review from a 'real' gaming site. In what way exactly do you think a "real" gaming site will have a much different first impression ? Its a first impression, get it ? Then others come in and read the review and give comments about ill wait 3 months for the real reviews coz right now the game is shiny and new. Ill give you that. Yeah most things are more fun when they are new. Again though.... why do you come and read the review then, from a real gaming site or not ? Again its a first impression. Though to me it seems like if the game were bashed, first impression or not, you'd be a happy reader and not mention the above. Why are so many contradicting themselves ? Im also wondering what exactly it is that for those people makes a review or first impression from a 'real' gaming site so much better then any other well written first impression ? Coz they happen to work for a gaming site and get paid for writing their impressions and reviews ? Ok so what makes those gaming site reviewers so special that they are like the pope with the holy bible. Anything they say is the truth ? Im no expert but lemme think for a minute what would probably be the requirements of a gaming site staffmember who writes reviews; 1) Gaming has to be his hobby 2) Prob needs alot of experience with gaming to be able to be somewhat neutral when reviewing newer games. He has to have experience to review innovation, review by comparison to standards etc etc 3) He has to be able to write well 4) It would prob rock if he/she did some sort of journalism educational background or something simular but i doubt those are easy to get. No idea what they get paid but i can imagine they can get paid alot more with another job. 5) Has to work well with others. Has to follow the rules by which to review a game by and give it points following those rules. 6) Has to follow orders. No boss will ever want a rogue review writer that writes whatever he feels like writing. This works both ways. First off this prevents idiot reviewers to make a mess of a review and 2nd off it prevents reviewers to not follow dictated rules. You could think about reputation of the site and many other things. Well add some more points if you can think of some more. Anyway..... so what it comes down to when reviewing the difference between a professional review and a non professional review; Professional review; 1) chances are he writes better. Im speaking of layout , grammar etc. 2) chances are he follows a fairly strict review table dictated by whoever's in charge and follows the company's vision etc. Thinking of possible important influences reputation etc. 3) ummmmm oh thats about it.... There's no 3rd. Except that for the professional reviewer his job is on the line if he doesnt please company he writes for. Thinking of possible important influences reputation + income. So what do both unprofessional and professional reviewers have in common. Gaming experience and gaming enthousiasm, hobby. What do they not have in common. The professional reviewer might give more neutral reviews following a stricter table which to use during reviews. Thinking of set standards, innovation etc.
A professional writer, which is likely what review writers are for reputable websites, likly have an educational background in journalism. Believe it or not, college educated people, writers or not, have A LOT of experience writing academic papers without bias, know how to be objective, and is a lot better at articulating their thoughts.
If you think gaming websites color their reviews to please a game company, you're assuming a company has bad business practices. That company wouldn't be in business for long, since readers can clearly see quality work versus half assed work. I don't know IGN well, but their name is everywhere so they must be doing something right.
I didn't read past here, because you're written proof that just anyone shouldn't be taken seriously when they write. You went on a long, non coherent rant and then expected people to take what you said to heart. That blog writer, writing his first impression probably wrote one of the best First Impressions written by an ordinary player I've ever seen, but he's still an ordinary player and you can tell with the amount of bias in his writing.
As many people have said already, this is not IGN review. It's just vault. If i'm not mistaken you do not need a journalism degree to write a review for vault. If you cannot tell his bias towards the game in the review something is wrong. Sure it's not all suckiness and the game sucks, there are good points, however the only bad point he mentioned was the UI? Seriously?
Comments
Warhammer does too.
So does DAoC, EQ, EQ2, WoW, Horizons, and almost every other MMO I have played or tried.
WoW? Since when? The only last name I've seen in WoW is "Jenkins", or some other title - that's really what it is - from the Achievement thing. I think jim meant last names as in you can create your own. For instance, my Ironbreaker, Itchybeard Willnotshave. Not Itchybeard Jenkins.
