Name an MMO that has better AI than Darkfall? Most MMOs conceal how bad their AI is by making mobs "evade", or disappear, or sprint back to their spawn when they get bugged out or detect potential exploitation attempts - but this is not "good AI", it's bad AI with bandaids. All of them. Hell, even AoC and I hate that game with a passion. You know why murlocs are so hated in WoW? It's not because they make that annoying sound. Rather it's because they run straight towards the biggest clump of other murlocs once they are near death. That's pretty much what most the mobs in DF do. That said, every MMO ever released has had exploitable mobs, eg: kiting mobs to uber NPC guards who kill the mob - i've done this in WOW to kill world elites, in DAOC to solo artifacts, you name it. The "evade" and sprinting back to spawn are mechanisms used to prevent the exploitation of buggy mobs. Something that Darkfall developers forgot about. Hense why the mob exploitation is so prevailent in that game. Is it possible to exploit mobs in other games? Absolutely. Is it as widepsread as in DF? Absolutely not. The real measure of what makes good AI is how repeatable & varied mobs responses are, and how well mobs react to the players action. WOW mobs for instance are RNG-based - their actions are random. WOW bosses are precisely scripted. That's why there is little to no variation at all between mobs & bosses of the same name/type. So besides randomly taking off and running, what varied responses do mobs in DF exibit? It is done this way because good AI costs CPU cycles. A lot of them. When you sum the AI CPU cost of a few thousand active mobs in a world it ends up costing a large slice of your available CPU.
As the review guy correctly identifies, Darkfall has taken the approach of having a fewer, and some would argue, more realistic, number of mobs, with better AI. And DF is all manually targeted, so mobs have to be made to move, aim and behave semi-realistically as well. It's not easy. Just the simple fact that DF is one of the only MMOGs that have FPS-based combat with unscripted AI-controlled mobs tells you how hard it is.
I'd like to give Darkfall a try, but I'm afraid that it will turn into Vanguard the second for me. I had high hopes for that one, as it promised the world, but it ended up being an unpolished and extremely buggy piece of work that shouldn't have been released.
Considering I've hearing about how bug-ridden and exploitable Darkfall is, after all those years of development, my incentive to play it has diminished even more. If it took them that long to make what they've given us, is there any hope for their future developments doing the game justice? Will new content be polished? Will all of the current content ever be polished? So many questions I shouldn't need to ponder before picking up a game.
I think we must talk some about the Eurogamer REVIEW, and this Tentonhammer FIRST IMPRESSIONS. When we read the Eurogamers review, we could see that the person writing it had not played the game. If he would do the same thing to WoW, about ten million people would notice it. Same with DF, the ones playing noticed it. Now Tentonhammer played for the same amout of time. And you can quickly see he did actually play the game. He got the looting "wrong" thou, i guess he will learn how to use the "F" key instead : ) What Eurogamer did with his two hours ingame, noone knows.
Now this I can agree, for I got the feeling that the Eurogamer author hated the game from the get go, and probably before he even played it. I also agree that the Tentonhammer guy actually played it.
Still, the fact that 2 hours ain't enough to bash, but is more than enough to praise is what is bugging me.
IMO, its not the matter of time Eurogamer did spend in Darkfall. Its about they made a review without the whole game as IF they had played it. If they had told us they just had walked around in the noob town and tryed to kill a goblin....then giving it a 2/10 because it was boring. I would have less problem with it.
And it would be much easier to see it was not a actual review of a MMO.
Now if you could prove that EuroGamer did not really play the game, then you would of won that argument. So far, we only have Tasos word that he didn't play the game.
How does "EuroGamer spent 2 hours in-game and only did 2 quests and killed 3 goblins" means less then "Tentonhammer spent 2 hours in-game and did 7 quests and killed 15 goblins"? He played 2 hours, whether he was clever enough to "get into" the game or not, thats not the point. The point is, he spent X number of hours and he was not able to do much. If this number was 2 weeks, yeah, thats unreasonable. But 2 hours? Thats reasonable. A game that does not presents itself is not a cleverly designed system. And if someone does get entangled in it and unable to acomplish much, is that the gamers fault or the game's fault?
"I won't repeat everyone else's assessment and note that Darkfall has "potential" - it's a solid, enjoyable game if you give it half a chance and play it on its own terms. I haven't played nearly long enough to give DF any kind of objective score, but sorry Eurogamer, this isn't a 4 / 10 game."
I am sorry but the fact that he took a shot at another review in his preview, shows his complete lack of professionalism, and this gives zero credibility to anything he writes from here on.
This would be my stand even if he gave the game a 1/10 and Eurogamer gave it 9/10.
And i dont get the "play it on its own terms" bullsh*t. Should i pay a monthly fee to play a game the way the devs think it should be played? or if the devs think the game is perfectly polished and complete, then i should be satisfied with their views and have none of mine?
I am sure cowdung tastes just as delicious and enjoyable as prime rib steak, when given half a chance and eaten "on its own terms"...
"It is my opinion, that my opinions are always right"
There's a reason you can't run cigarette commercials on TV. Many people love cigarettes, but the honest to God truth is, they will kill you.
The main reason I don't want to see any positive darkfall reviews is because I believe them to be misleading, and that they will encourage people to waste their money on a terrible game like I did. Darkfall is a poisonous mess that I really, REALLY wanted to enjoy, and that disappointment burns all that much worse when I consider I paid more for it than I did for both Final Fantasy XI and World of Warcraft when they were brand new games.
A very fair review, and not only has he played most than the majority of trolls in this forum, he didnt have an axe to grind. DF should be given a shot by anyone that appreciates the influence of human nature and players rather than the static rotating spawns of such whack-a-mole games controlled by computer-generated code in jelly-bean environments like LotRO, WoW, WAR, etc.
Name an MMO that has better AI than Darkfall? Most MMOs conceal how bad their AI is by making mobs "evade", or disappear, or sprint back to their spawn when they get bugged out or detect potential exploitation attempts - but this is not "good AI", it's bad AI with bandaids.
There are PLENTY of MMOs with better AI than Darkfall, but the three that stand out are EvE, Project Entropia and Ryzom. Easily.
I mean, Ryzom and Project Entropia have MIGRATIONAL patterns, for god's sake! Those were things that Aventurine promised and yet failed to deliver, like so many other things.
Sorry if I am consistant, but the fact remains the same. You can not accurately review any MMO objectively after only 2 hours of playtime. I don't care if the end results gives the game a 2 or an 8 out of 10. If he had given the game an 8/10 after 2 hours, the trolls would have called him out on it and they would be right in doing so. I couldn't review WoW in 2 hours, let alone a sandbox game. Endgame is drastically different than what you see when you first start playing. It has taken me 3 months in Darkfall to see warhsips and warhulks in action, and I'd wager most people playing as long as I have still haven't seen them in action. Remember this guy probably got paid money to write that as well. Me and other bloggers, as well as forum posters have written far more detailed reviews for free.
Just a few things.
1. I would agree that you can not fully review every aspect of a game after only 2 hours of gameplay. On the other hand, most professional reviewers should be able to give their professional opinion of the fun/playability of that game after only 2 hours.
2. There is no evidence that Ed only played for "less than 3 hours". According to EG he played for 8-9 hours. Based on Tasos' track record of lies and Eds record of not making stuff up, I'll believe Ed until proven otherwise. I personally think 9 hours is more than enough time to review the game considering I knew I wasn't going to like it in the first hour of playing; even though I ended up putting more than 30 hours into the game. Same thing was true for WoW. Only it ended up being more like 100+ hours total, but my opinion of the game never changed from the first day I played.
Core gameplay mechanics (the things that make the game fun) do not change the longer you play.
3. I agree that if Ed gave the game a high score and then Tasos came out and said "Don't believe the 8/10 score, he played less than 3 hours and was mostly getting ganked and asking for help during that time!"
Then yes, I think the Darkfall critics would have a problem with the EG review. But, lets be honest, if Ed had given the game a good score Tasos would never have made up... I mean... made public the logs trying to discredit the review. So while us critics would have not agreed with the review we would have rebutted it on the points brought up in the review, not simply because he "played less than 3 hours".
The Darkfall community would never have been given that information if the review was decent.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
Originally posted by Dameonk Just a few things. 1. I would agree that you can not fully review every aspect of a game after only 2 hours of gameplay. On the other hand, most professional reviewers should be able to give their professional opinion of the fun/playability of that game after only 2 hours. 2. There is no evidence that Ed only played for "less than 3 hours". According to EG he played for 8-9 hours. Based on Tasos' track record of lies and Eds record of not making stuff up, I'll believe Ed until proven otherwise. I personally think 9 hours is more than enough time to review the game considering I knew I wasn't going to like it in the first hour of playing; even though I ended up putting more than 30 hours into the game. Same thing was true for WoW. Only it ended up being more like 100+ hours total, but my opinion of the game never changed from the first day I played. Core gameplay mechanics (the things that make the game fun) do not change the longer you play. 3. I agree that if Ed gave the game a high score and then Tasos came out and said "Don't believe the 8/10 score, he played less than 3 hours and was mostly getting ganked and asking for help during that time!" Then yes, I think the Darkfall critics would have a problem with the EG review. But, lets be honest, if Ed had given the game a good score Tasos would never have made up... I mean... made public the logs trying to discredit the review. So while us critics would have not agreed with the review we would have rebutted it on the points brought up in the review, not simply because he "played less than 3 hours". The Darkfall community would never have been given that information if the review was decent.
Seems like this review was initiated by another review instead of a review being initiated by a game. So in that sense, it seems more bias than the first. Word of advice to such a reviewer, dont post about another review inside your review. It only shows that you have some alterior motive.
QFT. I never saw a reviewer reference another review before in any type of review, whether it was a movie, book, or game review. That TTH first impression is as bad as Zitron's review.
Smart fanbois and trolls alike will more than likely agree on one thing: don't believe shit from TTH.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
I haven't played Darkfall. I'm one of those guys that will not play it till it launches a free trial, but is it too much to ask to get an actual review of a game? All I want is solid reliable information till a free trial comes out and I can make my own decision on if it's worth the money. All I keep getting are these shitty assed "reviews" of companies that are supposed to be a well known source of information barely playing it and telling everyone about it. I don't want a first impression, I don't want some guy spending hardly any time in the game. I need a reviewer who will play their entire 31 days free time, and THEN let me know how they felt about its entirity. Day one through thirtyfirst, not hour one, and hour two. These are just my own particular prefences, before anyone starts posting things like the world doesn't revolve around you or whatever. I've just gotten tired of reading about all these "reviews" when I don't see an actual honestly written review. I hope someone soon, understands this, and actually gives Darkfall its full month before criticing it. I'm not a fan boy, and I'm not a hater, I just refuse to take either side until I can formulate my own judgment, and I can't do that without full honest judgment on a reviewers part, because Darkfall hasn't released a free trial. So someone that is a writer for whatever well known gaming magizine or orginization, PLEASE just play your full time, and THEN let me know what the hell is up, because all of this is just crap...
Edit: I really don't care what orginization or how well known the reviewer is, if he plays his full trial, and sounds like he's not just nitpicking or flaming the game, I could probably take that review seriously. Here's to hoping that someone is able to do that soon. In all honesty though, I'll probably be playing Mortal anyway. *shrugs*
It is like asking a reviewer to endure the full course of 10 year detention before writing a review about the life of an inmate. Come on, by the time he is done with the term he already lost sanity and can only walk like a zombie.
How much will you pay for a normal person to endure 31 days of inhumane treatment in DF? The pay from a review will definitely not compensate for 1% of the horror beyond speech experience in DF. Only the fanatic fanboys will log on and off (afk macro) during the 31 days. If you need 31days "online, even tho afk" as qualifier for a game review, read the fanboy praises. You already know what they are saying.
No it's not. You can't compare 31 days of playing a video game to 10 years of corporal punishment. Those two things can't even logically go together in any way. It's not inhumane treatmeant to go his 31 days of trial. Nor would I pay anything for him to do it. It's his job. His employer pays him to "endure inhumane treatment in DF". He's there to make a review about the game. He has to go through the games features. ALL OF THEM. And no one can do that in 2 hours. No one. I never said I needed 31 days online eventhough afk as a qualifier for a game review, so please don't put those words into my mouth. If a reviewer does this, they're simply continuing the trend of halfassing their job. I want a reviewer who takes his job seriously, to provide an actual review. Someone who has played more than a day or even a week. Someone who without a doubt took to that game with an objective mind, did their job to the best of their ability and provided sound sources of information for people like me to enlist judgment on if they want to spend my money on it. I probably do not need them to go that entire 31 days no, but seriously even half that time is over 10 times the amount of time any of these other so called reviewers have put in. This really doesn't have to do with Darkfall for me, just the principal of if you're going to write a review, take the time and honest effort to do so. Don't play the game for 2-9 hours(depending on who you believe, either way, not enough time)and then expect me to believe any of what you say. Game reviewers for console games, play the 40 hour on average gameplay of rpg's. How hard is it to do at least THAT for an mmo. That's almost 2 days worth of playing and still way ahead of EG and TTH's "first impressions".
No he does not. He is asked to find out how good the game is. If he has formulated an opinion that his boss agrees he can publish the findings.
Like a physician, if it took him 5 seconds to figure out you need a surgery, his job is done and you are shipped to the operation theatre. You walk in with a deep cut in your head, and soaking in blood. Do you think he need a 10 hour examination of each and every hair to decide what to do next?