People like the game. What's your problem? This is the Darkfall forums. In a normal, troll-free world, this would be a place where people can actually come and talk about the game. The game is being promoted because the game is good. NUFF SAID!
Warhammer does too.
So does DAoC, EQ, EQ2, WoW, Horizons, and almost every other MMO I have played or tried.
WoW? Since when? The only last name I've seen in WoW is "Jenkins", or some other title - that's really what it is - from the Achievement thing. I think jim meant last names as in you can create your own. For instance, my Ironbreaker, Itchybeard Willnotshave. Not Itchybeard Jenkins
Pretty sure the op meant last name from the start so like in real life people do have the same first names with different lastnames. Because thats how it is ,if you wanna be named Bob there can be 50 or 500 Bobs , all with different last names can you do that in ANY of them games that were listed?
Also you can do it with last names.Say you and your bud want to go in as family, you can do it different first names same last name.Have even seen guilds doing it with the last names as the guilds initials.
Ok my bad. DIdnt pay attention.
But anyway. I think alot of reactions from the sceptics are pretty pathetic if i may say so. Not all mind you. There's nothing wrong with being sceptic, its healthy actually. Im speaking of the bashers who seem to scream without thinking.
First off you open the thread to read the review and then complain about you'll be waiting for a review from a 'real' gaming site. In what way exactly do you think a "real" gaming site will have a much different first impression ? Its a first impression, get it ?
Then others come in and read the review and give comments about ill wait 3 months for the real reviews coz right now the game is shiny and new. Ill give you that. Yeah most things are more fun when they are new. Again though.... why do you come and read the review then, from a real gaming site or not ? Again its a first impression. Though to me it seems like if the game were bashed, first impression or not, you'd be a happy reader and not mention the above.
Why are so many contradicting themselves ?
Im also wondering what exactly it is that for those people makes a review or first impression from a 'real' gaming site so much better then any other well written first impression ? Coz they happen to work for a gaming site and get paid for writing their impressions and reviews ?
Ok so what makes those gaming site reviewers so special that they are like the pope with the holy bible. Anything they say is the truth ?
Im no expert but lemme think for a minute what would probably be the requirements of a gaming site staffmember who writes reviews;
1) Gaming has to be his hobby
2) Prob needs alot of experience with gaming to be able to be somewhat neutral when reviewing newer games. He has to have experience to review innovation, review by comparison to standards etc etc
3) He has to be able to write well
4) It would prob rock if he/she did some sort of journalism educational background or something simular but i doubt those are easy to get. No idea what they get paid but i can imagine they can get paid alot more with another job.
5) Has to work well with others. Has to follow the rules by which to review a game by and give it points following those rules.
6) Has to follow orders. No boss will ever want a rogue review writer that writes whatever he feels like writing. This works both ways. First off this prevents idiot reviewers to make a mess of a review and 2nd off it prevents reviewers to not follow dictated rules. You could think about reputation of the site and many other things.
Well add some more points if you can think of some more.
Anyway..... so what it comes down to when reviewing the difference between a professional review and a non professional review;
Professional review;
1) chances are he writes better. Im speaking of layout , grammar etc.
2) chances are he follows a fairly strict review table dictated by whoever's in charge and follows the company's vision etc. Thinking of possible important influences reputation etc.
3) ummmmm oh thats about it.... There's no 3rd. Except that for the professional reviewer his job is on the line if he doesnt please company he writes for. Thinking of possible important influences reputation + income.
So what do both unprofessional and professional reviewers have in common. Gaming experience and gaming enthousiasm, hobby. What do they not have in common. The professional reviewer might give more neutral reviews following a stricter table which to use during reviews. Thinking of set standards, innovation etc.
Now lets break it down to your experience with games that professional reviewers reviewed for you and im speaking of the average review of a bunch of professional reviews you've read before buying a game. Specifically an mmo game.
1) Any time they say a game rocks it does indeed rock for months to come? Helllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll no ! Lol may i laugh. You are kidding me right ?