DF stinks from a million miles, it took 2 hours to know that it is bleeding to death. Should the reviewer report it, or suffer another 30days 22hours before filling in exactly the same results? 2/10 or 4/10. That is the verdict. That is what the chief editor agrees.
You do not have to agree. That is the beauty of freedom. He has the freedom to score 2/10, 4/10. Each of us enjoys our own freedom to judge. The majority has caste the vote, with our feet. You might feel you need 3 months before you understand DF, I don't need to play to realise its crap, each reviewer did what he feels he need, not what you need. B/c we are not you.
Originally posted by Orthedos No he does not. He is asked to find out how good the game is. If he has formulated an opinion that his boss agrees he can publish the findings. Like a physician, if it took him 5 seconds to figure out you need a surgery, his job is done and you are shipped to the operation theatre. You walk in with a deep cut in your head, and soaking in blood. Do you think he need a 10 hour examination of each and every hair to decide what to do next? DF stinks from a million miles, it took 2 hours to know that it is bleeding to death. Should the reviewer report it, or suffer another 30days 22hours before filling in exactly the same results? 2/10 or 4/10. That is the verdict. That is what the chief editor agrees. You do not have to agree. That is the beauty of freedom. He has the freedom to score 2/10, 4/10. Each of us enjoys our own freedom to judge. The majority has caste the vote, with our feet. You might feel you need 3 months before you understand DF, I don't need to play to realise its crap, each reviewer did what he feels he need, not what you need. B/c we are not you.
Wow you guys feel the need to bash a game so bad that you are resorting to prison vs surgeon comparisons lol. Some of these conversations truly are epic.
Here's something I don't understand when some of you fanboyZ talk about that eurogamer review and say he didn't spend enough time in the game to be fair..... Did he imply in the review that he spent a lot of time in the game? Did he imply in the review that he spent weeks or months thoroughly testing and understanding hte game? Hell fucking no he didn't do that, he said exactly what he did, he played the game for a bit, saw that it was SHIT, and moved on to better games.
Whether he played for two hours or ten hours is a moot point, and makes no rational difference to the discussion at all!
maybe it was his opinion that he gave it that score, just like tentop gave theirs, a review is a opinion, you can not base 1 reviewer's opinion on a game. You need to add them all out and see if the game is for you, the game is for me, but not for that eurogamer reviewer, its that simple.
Add up opinion? Impressive. An opinion is a simple number with equal weight that can be added up? Impressive knowledge you have there. Go talk Statistics 101.
You can refer to each review/preview/first impression and make your own pick. Each and everyone of us can do so in our own format, but there is not yet a mathematical forumula to add up a bunch of opinion, in a manner no open to disputes.
Mr A says "Good", Mr B says "Not bad", Mr C says "Hmm interesting". So by adding up the strings, you got "GoodNot BadHmm interesting" Ah I got the final score. 9/10.
Here's something I don't understand when some of you fanboyZ talk about that eurogamer review and say he didn't spend enough time in the game to be fair..... Did he imply in the review that he spent a lot of time in the game? Did he imply in the review that he spent weeks or months thoroughly testing and understanding hte game? Hell fucking no he didn't do that, he said exactly what he did, he played the game for a bit, saw that it was SHIT, and moved on to better games.
Whether he played for two hours or ten hours is a moot point, and makes no rational difference to the discussion at all!
When writing a review friend it is better to spend a decent amount of time playing the game, that way the people who are sitting on the fence and want to hear more have a chance to hear from somone who gave it a good go. thats what a review is for isnt it?
I wrote an opinion on the game myself, but i stated that it was just that! an opinion. that way i am in no way reviewing the game and it shouldnt be taken as one. But if you are reviewing a game and putting it out there its best to be as honest as possible and try as much content as possible imagine reviewing a ferarri and giveing it 1 out of 10 because you didnt like red! so you never even sat in the car let alone drive it.
No, you are missing the point. The eurogamer review was very clear that the guy did not spend a lot of time in the game. He did not try to imply otherwise. He tried the game out, his initial impression was that it was TOTAL SHITE, and he didn't bother with it anymore after that. Whether it was two hours or ten hours doesn't reall matter as he was not claiming the review was based on extensive play of the game, in fact he specifically states in the review that he DID NOT extensively play the game. The whole, "he only played two hours" is just a straw man argument from Tasos, even if it was true how does it change the nature of the review in any way at all? The reviewer did not play the game extensively, he specifically says he did not play the game extensively, so if your argument is he did not play the game extensively you are only agreeing with what the eurogamer reviewer already said in his article.
Incidentally, I don't have to drive a Yugo all day to see it is a piece of shit, I just see it there in the lot and it is easy to tell the build quality is poor. If I take it for a test drive and it runs like a pile of cow flop oozing across the ground then what do you want me to take it to the autobahn or can I just write in the magazine that it is a shit already? LOL.
God the intelligence of some people eh ... if a reviewer cant be bothered to play a game then he should'nt be Fucking reviewing it at all should he now ?
Come on now Superpoo its not fucking rocket science is it ...
A reviewer does not need to bother play it, he just need to play enough to formulate his opinion. You might need 6 years to know DF stinks, he does not. That makes him the reviewer not you. That is why he is hire and got paid, while you have to pay and play. Its your own decision to agree with his review or not, that does not change the fact that he does his job, his employer agrees with it, and its done. He got paid, job done period.
The duration YOU need to formulate an opinion does not apply to others. It would take you 20 years to figure out how to sing a song, so no one can sing a song till they have been trying for 20 years? Interesting.
Originally posted by Orthedos No he does not. He is asked to find out how good the game is. If he has formulated an opinion that his boss agrees he can publish the findings. Like a physician, if it took him 5 seconds to figure out you need a surgery, his job is done and you are shipped to the operation theatre. You walk in with a deep cut in your head, and soaking in blood. Do you think he need a 10 hour examination of each and every hair to decide what to do next? DF stinks from a million miles, it took 2 hours to know that it is bleeding to death. Should the reviewer report it, or suffer another 30days 22hours before filling in exactly the same results? 2/10 or 4/10. That is the verdict. That is what the chief editor agrees. You do not have to agree. That is the beauty of freedom. He has the freedom to score 2/10, 4/10. Each of us enjoys our own freedom to judge. The majority has caste the vote, with our feet. You might feel you need 3 months before you understand DF, I don't need to play to realise its crap, each reviewer did what he feels he need, not what you need. B/c we are not you.
Wow you guys feel the need to bash a game so bad that you are resorting to prison vs surgeon comparisons lol. Some of these conversations truly are epic.
Here's something I don't understand when some of you fanboyZ talk about that eurogamer review and say he didn't spend enough time in the game to be fair..... Did he imply in the review that he spent a lot of time in the game? Did he imply in the review that he spent weeks or months thoroughly testing and understanding hte game? Hell fucking no he didn't do that, he said exactly what he did, he played the game for a bit, saw that it was SHIT, and moved on to better games.
Whether he played for two hours or ten hours is a moot point, and makes no rational difference to the discussion at all!
When writing a review friend it is better to spend a decent amount of time playing the game, that way the people who are sitting on the fence and want to hear more have a chance to hear from somone who gave it a good go. thats what a review is for isnt it?
I wrote an opinion on the game myself, but i stated that it was just that! an opinion. that way i am in no way reviewing the game and it shouldnt be taken as one. But if you are reviewing a game and putting it out there its best to be as honest as possible and try as much content as possible imagine reviewing a ferarri and giveing it 1 out of 10 because you didnt like red! so you never even sat in the car let alone drive it.
No, you are missing the point. The eurogamer review was very clear that the guy did not spend a lot of time in the game. He did not try to imply otherwise. He tried the game out, his initial impression was that it was TOTAL SHITE, and he didn't bother with it anymore after that. Whether it was two hours or ten hours doesn't reall matter as he was not claiming the review was based on extensive play of the game, in fact he specifically states in the review that he DID NOT extensively play the game. The whole, "he only played two hours" is just a straw man argument from Tasos, even if it was true how does it change the nature of the review in any way at all? The reviewer did not play the game extensively, he specifically says he did not play the game extensively, so if your argument is he did not play the game extensively you are only agreeing with what the eurogamer reviewer already said in his article.
Incidentally, I don't have to drive a Yugo all day to see it is a piece of shit, I just see it there in the lot and it is easy to tell the build quality is poor. If I take it for a test drive and it runs like a pile of cow flop oozing across the ground then what do you want me to take it to the autobahn or can I just write in the magazine that it is a shit already? LOL.
God the intelligence of some people eh ... if a reviewer cant be bothered to play a game then he should'nt be Fucking reviewing it at all should he now ?
Come on now Superpoo its not fucking rocket science is it ...
A reviewer does not need to bother play it, he just need to play enough to formulate his opinion. You might need 6 years to know DF stinks, he does not. That makes him the reviewer not you. That is why he is hire and got paid, while you have to pay and play. Its your own decision to agree with his review or not, that does not change the fact that he does his job, his employer agrees with it, and its done. He got paid, job done period.
The duration YOU need to formulate an opinion does not apply to others. It would take you 20 years to figure out how to sing a song, so no one can sing a song till they have been trying for 20 years? Interesting.
sounds like you really believe in what you're saying friend but i think general consesus would be not to trust any reviewer that has only spent a minimum time reviewing anything.....including this first small review! and as a reviewer its your responsibility to provide a honest subjective report, which you can only do if you have tried the content!
Dont forget friend a review is different to just making up you're own mind on a game. it's there to provide others with information to help them decide! make you're own mind up within 2 minutes if you like, i do on lots of things...but i sure dont think that makes me qualifed to help others decide. If you would follow that type of review then thats up to you....me? i would rather look into a more informed review.
Remember that i also said i wouldn't follow a good review that played for a small limited time either before you start
The difference is when Eurogamer plays for 2 hours, they write a review. When these guy play for 2 hours, they rightly call it a first impression. Eurogamer is supposed to be a professional publication, and spending 2 hours on any game, let alone an MMO to write a review is shameful no matter what the title is.
This assumes we believe taco. Also, it does not take a bioware RPG worth of time to review a MMO. The first 30 are enough for anyone to know if the game is competently made, and hour after that they will know if its worth continuing. The first 15 however, are the most important.
"It is not the responsibility of the player to FIND the fun, its the responsibility of the game to show it to them"
If you can not, or will not under stand the above, i have nothing else but pity for you. The darkfall developers do not understand this, and that's why they continually fail.
A agree with the quoted statement. I think it's always the responsibility of the develloper to make the game fun, never the responsiblity of the player.
You don't put features in games that dont' work, and then blame their failure on the players inability to follow the rules, or follow instructions, or play the game "like you are supposed to". Players have never and will never do that. They will do whatever they can in a game, so knowing that you must design for it.
The difference is when Eurogamer plays for 2 hours, they write a review. When these guy play for 2 hours, they rightly call it a first impression. Eurogamer is supposed to be a professional publication, and spending 2 hours on any game, let alone an MMO to write a review is shameful no matter what the title is.
This assumes we believe taco. Also, it does not take a bioware RPG worth of time to review a MMO. The first 30 are enough for anyone to know if the game is competently made, and hour after that they will know if its worth continuing. The first 15 however, are the most important.
"It is not the responsibility of the player to FIND the fun, its the responsibility of the game to show it to them"
If you can not, or will not under stand the above, i have nothing else but pity for you. The darkfall developers do not understand this, and that's why they continually fail.
A agree with the quoted statement. I think it's always the responsibility of the develloper to make the game fun, never the responsiblity of the player.
You don't put features in games that dont' work, and then blame their failure on the players inability to follow the rules, or follow instructions, or play the game "like you are supposed to". Players have never and will never do that. They will do whatever they can in a game, so knowing that you must design for it.
Sorry i missed the part where Aventurine blamed the players for not playing the game like i am supposed to? which makes the whole argument worthless. As far as i have read, aventurine seem to be admitting thier game is not feature complete and seem to be doing thier best to address this. Patches are coming regulary and seem to be making a difference. They also seem to listening to the players too, which is a MMO first as far as i'm concerned.
People still seem to be not seeing the difference between a simple " first impression" and a published " review"!
A first impression is simply someone describing thier "first impressions" as long as they make that clear, which they did then it is the fault of people who take it any other way!
A published review is a meant to be a means for people to take a look at and use that review as means of deciding whether to give it a try or not. thus needing informed and as detailed as possible information to help them. Thats what magazines, be them online or not are for..to provide information.
The only real hypocrisy would be in calling it a "review", which the author doesn't do. He calls it "first impressions." That much is evident if one clicks on the link and reads the article. The only people calling it a "review" are here in this thread, e.g. the OP in his title. The word "review" can have different meanings to different people and in different contexts, but it's clear that, while the author does give some impressions and his opinion based on what he experienced, it was not intended as what is accepted in the industry as a "review." You obviously want to believe Ed Zitron, which is fine, and is probably what many people here will choose to do. However, why you're so up in arms about the terminology that you have to attack daarco personally when he is expressing his opinion simply because it does not jibe with yours is a little hard to understand.
Read my post again, or stop misrepresenting it, and stop playing semantics. I make my point of where the hypocrisy is quite clear.
Spare the attempts at telling me what I "obviously want to believe" and putting words in my mouth. I'm not supporting any score... I'm pointing out the hypocrisy displayed (constantly) by DF fans, nothing more.
"First impression" or no, the TTH writer says, unequivocally, "sorry EG, it's not a 4/10 game". He says this after 2 hours of playing. That's a definitive statement. He doesn't say "so far it doesn't seem deserving of a 4/10". No. They say, without exception or qualification, "it's not a 4/10 game", and does so after only 2 hours played. If 2 hours is not enough time played to say it deserves a 4/10 or 2/10, then it's not enough time to say it doesn't.