2) When reviewing a new mmorpg their experience with this new mmorpg is so thorough that they've seen it all and whatever they say is based on alot of experience playing the game for everything it has to offer. Lol sorry but i gotta laugh again.
How many times do gaming sites race to get the first review out before the other competing sites do (its all about viewers/visitors remember). How many times nowadays this is getting so much out of hand that its becomming a standard that sites do a 2nd or even 3rd review. Why do they do this ? To keep attracting visitors/readers for popular titles or they are getting paid to re-review a game by the company who made the game and has improved it in the mean time. They also do this coz their first review might have been called a review but basically was nothing more then a first impression and they know this.
Ok so whats special again about these professional gaming reviewers that makes their word like the pope preaching the holy bible ? I mean are you people really this stupid ?
The only differences between such reviewers and any well written review, in this case we are speaking of a first impression, is that one gets paid for it and the other doesnt. The other most important difference is a neutral perspective before reviewing the game. How neutral are professional reviewers really though ? Do they have the freedom a non professional reviewer has ? Here im thinking about how neutral a professional reviewer can be when they need to think about their visiting population, sponsoring companies, reputation, income for the site/company, salary for the reviewer. Even for something as small, though very important for a site, as reputation means the review is likely to be under influence by previous reviews from the same site since their way of reviewing means they have a following of visitors.
The professional reviewer definately isnt nescesarily smarter then a non prof reviewer. The professional reviewer definately isnt nescesarily a better writer then a non reviewer. They both definately have the same hobby, we can assume. They both definately have the same experience with gaming, we can assume. We can assume this by simply reading their reviews, or first impressions, coz we have the brains to be able to tell if this is the case or not by simply reading what they wrote.
Anyway to make a long story short.....
If i were a psychologist and i'd say yer a bunch of dumbasses then would this mean im right because i happen to have studied psychology and get paid for putting it to practice ? They way you people reason i'd be right. I'd be neutral in my profession and based on the profile i use i'd say yer dumbasses since the logic you use is simply retarted.
Don't get me wrong. I too view/read reviews, and first impressions, on professional sites but they are by no means the deciding factor for me. The only thing i pay attention about is how well written it is and the arguments for why something is good and why something is bad.
Basically the only real reviewer is always the reader, not the one writing the review. You, the reader, are the one deciding what to do with the information given by the reviewer. You are the one capable, or not capable, of seeing the truth in a review. You are the one who's intelligence, and logic, is applied to finding this truth. Its always your pespective which is the deciding factor and your perspective is always under influence of yourself, your own emotions. The only thing the reviewer does is try influence your perspective, your emotions, towards the game. The decision is always ultimately yours. How your decision is influenced is dependant on how eager you are to try this new shiny game, how well written the review is but also what content is reviewed, how smart you are yourself in finding the truth in a review and what you are looking for in the review.
Most of all though its your emotions being the ultimate deciding factor towards bying or not to buy. This exact same factor is what often makes professional reviewers biased. They are human just like you. Look at warhammer or age of conan and the reviews for those 2 games given by enthousiastic anticipating gaming professional reviewers. Hell i've even see a trio doing a review of warhammer and all 3 of m with a huge smile on their face. They didnt even have to review the game coz their emotions got in the way and their enthousiasm for the new game spoke for itself. I wonder if they are still this enthousiastic lol.
There you have it. Thats why some of you act like total dumbasses. You dont think before you speak. Im always amazed how people value the so called "professionals" in whatever field. Simply because you cant think for yourself. What a joke.
"Combat may turn some people off of Darkfall. If you are looking for a deep, complex combat system, Darkfall probably will not fulfill that desire."
I'm glad SOME people actually are willing to tell the truth instead of pretending the game requires skill this is a game for people who want the freedom to gank and thats it really.
Quoting people doesn't make you clever, in fact, it makes you all the more stupid for not bothering to read the quotes you post in the first place.
AoC is still alive and growing, actually.