Again, it's hypocrisy. Period.
Stop trying to spin it.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
The difference is when Eurogamer plays for 2 hours, they write a review. When these guy play for 2 hours, they rightly call it a first impression. Eurogamer is supposed to be a professional publication, and spending 2 hours on any game, let alone an MMO to write a review is shameful no matter what the title is.
Should someone writing a "first impression" article be making unquivocal, definitive statements like they did? No, they shouldn't. Even according to Tasos and various fans, 2 hours is not enough time to formulate a valid opinion.
If they haven't played enough to give a thorough review, then they haven't played enough to voice definitive opinions, such as whether or not it's deserving of a final score from another review. Yet, that's what the TTH writer did... he voiced a definitive opinion based on 2 hours of gameplay.
That's the point of contention here. Spin it any way you want, it still comes out BS.
Yet, as usual, the fans accept it as "okay" and rally around it, in all their spinning glory - because it's complimentary to their game, of course.
The DF hypocrisy train just keeps on a-rollin'.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
The difference is when Eurogamer plays for 2 hours, they write a review. When these guy play for 2 hours, they rightly call it a first impression. Eurogamer is supposed to be a professional publication, and spending 2 hours on any game, let alone an MMO to write a review is shameful no matter what the title is.
Should someone writing a "first impression" article be making unquivocal, definitive statements like they did? No, they shouldn't. Besides, they haven't played long enough to, right?
If they haven't played enough to give a thorough review, then they haven't played enough to voice definitive opinions, such as whether or not it's deserving of a final score from another review.
That's the point of contention here. Spin it any way you want, it still comes out BS.
Yet, as usual, the fans accept it as "okay" and rally around it, in all their spinning glory - because it's complimentary to their game, of course.
The DF hypocrisy train just keeps on a-rollin'.
I'm a Darkfall fan and i dont think 2 hours is enough to give a review either way, good or bad! i also dont think 2 hours ingame is enough to decide if another review score is deserving or not. i agree with you on those points friend, do you agree with my view?
Though i dont agree with your other point friend. 2 hours is not enough to review a game, but 2 seconds is enough to form an opinion, Thats our right as human beings, we have the right to form an opinion on anything at anytime. your opinion is something that no one can take away from you friend, others may influence it but it is still your choice on how you take that influence.....just remember the golden rule! it is and always will be " just your opinion"
Is it just me or isn't it a bit strange for a gaming review in one publication to reference the review score given by a different publication? ......I wonder how much tAsus had to pay for this "review"? lol It's hard to believe this kind of "damage control" service is available for free!
I thought it was completely uncalled for as well. It makes me feel like the person writing the article wanted to prove Eurogamer wrong no matter what and as such, I cannot take that TTH article at face value. Not that I take anything written on that website seriously anyway.
Pretty much all that needs to be said about this thread. I've read plenty of "Previews", "First Impressions", and "Reviews". Not once do I ever recall one of them, referencing another publications writing in such a manner.
PS: Paragus I've noticed you saying the same thing alot lately. The funny thing is do you honestly believe any of the DF fans would have complained, if EG had given the game 8/10 with only 2 hours played? Nope, and sadly even though I respect your writing talent. I'd bet you wouldn't have said anything about it either. The only reason DF fans complained about the EG review was because it didn't paint the game in a good light.
He could have played for a month straight 8-10 hours a day. Gave it a 8/10, still had inaccuracies in the review. Yet you would still have DF fans praising EG and Ed for it. Simply because it's what they wanted to hear. That is what annoys me the most about 90% of the DF fans that pass through here. Everything is right as rain as long as you all are hearing and seeing what you want. As soon as reality hits though you all start flip flopping.
Someone mentions DF pop dying typical reply: "It's a niche game." or "Small Communities are better"
Press clipping about DF NA server "The population is growing." or "People are just beating down the door to play DF"
Someone mentions DF limited release: "They are doing that to keep the server from being crowded"
Tasos post about store selling out in minutes "DF is selling like Hotcakes everyone wants to play it."
Yep. The typical rabid DF fan duplicity in all its glory.
Let's not forget how they were crying victoriously from the rooftops about how DF was the most hyped game on mmorpg.com prior to "launch", and how that was a clear sign the game would be a success...
... until the hype turned out to be largely negative (due to Tasos/AV's rolling train-wreck style of launching/managing the game).. Then they blamed all the game's problems on "too much hype".
DF fans will spin all sides of a situation to their benefit without thinking twice about it or even stopping to wonder if what they're saying now contradicts what they said a day ago. And that's when they even bother to remember things that happen a day or more earlier. DF fans tend to view history through a variety of "ignorance filters", blocking out things that have been said or done, or otherwise revising it to look favorable to DF. Or, they just ignore history completely. That's part of the enjoyment of reading these threads... seeing how many times a single DF fan will change or spin their opinion about the same topic to keep it favorable toward DF.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Comments
I'd like to give Darkfall a try, but I'm afraid that it will turn into Vanguard the second for me. I had high hopes for that one, as it promised the world, but it ended up being an unpolished and extremely buggy piece of work that shouldn't have been released.
Considering I've hearing about how bug-ridden and exploitable Darkfall is, after all those years of development, my incentive to play it has diminished even more. If it took them that long to make what they've given us, is there any hope for their future developments doing the game justice? Will new content be polished? Will all of the current content ever be polished? So many questions I shouldn't need to ponder before picking up a game.
Now this I can agree, for I got the feeling that the Eurogamer author hated the game from the get go, and probably before he even played it. I also agree that the Tentonhammer guy actually played it.
Still, the fact that 2 hours ain't enough to bash, but is more than enough to praise is what is bugging me.
IMO, its not the matter of time Eurogamer did spend in Darkfall. Its about they made a review without the whole game as IF they had played it. If they had told us they just had walked around in the noob town and tryed to kill a goblin....then giving it a 2/10 because it was boring. I would have less problem with it.
And it would be much easier to see it was not a actual review of a MMO.
Now if you could prove that EuroGamer did not really play the game, then you would of won that argument. So far, we only have Tasos word that he didn't play the game.
How does "EuroGamer spent 2 hours in-game and only did 2 quests and killed 3 goblins" means less then "Tentonhammer spent 2 hours in-game and did 7 quests and killed 15 goblins"? He played 2 hours, whether he was clever enough to "get into" the game or not, thats not the point. The point is, he spent X number of hours and he was not able to do much. If this number was 2 weeks, yeah, thats unreasonable. But 2 hours? Thats reasonable. A game that does not presents itself is not a cleverly designed system. And if someone does get entangled in it and unable to acomplish much, is that the gamers fault or the game's fault?
I am the type of player where I like to do everything and anything from time to time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor - pre-WW2 genocide.
I am sorry but the fact that he took a shot at another review in his preview, shows his complete lack of professionalism, and this gives zero credibility to anything he writes from here on.
This would be my stand even if he gave the game a 1/10 and Eurogamer gave it 9/10.
And i dont get the "play it on its own terms" bullsh*t. Should i pay a monthly fee to play a game the way the devs think it should be played? or if the devs think the game is perfectly polished and complete, then i should be satisfied with their views and have none of mine?
I am sure cowdung tastes just as delicious and enjoyable as prime rib steak, when given half a chance and eaten "on its own terms"...
"It is my opinion, that my opinions are always right"
forums.tentonhammer.com/showthread.php
did anyone even bother to read the thread that has this overview.
Once again the spin is in the air. lets read the whole thread shall we?
as you see there is the Poster of the overview putting up a link to said overview. he then ask the ten ton hammer community to pitch in on their take.
wow look at all the posts it got. Lots and lots of negativity.
Watching Fanbois drop their soap in a prison full of desperate men.
There's a reason you can't run cigarette commercials on TV. Many people love cigarettes, but the honest to God truth is, they will kill you.
The main reason I don't want to see any positive darkfall reviews is because I believe them to be misleading, and that they will encourage people to waste their money on a terrible game like I did. Darkfall is a poisonous mess that I really, REALLY wanted to enjoy, and that disappointment burns all that much worse when I consider I paid more for it than I did for both Final Fantasy XI and World of Warcraft when they were brand new games.
I would be just as vocal about any other scam.
A very fair review, and not only has he played most than the majority of trolls in this forum, he didnt have an axe to grind. DF should be given a shot by anyone that appreciates the influence of human nature and players rather than the static rotating spawns of such whack-a-mole games controlled by computer-generated code in jelly-bean environments like LotRO, WoW, WAR, etc.
Eurogamer spent 2 hours on an account and said the game was bad, fanbois cry wolf.
TenTonHammer spent 2 hours on an account and said the game was good, fanbois agree.
I DRINK IN THE HYPOCRISY.
He who keeps his cool best wins.
There are PLENTY of MMOs with better AI than Darkfall, but the three that stand out are EvE, Project Entropia and Ryzom. Easily.
I mean, Ryzom and Project Entropia have MIGRATIONAL patterns, for god's sake! Those were things that Aventurine promised and yet failed to deliver, like so many other things.
Just a few things.
1. I would agree that you can not fully review every aspect of a game after only 2 hours of gameplay. On the other hand, most professional reviewers should be able to give their professional opinion of the fun/playability of that game after only 2 hours.
2. There is no evidence that Ed only played for "less than 3 hours". According to EG he played for 8-9 hours. Based on Tasos' track record of lies and Eds record of not making stuff up, I'll believe Ed until proven otherwise. I personally think 9 hours is more than enough time to review the game considering I knew I wasn't going to like it in the first hour of playing; even though I ended up putting more than 30 hours into the game. Same thing was true for WoW. Only it ended up being more like 100+ hours total, but my opinion of the game never changed from the first day I played.
Core gameplay mechanics (the things that make the game fun) do not change the longer you play.
3. I agree that if Ed gave the game a high score and then Tasos came out and said "Don't believe the 8/10 score, he played less than 3 hours and was mostly getting ganked and asking for help during that time!"
Then yes, I think the Darkfall critics would have a problem with the EG review. But, lets be honest, if Ed had given the game a good score Tasos would never have made up... I mean... made public the logs trying to discredit the review. So while us critics would have not agreed with the review we would have rebutted it on the points brought up in the review, not simply because he "played less than 3 hours".
The Darkfall community would never have been given that information if the review was decent.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
Ohhh I love conspiracies!!!
QFT. I never saw a reviewer reference another review before in any type of review, whether it was a movie, book, or game review. That TTH first impression is as bad as Zitron's review.
Smart fanbois and trolls alike will more than likely agree on one thing: don't believe shit from TTH.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
It is like asking a reviewer to endure the full course of 10 year detention before writing a review about the life of an inmate. Come on, by the time he is done with the term he already lost sanity and can only walk like a zombie.
How much will you pay for a normal person to endure 31 days of inhumane treatment in DF? The pay from a review will definitely not compensate for 1% of the horror beyond speech experience in DF. Only the fanatic fanboys will log on and off (afk macro) during the 31 days. If you need 31days "online, even tho afk" as qualifier for a game review, read the fanboy praises. You already know what they are saying.
No it's not. You can't compare 31 days of playing a video game to 10 years of corporal punishment. Those two things can't even logically go together in any way. It's not inhumane treatmeant to go his 31 days of trial. Nor would I pay anything for him to do it. It's his job. His employer pays him to "endure inhumane treatment in DF". He's there to make a review about the game. He has to go through the games features. ALL OF THEM. And no one can do that in 2 hours. No one. I never said I needed 31 days online eventhough afk as a qualifier for a game review, so please don't put those words into my mouth. If a reviewer does this, they're simply continuing the trend of halfassing their job. I want a reviewer who takes his job seriously, to provide an actual review. Someone who has played more than a day or even a week. Someone who without a doubt took to that game with an objective mind, did their job to the best of their ability and provided sound sources of information for people like me to enlist judgment on if they want to spend my money on it. I probably do not need them to go that entire 31 days no, but seriously even half that time is over 10 times the amount of time any of these other so called reviewers have put in. This really doesn't have to do with Darkfall for me, just the principal of if you're going to write a review, take the time and honest effort to do so. Don't play the game for 2-9 hours(depending on who you believe, either way, not enough time)and then expect me to believe any of what you say. Game reviewers for console games, play the 40 hour on average gameplay of rpg's. How hard is it to do at least THAT for an mmo. That's almost 2 days worth of playing and still way ahead of EG and TTH's "first impressions".
No he does not. He is asked to find out how good the game is. If he has formulated an opinion that his boss agrees he can publish the findings.
Like a physician, if it took him 5 seconds to figure out you need a surgery, his job is done and you are shipped to the operation theatre. You walk in with a deep cut in your head, and soaking in blood. Do you think he need a 10 hour examination of each and every hair to decide what to do next?
DF stinks from a million miles, it took 2 hours to know that it is bleeding to death. Should the reviewer report it, or suffer another 30days 22hours before filling in exactly the same results? 2/10 or 4/10. That is the verdict. That is what the chief editor agrees.
You do not have to agree. That is the beauty of freedom. He has the freedom to score 2/10, 4/10. Each of us enjoys our own freedom to judge. The majority has caste the vote, with our feet. You might feel you need 3 months before you understand DF, I don't need to play to realise its crap, each reviewer did what he feels he need, not what you need. B/c we are not you.