That's not really the point though. Aventurine didn't meet expectations because they didn't have the funds to do so. They, obviously so, fully intend to implement them in the near future. They've straight up said many times they're making this game not just for us, but for them too, as they're gamers as well. They want a real MMORPG.
Well, it requires far more skill than any other MMORPG on the market, but not as much as a pure FPS game. This was to be expected to be honest.
meh, just excuses as far as I'm concerned.
If games like Planetside, Huxley and WW2 Online can be made as MMO's then I don't see whats stopping games like Age of Chivalry or Mirror's Edge from happening too.
p.s. I would kill for a Mirror's Edge or Age of Chivalry style MMO.
Quoting people doesn't make you clever, in fact, it makes you all the more stupid for not bothering to read the quotes you post in the first place.
Please give the full context of the quote. Then everyone will notice what he is talking about.
"Combat may turn some people off of Darkfall. If you are looking for a deep, complex combat system, Darkfall probably will not fulfill that desire. I have two 'swings' that I can use during combat. A side to side slice or an overhead bludgeon."
and continues
"Mounted combat is very well done in Darkfall, with the ability to 'lean' over the side of your mount and bring your weapon down hard across anyone in your path. Of course, combat in Darkfall in the bigger scheme of things is much larger than how many different style of attacks a player has."
It is clearly for me and everyone i think see it. He speaks about mellee combat only in your quote . The review also stated he was mainly craftinng/gathering and used combat a lot less during his online time.
He may hve this impression from melee combat. But putting ranged, mounted, magic combat together Darkfalls combat is a strong point of the game. The vast majority of people playing tell it is fun..some say it is the most fun combat in an MMO they had..
-----MY-TERMS-OF-USE--------------------------------------------------
$OE - eternal enemy of online gaming
-We finally WON !!!! 2011 $OE accepted that they have been fired 2005 by the playerbase and closed down ridiculous NGE !!
"There was suppression of speech and all kinds of things between disturbing and fascistic." Raph Koster (parted $OE)
Sorry but I refuse to accept that this half-assed version of Age of Chivalry as a full game.
Being able to do two swings in a game is NOT complex, being able to lean side to side is okay but it is NOT complex and your average FPS has been able to do aiming for years now online, it doesn't matter how much crap you make, crap is still crap.
The only thing I will admit to being impressed by is archery because that had a proper form of gravity in it and you could even aim the arrow in the air and it would come down as expected albeit rather badly.
Until I see games attempting to do things as well as Mirror's Edge which I will point out is a game PUBLISHED by EA then I refuse to accept any of the crap out there currently.
In my games I want to have fun, in my games I want to have freedom, Darkfall offers niether with its crappy combat system, artifical protection on players through stats, all seeing shoot anywhere guard towers and crappy turret-like movement.
Quoting people doesn't make you clever, in fact, it makes you all the more stupid for not bothering to read the quotes you post in the first place.
The screen shots back up this author's claims about a beautiful game world. I think you are trying to hard to dislike this game. Let it go man. Deep breaths.
prestige classes, personal housing, housing that is totally customizable, crafting system that is non-repetitive, in-game trade boards?, prompt and swift customer service, advanced features & technologies never before seen in online games, next generation, farming - setting snares - hunting animals?, sophisticated trading system that works in and out of game, pets and npc hirelings - ranging from tamed animals to monsters - to summoned skeletons - charmed animals and monsters - hired npc merchants - hired npc guards - etc.
trying hard? or did IGN have no clue what's been cut from the game, BUT is still listed on the website. all of the above is still on the website as of NOW, as is "hi we're beta testing, come join the beta".
please.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
AoC is still alive and growing, actually.