Wow you guys feel the need to bash a game so bad that you are resorting to prison vs surgeon comparisons lol. Some of these conversations truly are epic.
maybe it was his opinion that he gave it that score, just like tentop gave theirs, a review is a opinion, you can not base 1 reviewer's opinion on a game. You need to add them all out and see if the game is for you, the game is for me, but not for that eurogamer reviewer, its that simple.
Add up opinion? Impressive. An opinion is a simple number with equal weight that can be added up? Impressive knowledge you have there. Go talk Statistics 101.
You can refer to each review/preview/first impression and make your own pick. Each and everyone of us can do so in our own format, but there is not yet a mathematical forumula to add up a bunch of opinion, in a manner no open to disputes.
Mr A says "Good", Mr B says "Not bad", Mr C says "Hmm interesting". So by adding up the strings, you got "GoodNot BadHmm interesting" Ah I got the final score. 9/10.
When writing a review friend it is better to spend a decent amount of time playing the game, that way the people who are sitting on the fence and want to hear more have a chance to hear from somone who gave it a good go. thats what a review is for isnt it?
I wrote an opinion on the game myself, but i stated that it was just that! an opinion. that way i am in no way reviewing the game and it shouldnt be taken as one. But if you are reviewing a game and putting it out there its best to be as honest as possible and try as much content as possible
imagine reviewing a ferarri and giveing it 1 out of 10 because you didnt like red! so you never even sat in the car let alone drive it.
No, you are missing the point. The eurogamer review was very clear that the guy did not spend a lot of time in the game. He did not try to imply otherwise. He tried the game out, his initial impression was that it was TOTAL SHITE, and he didn't bother with it anymore after that. Whether it was two hours or ten hours doesn't reall matter as he was not claiming the review was based on extensive play of the game, in fact he specifically states in the review that he DID NOT extensively play the game. The whole, "he only played two hours" is just a straw man argument from Tasos, even if it was true how does it change the nature of the review in any way at all? The reviewer did not play the game extensively, he specifically says he did not play the game extensively, so if your argument is he did not play the game extensively you are only agreeing with what the eurogamer reviewer already said in his article.
Incidentally, I don't have to drive a Yugo all day to see it is a piece of shit, I just see it there in the lot and it is easy to tell the build quality is poor. If I take it for a test drive and it runs like a pile of cow flop oozing across the ground then what do you want me to take it to the autobahn or can I just write in the magazine that it is a shit already? LOL.
God the intelligence of some people eh ... if a reviewer cant be bothered to play a game then he should'nt be Fucking reviewing it at all should he now ?
Come on now Superpoo its not fucking rocket science is it ...
A reviewer does not need to bother play it, he just need to play enough to formulate his opinion. You might need 6 years to know DF stinks, he does not. That makes him the reviewer not you. That is why he is hire and got paid, while you have to pay and play. Its your own decision to agree with his review or not, that does not change the fact that he does his job, his employer agrees with it, and its done. He got paid, job done period.
The duration YOU need to formulate an opinion does not apply to others. It would take you 20 years to figure out how to sing a song, so no one can sing a song till they have been trying for 20 years? Interesting.
Wow you guys feel the need to bash a game so bad that you are resorting to prison vs surgeon comparisons lol. Some of these conversations truly are epic.
And your point is? Derailing?
When writing a review friend it is better to spend a decent amount of time playing the game, that way the people who are sitting on the fence and want to hear more have a chance to hear from somone who gave it a good go. thats what a review is for isnt it?
I wrote an opinion on the game myself, but i stated that it was just that! an opinion. that way i am in no way reviewing the game and it shouldnt be taken as one. But if you are reviewing a game and putting it out there its best to be as honest as possible and try as much content as possible
imagine reviewing a ferarri and giveing it 1 out of 10 because you didnt like red! so you never even sat in the car let alone drive it.
No, you are missing the point. The eurogamer review was very clear that the guy did not spend a lot of time in the game. He did not try to imply otherwise. He tried the game out, his initial impression was that it was TOTAL SHITE, and he didn't bother with it anymore after that. Whether it was two hours or ten hours doesn't reall matter as he was not claiming the review was based on extensive play of the game, in fact he specifically states in the review that he DID NOT extensively play the game. The whole, "he only played two hours" is just a straw man argument from Tasos, even if it was true how does it change the nature of the review in any way at all? The reviewer did not play the game extensively, he specifically says he did not play the game extensively, so if your argument is he did not play the game extensively you are only agreeing with what the eurogamer reviewer already said in his article.
Incidentally, I don't have to drive a Yugo all day to see it is a piece of shit, I just see it there in the lot and it is easy to tell the build quality is poor. If I take it for a test drive and it runs like a pile of cow flop oozing across the ground then what do you want me to take it to the autobahn or can I just write in the magazine that it is a shit already? LOL.
God the intelligence of some people eh ... if a reviewer cant be bothered to play a game then he should'nt be Fucking reviewing it at all should he now ?
Come on now Superpoo its not fucking rocket science is it ...
A reviewer does not need to bother play it, he just need to play enough to formulate his opinion. You might need 6 years to know DF stinks, he does not. That makes him the reviewer not you. That is why he is hire and got paid, while you have to pay and play. Its your own decision to agree with his review or not, that does not change the fact that he does his job, his employer agrees with it, and its done. He got paid, job done period.
The duration YOU need to formulate an opinion does not apply to others. It would take you 20 years to figure out how to sing a song, so no one can sing a song till they have been trying for 20 years? Interesting.
sounds like you really believe in what you're saying friend but i think general consesus would be not to trust any reviewer that has only spent a minimum time reviewing anything.....including this first small review! and as a reviewer its your responsibility to provide a honest subjective report, which you can only do if you have tried the content!
Dont forget friend a review is different to just making up you're own mind on a game. it's there to provide others with information to help them decide! make you're own mind up within 2 minutes if you like, i do on lots of things...but i sure dont think that makes me qualifed to help others decide. If you would follow that type of review then thats up to you....me? i would rather look into a more informed review.
Remember that i also said i wouldn't follow a good review that played for a small limited time either before you start
This assumes we believe taco. Also, it does not take a bioware RPG worth of time to review a MMO. The first 30 are enough for anyone to know if the game is competently made, and hour after that they will know if its worth continuing. The first 15 however, are the most important.
"It is not the responsibility of the player to FIND the fun, its the responsibility of the game to show it to them"
If you can not, or will not under stand the above, i have nothing else but pity for you. The darkfall developers do not understand this, and that's why they continually fail.
A agree with the quoted statement. I think it's always the responsibility of the develloper to make the game fun, never the responsiblity of the player.
You don't put features in games that dont' work, and then blame their failure on the players inability to follow the rules, or follow instructions, or play the game "like you are supposed to". Players have never and will never do that. They will do whatever they can in a game, so knowing that you must design for it.