That's not really the point though. Aventurine didn't meet expectations because they didn't have the funds to do so. They, obviously so, fully intend to implement them in the near future. They've straight up said many times they're making this game not just for us, but for them too, as they're gamers as well. They want a real MMORPG.
i keep reading that... proof or stfu please, in regards to av didn't have the funds.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
Again, this is not an IGN.com review. It is an article on Vault Network.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Its amazing some people can praise the combat system with a straight face when the camera system is biorked, the animation is HORRID and the number of options you actually have in a fight is terribly limited. Its like people praising UO's combat system by todays standards, when it was 2 frames of animation, mouse point & clicking and a small handfull of worthwhile abilities. DF's combat should turn ANYONE off that actually enjoys combat!!! To say its deep, is like saying Karate Champ is deep compared to VF5. YES, I played the beta and it didn't take long to realize that the list of skills I'll never see won't change a darn thing. Bad latency didn't help the aiming either. It was like playing a really, really BAD FPS with 2 attacks. Are people still THAT impressed when a game lets you aim? I guess its the same reason people enjoyed AC. Same problem.
If you expectations or standards are THAT low, you could claim PONG is deep=) Hey, if people are enjoying it, all the power to them. People think Eve is exciting, so what are gonna do=)
Like other said, this review is not really official. Its no better then someone posting one here. He gives the game far too much credit though. He might as well said, "its really good for a really bad game".
I think you're confusing the animation system with the combat system. The animation is 2D suckiness. I'm a die-hard UO fan and i will readily admit that. The combat is by far one of the best systems out there for people that like strategy and planning in combat.
UO, like EVE Online, has a combat system unlike most class-restricted, level-based MMOs. Players have chests of armor and weapons that they keep for specific engagements and scenarios. The character gear and player tactics you use aren't artificially restricted. True, artifacts were added that f'd the whole system up a lot, but combat includes various aspects that EQ/WOW-style MMOs just don't have.
-identifying your oppents strengths and weaknesses
- identifying their skills
- item loss
- changing your gear/tactics to match the opponents
- identifying your team's strengths and building an attack based on that
- planning for loss and recorvery
I am not saying these features are superior. It is a different style of gameplay and it adds depth to the game for those who prefer that playstyle. People who enjoy playing max level class-regulated combat in epic gear, due to the mechanics of the game they play, usually do not like some or all of those aspects. Also, many of those aspects are often foreign to them - for the UOers, it's like a Trammel player stepping foot into Fel for the first time.
To the EQ/WOW-style MMO gamer, Darkfall combat seems like a 2-swing 2-button limited engagement. To them, the battle started the minute someone to the first swing. In that light, I can see how they would perceive DF PvP to be very limited.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Of course, the game is new and as such almost all the players are relatively low skill level, even the macroers simply now have lopsided skills.
We will see in a few months...
A professional writer, which is likely what review writers are for reputable websites, likly have an educational background in journalism. Believe it or not, college educated people, writers or not, have A LOT of experience writing academic papers without bias, know how to be objective, and is a lot better at articulating their thoughts.
If you think gaming websites color their reviews to please a game company, you're assuming a company has bad business practices. That company wouldn't be in business for long, since readers can clearly see quality work versus half assed work. I don't know IGN well, but their name is everywhere so they must be doing something right.
I didn't read past here, because you're written proof that just anyone shouldn't be taken seriously when they write. You went on a long, non coherent rant and then expected people to take what you said to heart. That blog writer, writing his first impression probably wrote one of the best First Impressions written by an ordinary player I've ever seen, but he's still an ordinary player and you can tell with the amount of bias in his writing.
This is NOT a review from IGN. It is a review written by a normal player and posted on the IGN site.
IGN has not done any official reviews of DF yet, and probably won't
You dont like the game..fine ..it is not for everyone...
Darkfall offer for me freedom , fun, one of the most beutiful online wordls , the best combat of an MMORPG today ..
All good reasons to be my favorite game..
-----MY-TERMS-OF-USE--------------------------------------------------
$OE - eternal enemy of online gaming
-We finally WON !!!! 2011 $OE accepted that they have been fired 2005 by the playerbase and closed down ridiculous NGE !!
"There was suppression of speech and all kinds of things between disturbing and fascistic." Raph Koster (parted $OE)
If they don't review an MMO thats kicked up as much fuss as Darkfall has, we can safely say IGN aren't true gamers.
It is a good review if you are willing to look over everything that is bad and just focus on the good.
In other words, it was, as stated, a fanboy review.
The UI does not always scale with monitor size? Wow....
http://vnmedia.ign.com/screenshots/vnhub/62527895.jpg
Talk about annoying.
"I believe in God, only I spell it Nature." - Frank Lloyd Wright
AoC is still alive and growing, actually.
That's not really the point though. Aventurine didn't meet expectations because they didn't have the funds to do so. They, obviously so, fully intend to implement them in the near future. They've straight up said many times they're making this game not just for us, but for them too, as they're gamers as well. They want a real MMORPG.
i keep reading that... proof or stfu please, in regards to av didn't have the funds.
they dudnt have abeter account mangmeant i think thats pretty proof enough
never had issues with that except the ui you have to make bigger a tleas tthe webpage windows
As far as a "professional" review...
After seeing the professional reviews from this site on Warhammer last year and the high marks around the industry journals/sites, and then seeing reality of the actual game for myself, its obvious that the only difference in most cases between a pro writer and a blogger both playing any game and giving reviews is PAY. One gets paid, one doesn't. That does not mean that one knows more than the other. When professional review after review rates Warhammer so high, then you watch as it consistently loses subscriptions from 750k down to under 300k about now and almost 50 server closing later, you realize either:
A) Hundreds of thousands of people simply "didn't get it" and never saw the awesomeness that was Warhammer professional writers saw OR:
Professional reviewers don't know more than anyone else when it comes to measuring "fun".
Sure, they know technical jargon; they can tell you how many FPS you get with what rig setup, whether the anti-aliasing is good or not, what engine a company used, and loads of other useless facts and stats about the physical structure of a game.
But what they cannot tell you and what you will never know until you try it for yourself, is just how FUN any game is. Their idea of fun apparently was different than hundreds of thousands of others last year, because they sure didn't see much wrong when they submitted their reviews. I dare anyone to go back and reread some of the reviews this site, or ANY site gave on Warhammer, then gauge that against the actual PAYING customers and what they think/said.
Some of you are just haters of the game or their fans, and even if 9.9 out of 10 professional reviewers say Darkfall is worth the money and great fun for the buck, we all know you will still sit on the side not subbing, but still throwing bricks. Your argument will be just like the one given towards the Noob Comic author (the friend of Tasos) who said the game was fun, and you said "Well, of course SHE says that. She's his friend." Now bloggers all over different sites, who are actually PLAYING the game, are saying, "The game is fun; not perfect, but fun" and you say "Bleh.. I'll wait for the pros to review it. Those of you in this thread saying "I'll wait for the pros" and expecting that they will have an idea of what fun you like more than yourself, you have got to be kidding yourself.
To have us all believe that you are somehow sitting around waiting for a pro to tell you to go buy Darkfall is really, really laughable.
Who does that.. really?
"TO MICHAEL!"
A professional writer, which is likely what review writers are for reputable websites, likly have an educational background in journalism. Believe it or not, college educated people, writers or not, have A LOT of experience writing academic papers without bias, know how to be objective, and is a lot better at articulating their thoughts.
If you think gaming websites color their reviews to please a game company, you're assuming a company has bad business practices. That company wouldn't be in business for long, since readers can clearly see quality work versus half assed work. I don't know IGN well, but their name is everywhere so they must be doing something right.
I didn't read past here, because you're written proof that just anyone shouldn't be taken seriously when they write. You went on a long, non coherent rant and then expected people to take what you said to heart. That blog writer, writing his first impression probably wrote one of the best First Impressions written by an ordinary player I've ever seen, but he's still an ordinary player and you can tell with the amount of bias in his writing.
As many people have said already, this is not IGN review. It's just vault. If i'm not mistaken you do not need a journalism degree to write a review for vault. If you cannot tell his bias towards the game in the review something is wrong. Sure it's not all suckiness and the game sucks, there are good points, however the only bad point he mentioned was the UI? Seriously?