This assumes we believe taco. Also, it does not take a bioware RPG worth of time to review a MMO. The first 30 are enough for anyone to know if the game is competently made, and hour after that they will know if its worth continuing. The first 15 however, are the most important.
"It is not the responsibility of the player to FIND the fun, its the responsibility of the game to show it to them"
If you can not, or will not under stand the above, i have nothing else but pity for you. The darkfall developers do not understand this, and that's why they continually fail.
A agree with the quoted statement. I think it's always the responsibility of the develloper to make the game fun, never the responsiblity of the player.
You don't put features in games that dont' work, and then blame their failure on the players inability to follow the rules, or follow instructions, or play the game "like you are supposed to". Players have never and will never do that. They will do whatever they can in a game, so knowing that you must design for it.
Sorry i missed the part where Aventurine blamed the players for not playing the game like i am supposed to? which makes the whole argument worthless. As far as i have read, aventurine seem to be admitting thier game is not feature complete and seem to be doing thier best to address this. Patches are coming regulary and seem to be making a difference. They also seem to listening to the players too, which is a MMO first as far as i'm concerned.
People still seem to be not seeing the difference between a simple " first impression" and a published " review"!
A first impression is simply someone describing thier "first impressions" as long as they make that clear, which they did then it is the fault of people who take it any other way!
A published review is a meant to be a means for people to take a look at and use that review as means of deciding whether to give it a try or not. thus needing informed and as detailed as possible information to help them. Thats what magazines, be them online or not are for..to provide information.
The only real hypocrisy would be in calling it a "review", which the author doesn't do. He calls it "first impressions." That much is evident if one clicks on the link and reads the article. The only people calling it a "review" are here in this thread, e.g. the OP in his title. The word "review" can have different meanings to different people and in different contexts, but it's clear that, while the author does give some impressions and his opinion based on what he experienced, it was not intended as what is accepted in the industry as a "review." You obviously want to believe Ed Zitron, which is fine, and is probably what many people here will choose to do. However, why you're so up in arms about the terminology that you have to attack daarco personally when he is expressing his opinion simply because it does not jibe with yours is a little hard to understand.
Read my post again, or stop misrepresenting it, and stop playing semantics. I make my point of where the hypocrisy is quite clear.
Spare the attempts at telling me what I "obviously want to believe" and putting words in my mouth. I'm not supporting any score... I'm pointing out the hypocrisy displayed (constantly) by DF fans, nothing more.
"First impression" or no, the TTH writer says, unequivocally, "sorry EG, it's not a 4/10 game". He says this after 2 hours of playing. That's a definitive statement. He doesn't say "so far it doesn't seem deserving of a 4/10". No. They say, without exception or qualification, "it's not a 4/10 game", and does so after only 2 hours played. If 2 hours is not enough time played to say it deserves a 4/10 or 2/10, then it's not enough time to say it doesn't.
Again, it's hypocrisy. Period.
Stop trying to spin it.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Should someone writing a "first impression" article be making unquivocal, definitive statements like they did? No, they shouldn't. Even according to Tasos and various fans, 2 hours is not enough time to formulate a valid opinion.
If they haven't played enough to give a thorough review, then they haven't played enough to voice definitive opinions, such as whether or not it's deserving of a final score from another review. Yet, that's what the TTH writer did... he voiced a definitive opinion based on 2 hours of gameplay.
That's the point of contention here. Spin it any way you want, it still comes out BS.
Yet, as usual, the fans accept it as "okay" and rally around it, in all their spinning glory - because it's complimentary to their game, of course.
The DF hypocrisy train just keeps on a-rollin'.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Should someone writing a "first impression" article be making unquivocal, definitive statements like they did? No, they shouldn't. Besides, they haven't played long enough to, right?
If they haven't played enough to give a thorough review, then they haven't played enough to voice definitive opinions, such as whether or not it's deserving of a final score from another review.
That's the point of contention here. Spin it any way you want, it still comes out BS.
Yet, as usual, the fans accept it as "okay" and rally around it, in all their spinning glory - because it's complimentary to their game, of course.
The DF hypocrisy train just keeps on a-rollin'.
I'm a Darkfall fan and i dont think 2 hours is enough to give a review either way, good or bad! i also dont think 2 hours ingame is enough to decide if another review score is deserving or not. i agree with you on those points friend, do you agree with my view?
Though i dont agree with your other point friend. 2 hours is not enough to review a game, but 2 seconds is enough to form an opinion, Thats our right as human beings, we have the right to form an opinion on anything at anytime. your opinion is something that no one can take away from you friend, others may influence it but it is still your choice on how you take that influence.....just remember the golden rule! it is and always will be " just your opinion"
I thought it was completely uncalled for as well. It makes me feel like the person writing the article wanted to prove Eurogamer wrong no matter what and as such, I cannot take that TTH article at face value. Not that I take anything written on that website seriously anyway.
Pretty much all that needs to be said about this thread. I've read plenty of "Previews", "First Impressions", and "Reviews". Not once do I ever recall one of them, referencing another publications writing in such a manner.
PS: Paragus I've noticed you saying the same thing alot lately. The funny thing is do you honestly believe any of the DF fans would have complained, if EG had given the game 8/10 with only 2 hours played? Nope, and sadly even though I respect your writing talent. I'd bet you wouldn't have said anything about it either. The only reason DF fans complained about the EG review was because it didn't paint the game in a good light.
He could have played for a month straight 8-10 hours a day. Gave it a 8/10, still had inaccuracies in the review. Yet you would still have DF fans praising EG and Ed for it. Simply because it's what they wanted to hear. That is what annoys me the most about 90% of the DF fans that pass through here. Everything is right as rain as long as you all are hearing and seeing what you want. As soon as reality hits though you all start flip flopping.
Someone mentions DF pop dying typical reply: "It's a niche game." or "Small Communities are better"
Press clipping about DF NA server "The population is growing." or "People are just beating down the door to play DF"
Someone mentions DF limited release: "They are doing that to keep the server from being crowded"
Tasos post about store selling out in minutes "DF is selling like Hotcakes everyone wants to play it."
Yep. The typical rabid DF fan duplicity in all its glory.
Let's not forget how they were crying victoriously from the rooftops about how DF was the most hyped game on mmorpg.com prior to "launch", and how that was a clear sign the game would be a success...
... until the hype turned out to be largely negative (due to Tasos/AV's rolling train-wreck style of launching/managing the game).. Then they blamed all the game's problems on "too much hype".
DF fans will spin all sides of a situation to their benefit without thinking twice about it or even stopping to wonder if what they're saying now contradicts what they said a day ago. And that's when they even bother to remember things that happen a day or more earlier. DF fans tend to view history through a variety of "ignorance filters", blocking out things that have been said or done, or otherwise revising it to look favorable to DF. Or, they just ignore history completely. That's part of the enjoyment of reading these threads... seeing how many times a single DF fan will change or spin their opinion about the same topic to keep it favorable toward DF.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops