I don't agree with everything the OP put in but we all have to remember that Cryptic has done this in the past. They have gotten better and I expect CO to get better not worse, but I don't like their respec ( I don't want to say the other way respec is all I know being a 5+ year CoX vet) is a bit off. I have my problems with the game but those are mine and not really a problem for most who play and enjoy CO.
"You think this "A" stands for France?" Captain America
Also, since so much time was devoted to saying how hard the game is now since beta I think it's worth noting that some of us only started playing since launch. This fact renders almost half of Michaels argument moot.
Originally posted by GTwander:
How are you an MMO? Or any of us for that matter?
I say we strike all users from the site for not being MMOs.
This is one of the reasons why you cannot let non-professionals beta test video games. People tend to forget that beta test is there to test a game, and that the only game that matters is the one that releases. The game that released was harder than the one in Beta, so people complained. Well, if they didn't beta test the game, they wouldn't have know the difference and there'd be less complaining. I for one don't beta test video games, because beta testing leaves bad impressions and spoils content. The bad impressions come when you see things in the game that suck, but people forget that those things that suck may not be there at release. Spoiled content comes by just playing the game. I picked up Champions Online a couple days after release. The game is complex, in the sense that you can easily gimp your character, because you're free to choose any combination of powers, stats, super stats, talents, and travel powers. After the learning curb, you pretty much know what you're doing, but you also learn that you need to fit in a non-official mold if you are to not gimp yourself, especially if you PvP. Some powersets are superior than others, as are some travel powers. Some powersets get owned in PvE, while some do the owning, and others seem about equal. The game will benefit from some balancing patches, but the complaints about the game changing should not be heard. This is because beta knowledge and post release knowledge should not coexist, because people are not professional enough or mature enough to not let their opinions become biased. Bias is something that is really hard to control, especially when it takes place in something you are passionate about, such as your hobbies. The biased opinions from beta testers are unfair and are unwarranted. People forget that it was their job to test the game out, and it is the developers job to fix the game into their intended desire. The job of listening to the players, and only implementing what they deem worthy is not the devs job, nor is it anyones. Players do not always know best, and in this case, the players are wrong. You cannot have a game so easy that you never need groups.
I have a few things to comment on. You say that from beta to release there will be changes. That's completely inaccurate. A GOOD developer will not release their game until ALL beta content has been ironed out. To release a game as a beta is a rip off for the consumer. I say this for two reason: I AM a tester, and I'm also a consumer.
Now, I will go about explaining (as I believe a beta-tester should) my gripes on releasing a beta version. CoH did it. SWG did it (and if people must know, that's what really did it in for the game... I continued to play it, but many of my guild mates never touched the game after the first month---and we're die hard Star Wars fans). To release a game that lacks integrity is just bad business on the developers.
However, you ARE right when you say that testers forget to do their job during beta. Many people just run around or get to end-game just so they can release images of the game or video (which is usually illegal per devs standards), while the few of us who DO enjoy beta-testing because we WANT the game to succeed, because we TRULY care about the MMO franchise, are getting weeded out with them. Beta-testing should be done by those that care. Simple as that. I didn't test CO, but I didn't really show interest in the art style.
And you go on to say that the job of listening to players and only implementing what they deem worthy is not the devs job, yet you're not a dev. So, it is here I find you contradicting your opening statement. Players don't know best? While I agree, tell Blizz that. They've turned their community into a completely casual-friendly yawn fest. Ask yourself why.
If you are going to host an open beta as a means of promotiong your game (Which is what Cryptic did) then you need to sell the consumers the product as advertised. Everyone is aware the product was a prerelease test, but it was still a promotional stunt how ever you want to look at it, and that's ok. They are in a niche market and needed to put out the word to tall the hero game fans out there that they had a product worth spending some time and money on. It also served the purpose of stress testing servers with greater populations prior to launch. This could likely have been achieved just as easily by announcing open beta earlier than they did to the fans in order to make changes and get feed back prior to launch, and then get feedback on the changes, and so on a few times.
I'm not sure what to say about the early bird deal on the lfie time subs, that was just plain handled poorly by both customers who were upset, and Cryptic. They fixed it in the end but things should have never escalated to the point they did. If you advertise a product's availability for a set length of time then you have to honor that commitment, and they did, but only after some threatened legal action. If they had advertised the lifetime subs as limited quantities available and only the first 5000 customers will receive a limited lifetime sub, then things may have gone differently for them.
The nerf to player powers and defenses and increase in difficulty at launch was unbelievable. I couldn't believe the difference. I would have never sigined up for a 6 mo. sub had I played the post launch game in the open beta. so I cancelled the 6 mo. sub and will pay monthly if the game is improved to a place where I want to continue paying for it by the end of my first free month. As it stands past couple of patches have made things alot more enjoyable. I had a large patch come in on Thursday, then a smaller one Friday , and a smaller one Saturday. All the patching is a little frustrating but the game is much better over all for me now.
I do have a problem with the Thursday patch in that there was some sort of unannounced graphical requirement change or something to that effect. Several people includung a close friend at work were unable to play the game any longer. My friend has a Radeon 4650 and it wasn't running well; numerous crashes even after he updated the drivers. The card is not brand new or a power house by any stretch but it's no slouch either. This was an unacceptable change, and the fact that there was no warning is an unacceptable way to treat a customer.
I read an article on here the other day with a title something to the effect of "The Customer is not Always Right" that's true, one customer doesn't make a difference, but 20,000 that are all angry do, and they show it with their wallets by doing things like I did and cancelling subscriptions. 1 customer can inform and influence up to 55 other people's opinions of any given product and the decision to purchase or not to purchase, so in effect the customer is only right when you want the customer's money.
I am in sales and the most important thing I learned was very simple and stuck weith me to this day.
"Don't treat other people how you want to be treated, treat them how they want to be treated." In other words find out what the customers wants and needs are, and then fill them. Percieved value is worth more than anything when selling goods and services. Trying to say that the in the MMO world the normal rules of customer service and supply and demand dont apply is ludicrous. Customer service is of paramount importance to this industry. CoH and WoW both in my experience prove that good customer service goes along way, where as poor customer service can ruin chances of any future business from a customer on new items.
Cryptic has put together an amazing MMO here with some nice innovations that could be putting them ahead of the pack. Instead they are instituting changes that they are deciding upon rather than truly focusing on customer feedback, and sort of piecnailing what they like from the feedback ino the patches that are coming out. This is sort of a shotgun approach to customer satisfaction and results in a handful of hits and a handful of misses.
Anyways these are just some of my opinions on things thus far. I may be totally wrong and am sure others will agree/ disagree which is fine. I just wanted to relate things as I see them from someone who has been playing the game since closed beta.
The game is still very fun and has the potential to be great.
The customer service experience has been less than exemplary, though Cryptic has tried to go back and fix their mistakes.
It's been a rocky start that's for sure, and I wish Cryptic the best of luck with Champions Online and do hope it succeeds.
Soon after a game's launch, we like to have the game's reviewer offer his first impressions to give players an idea of what they can expect early on. Today, Michael Bitton files his report on Champions Online.
In late August we took a look at what Champions Online has to offer players, and now with the game's release behind it we're checking in for our first impressions of the game in order to give you a taste of how things are actually stacking up so far. The idea of a "first impressions" would have been a bit of a challenge, seeing as how we've spent a ton of time with the game prior to its launch, but something that occurred on launch day made a first impressions article much easier. You see, for those of you who previewed the game in beta, or were even part of the head start, Champions Online launched almost a completely different game. Before we get into all of that, let's talk a bit about the basics of an MMOG launch. Champions Online faired pretty well in this regard, many of the launcher and account issues present in the beta were thankfully absent at launch, with things going fairly smoothly on the technical side of things. Now, where were we? Ah, that's right, Champions Online launching as a different game, whatever do you mean? Well, in a boneheaded move, Cryptic Studios thought it would be a good idea to dump major, far-reaching changes onto the game in a launch day patch with absolutely no feedback from players. In these first impressions, we're going to take a look at this 'new' Champions Online and some of the effect the recent changes have had on early gameplay.
Written with utter contempt for the Dev team and the hard work that has obviously been put into this game, all because they tried to add the challenge back into the game, how short sighted you are.
I've been playing since Open Beta, got into the head start program, and play about every other day. I currently maintain 5 toons, and did hear all the complaining in the zones about the nerfs.
My own experience with the game has taught me some things that most people need to understand, and that I don't get the impression that the reviewer necessarily understood:
Block: If you are soloing, you must learn to do this. It is integral to the design of the game. Prior to the nerf, it wasn't really necessary for some or even most builds. With the nerf, this ability has become the requirement that the designers intended (why do you think there is a box that appears above the villians' heads when a big hit is coming?). It is a notable change from other games...blocking is an active system in the game and the players need to learn to use it.
Correct Powers: Whether you are soloing or running in a group, you do need to pick your powers intelligently. If a game is so easy that you can pick any power willy-nilly, why would you want to play it? I'm not interested in an MMO that you can beat in a few days. You should need to learn how the powers work. Cryptic has done a nice job of letting you play with your power choices prior to purchasing...a first to my knowledge. And retconning the last power / enhancement before your next level is either free or very low cost. Name one other game that is remotely that friendly? If you respec'd in WoW at level 80, you had to pick all the talents from scratch...even if you were just unhappy with the last couple of picks. It looks like some people will just never be satisfied if this is an issue...
Day 1 Nerf: The majority of players will never know that there was a nerf because the current system was there from day 1. I would like the author to name a better time to do a serious change to a game. A week in...a month in? I was very ticked off when Cryptic made substantial nerfs to classes in CoH (regen scrapper more than any) because I was used to how it worked, and it took away a toon that I had come to like very much. Some of the largest nerfs came when the game had been out for many months...now that is a game breaker (at least it was for me, and the point when I went to WoW for the next several years after I'd been playing CoH nearly from the start).
Actual Nerfs: As I mentioned in my previous point, I was highly upset with the regen scrapper nerf in CoH (it completely altered how the toon operated). Between the 5 toons I have in CO, it only notably impacted 1 of them. My gadgeteer could now no longer hit his sonic weapon, and the drones would heal him no matter what was thrown his way (I could literally walk away and come back to see the mobs dead). Definitely a nerf that needed to happen...but perhaps a bit too much (both the amount of healing as well as the amount of time healing occurs was reduced), but there are bound to be corrections over time The resolution for the gadgeteer is that he now has to use block (oh my) and can't simply wade into 2+ lieutenants/villains and 3+ base mobs/henchmen.
In the end, I think the reviewer's emotions got the better of him due to the loss of what once was. Time to take a step back and do an honest comparison of the state of the game as it is (not as it was) compared to what else is available.
I wanted to make it known that I understood Cryptic Studios' motives with the patch, but found the fact they didn't allow their testers to put the changes through the paces during beta a boneheaded move. Make more sense?
There's that word again. "Boneheaded." Implies a lack of intelligence or unwillingness to learn.
You really think they didn't realize this thing was going to upset some players? I'm relatively certain that the people who made the game are experienced professionals, intelligent people with degrees and everything.
You're a writer for this website so I can only assume you know how this works: Patches take time to develop. They take time to test. They take time to get feedback on, and they take time to alter based on that feedback. Roll all that up into a sum and you get X, X being the amount of time it takes to properly create and implement a patch.
Since this isn't a live product, we must also factor for Y, Y being the launch date. Y is a fixed number, one mutually agreed on by Cryptic and Atari. Or maybe not, maybe Atari issued an ultimatum saying they had to launch on Y, regardless of the state of the product. It has happened before. In either case, Y is a date that, by the time it was realized the critical patch had to happen, couldn't be moved.
X was too big to fit into Y. They had to trim the process down. Since there was no time to even do so much as get patch notes up for it before it went live, I'm guessing they managed to get the thing into a workable state just under the wire by pulling triple shifts. They squeezed it onboard just in time, and the player feedback portion of the process became an unfortunate casualty. All done to make the patch content go live *before* the primary customer base could get their hands on the game and have the rug yanked out from under them days later.
The point I'm making is this: Hasty, it was. Boneheaded, it was not. There can be no "boneheaded" decision when your back is to the wall, the gun is to your head, and the man is in the process of squeezing the trigger, because the only truly stupid thing you can do in that situation is nothing.
And, before you ask, why am I making such a big deal out of this? Because this statement goes on to set the tone of the rest of your review. By writing in this fashion you make yourself more than you are, writing as though you know more than the devs. You come off sounding like--forgive me, fellow posters--an angry nerd on a video game forum, one of the ones who believes in his bones that he knows more about making and running an MMO than the people actually doing it for a living. The ones who arrogantly spout their ideas and scream things like, "They never listen to me!" when their pet cause goes ignored.
Taking into consideration your theory on x,y (which is moreless accurate), and going along with your assumption that the game was only dumped out onto the floor because that bully Atari gave poor Cryptic no choice, I'd say thablame should be reflected onto Atari. Wouldn't you agree? I mean, I know that if I had a gun held to my head over a silly release date that could potentially make or break the longevity of the game and possibly ruin my chances of really having a customer base ever again, I'd do what the gunman said and release it all "willy nilly".
Actually, I take that back. Knowing me as well as I do, I'd have my own protection. A 300 lb Amazonian woman named... Amazonia... and uh, bullets would just bounce off her bouncing bossom while I escaped to my secret lair.
While your post was extremely candid and contained some brilliant rhetoric, I'm going to have to disagree with EITHER of those companies being the letters x or y. It's just not realistic. But then again, I've never heard of an x or a y developing a game before, so maybe that's just pure ignorance on my part.
Otherwise, I love you and I tend to humor the idea of us having babies together. Nothing more though. I couldn't see us moving in together. Your opinions are too smart for me. And I tend to digress from the point on a... well, I'm doing it now.
What I would like to know, what is going to happen when DC Comics comes out. There are not enough players to support 3 subscription MMO's in this niche. Something is going to have to give. If you want to condemn the developers, do it for a good reason like choosing to do another game in the hero niche instead of something different.
What I would like to know, what is going to happen when DC Comics comes out. There are not enough players to support 3 subscription MMO's in this niche. Something is going to have to give. If you want to condemn the developers, do it for a good reason like choosing to do another game in the hero niche instead of something different.
Firstly, you're not staying on topic at all. Secondly, some might say that "high Medieval fantasy" MMO's are a fairly niche market yet WAR, WOW, and LOTRO seem to all be doing fine.
Originally posted by GTwander:
How are you an MMO? Or any of us for that matter?
I say we strike all users from the site for not being MMOs.
My irritation is at the reviewer. The tone of most of his post is that he thinks the CO devs are idiots, and he's saying it when he himself can't get the facts in his tiny initial impressions review straight. Another strange line in this review is that the devs created the launch day patch with "no feedback", when in the next paragraph he outright says the patch was created using accurate feedback from the players that the game was too easy. So what's the gripe? That they didn't get feedback on their response to the feedback? That they didn't delay launch so they could get feeback on the feedback on the feedback? Sorry, the whole review is a dog wearing a cape.
Um... I don't know if you're being ignorant on purpose or aren't reading it correctly. He's saying they patched on launch, and gave no feedback on the day of the launch. There was no warning. There were no patch notes. And hours and hours passed before an initial response was given by the devs.
That's a completely unaceptable approach towards your community in the opinion of most people paying money.
. . . No?
The line in question says, "Well, in a boneheaded move, Cryptic Studios thought it would be a good idea to dump major, far-reaching changes into the game in a launch day patch with absolutely no feedback from players."
So, it would seem it is you who did not read correctly. The review says nothing about Cryptic's communication. Yes, it did suck, no, that's not what the reviewer was talking about, nor was it what *I* was talking about. He's griping about the fact that the patch went live without the testers getting the chance to provide feedback on it. He is, in other words, upset that Cryptic Studios lacks the power to fundamentally alter the space-time continuum.
Proper feedback on a patch that size and scope might have taken weeks. It was launch day. Time was up.
No... It is still you who is not reading correctly, or rather has no reading comprehension.
"Well, in a boneheaded move, Cryptic Studios thought it would be a good idea to dump major, far-reaching changes into the game in a launch day patch with absolutely no feedback from players."
I will explain it for you I guess.
What this actually means is that cryptic released a patch on launch day, without consulting players for feedback on how it might actually impact the game. They just did it. No warning, no "Hey everyone, we think we might drop this on your in a few days, how do you feel about it" nothing.
Just dumped the patch completely changing the style of game it was from beta to launch.
Beta's are used for 2 purposes.
1. To test out bugs and gather feedback from players, to stabilize the game and iron out any issues it might have, while listening to players and trying to adjust the game to give the players a better product.
2. To get word of mouth out there, because let's face it, no beta tester abides by the "shhhhhh philosophy" when it comes to betas. Devs know joe blow out there is gonna tell all his buddies about the game and how they should get it cause it is good.
That is where the problem lies.
Joe Blow told all his buddies to go grab CO cause it was awesome!!!!! and you REALLY had the feeling of being a super hero and could just plow down the enemies.
Launch Day comes and the devs make it so you aren't so super anymore and you are kinda a chump, just dieing to random thugs.
All joe blows buddies got CO and now are pissed cause everything Joe told them about the game turned out to be a lie.
Joe gets beat up after school.
It's not cool to change shit on launch day to this extreme level, without at least consulting the player base or at a minimum letting them know in advance the changes are coming.
It feel like you raise three main problems with your "First Impressions" Michael B: game isn't like it was pre-launch, Economy discrepancies, and the game being too confusing. I'll admit the latter two are concerning problems (I know I eagerly used my free respec to fix myself up) but you spend practically half the article really (and I can't think of a better expression than this) QQ-ing over the difficulty since pre-launch. On a scale from all the other MMO's I've played: WOW, EVE, LOTRO, WAR, EQ etc. the dificulty is right on par if even easier than many games on the market. From a game standpoint (not being a hero) it makes sence that Cryptic would make the game harder so people, whom are now acclimated to playing MMO's, don't just blow through to endgame. Makes me think of AOC where people flew right to endgame to find - oops! - there was no endgame yet.
Also why aren't you bothering to describe any of the great features of this game? Travel power at level 5!? Uh, yeah I feel super with it, AOE spells can easily take out hordes of henchmen (unless you specc'd weird - lol L2play) and crafting (though convoluted with what stats do what) is really straight forward. Not to mention the graphics look clean and the servers have actually been able to stay up except for routine maintenance - yes I know you mentioned the technical side was solid, but I think it's important to emphasize that, unlike some games, this one is actually playable from day one.
Seriously your first impression really does not make Champions Online look good at all, and it feels like just a bash on the game. It seems to me that if you're going to give some Impressions on a game you should at least bother to note the pros along with the cons.
---edited to have correct author's name---
I described many of the game's features in great detail in our preview of the game which I linked to in the opening of the first impressions, the full review will evaluate all of these areas. I decided to take the first impressions to specifically evaluate the impact of the launch day patch on the game as frankly the changes that were made were going to greatly color new players' first impressions and so I felt it was appropriate.
You are correct in that the difficulty is now on par with the games you cited. I mentioned in my article that were this any traditional fantasy MMOG, the changes would be received with likely a lot less uproar, but that this was a superhero game, and henchmen should serve the role of simply being cannon fodder to create a sense of being super. The changes made Champions Online feel much like the games you mentioned ,which I found to be a negative first impression since players who are playing Champions Online are likely looking to feel like a superhero, not to meet a spawn of 2-4 enemies with trepidation.
This issue is exacerbated by the fact the game is open and classless. Unintentionally poor character choices made due to the fact new players will likely be confused and misinformed highlight the game's new level of difficulty even further. While experienced players like myself can mostly adapt, the experience is that much worse for those who are still confused and learning. Made worse is the fact that once new players do learn more of the game as they progress, they are unable to course correct their characters, due to the largely prohibitive respec situation.
I made note of my beta experiences in order to contrast them to a game I actually found fun, and not because I abused the overpowered abilities (I honestly didn't , I played Claws with the offensive passive in beta, 'nuff said). As I said in the article, the changes to those abilities were quite warranted, it was only those changes combined with the changes to mobs that really messed things up. Also, there were many completely new players who learned their ropes with the game during the head start and actually got a different game on official launch day, while also being left with a potentially unplayable character due to the breadth of the changes made. The early start program was not beta.
I wrote the piece trying to best imagine myself in the shoes of a new player, and as such, I felt all the subtle nuance and beauty would be overshadowed by the largely cumbersome and confusing new player experience. It's important to note that this would have been the case pre-patch, but was made far worse by the difficulty being raised to unforgiving levels for new players, and to disappointing levels for experienced ones. Given the language and attentiveness Cryptic Studios has exhibited since the whole fiasco I can confidently say I expect them to dial it back some and meet somewhere in the middle, but this isn't the case right now, and so I felt the commentary was warranted.
I did also mention that the game was 'playable from day one' with respect to the technical aspects (billing, servers etc) in the opening of the article.
I hope this clears up any confusion, back to work for me.
I'm sorry but do we have any editors on here to actually check over these articles and keep a rein on these writers?
"a boneheaded move" doesn't sound like professional writing to me at all. Then he goes on to contradict himself "...a launch day patch with absolutely no feedback from players" followed shortly by "...launch day patch... was put out in response to player feedback..." So they put out a patch with absolutely no feedback from players, but it was put out in response to player feedback. A "boneheaded move" indeed?
Personally I feel the article is poorly written, and mostly amounts to a bunch of complaining. Some of which seems more a personal opinion of where the author thinks the game should be compared to perhaps where the developers think the game should be. Not to mention the contradictions and other things in the article.
As far as the overall tone of the article, it feels to me more like just a forum complaint about the game's initial growing pains. I assure you, CO is not the first game in the genre to have them. Perhaps some people forget the state WoW was in it's first month+ of gameplay.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
I like the game but i must say its not a easy game at least from lvl 14 to 16 for me as i am running out of quests and the ones i do have i cannot solo for the life of me. I will stay playing though. Getting groups together can be easy at peak times and a pain when not at peak.
This isn't a "First Impression" article. It's a rant about a patch that was released on the day the game launched. Your article wreaks of nerd rage against the devs. I think MMORPG needs to do a read through of some of these articles before posting. I used to enjoy reading the articles, but some of them lately have been nothing but biased nonsense. I think MMORPG should have chosen someone that has played the game from launch day, not someone that was in the beta, to do the first impression.
The game does have faults, but whining about a patch that went live on LAUNCH DAY, should not comprise 2/3 of the article. There are other faults with the game that should have been further expounded upon...teaming, cross-shard chat (when looking for a team), and content gaps at later levels. This article is just full of fail.
Since this is continuing to pop up, I'd like to address the people who are confused about the no feedback vs. response to player feedback part of my article: you're not reading in context here.
In the first instance, I am saying that the changes were dumped on players without taking into account player feedback on the specific changes implemented to rectify the situation that the game was too easy. Just making things harder isn't the answer, how you go about it, and to what extent is important and for that player feedback was necessary. Generally, when an MMO developer wants to make changes of such breadth and scope they will get player feedback on the specific changes before they release them to the general populace.
The second instance was to reassure the conspiracy theorists out there that Cryptic Studios' motive with the patch wasn't to "screw" the player -- but was intended as a response to player feedback that the game was in fact too easy, an assessment Cryptic Studios agreed with. That's all there is to it -- there is no contradiction.
If you go to your barber for a haircut and he's leaving things too long, you tell him to cut your hair shorter, but he immediately goes from leaving your hair too long to breaking out the razor and shaving your head bald, you'd probably be unhappy, no? You want him to gradually shorten it and ask you if its short enough, instead of a pendulum swing from one extreme to the next.
Players needed to see these changes during the beta test or on the Public Test Server which was implemented after launch so that they could evaluate them and give feedback to the developers on the changes themselves. Instead, they were dumped all of a sudden on the live population without any warning, and not even on day one of early start, so there were players playing the live game that were treated to an entirely experience than the game they woke up to only a few days later. That was the "boneheaded" move, and I certainly don't regret that assessment!
Yes, the game was too easy. Now, the game is too hard. A middle ground could have been achieved were some feedback taken into account before these changes were released to the live servers. Now, I imagine that middle ground will still be achieved, but only after the live environment serves as the test bed, that's generally not something you want to do.
This article seems to have a number of fanbois following it trying to give MMORPG.com and the author flaming responses. It was an impression article. Was not a review, was not a rating, was not to make people not play the game. The article talked about "boneheaded" moves (which to me is just accurate since letting people know what was coming would have been the correct move) and yet it seems to offend people because they think they can insult but that others in an official capacity should not. How many of you that are complaining about this article are doing the same about what Jordan did for his acceptance speech?
I might not be in total agreement with the article. Doesn't really matter as I was not trying to decide if I agreed. I played beta and headstart with intention of playing for a while. I felt like a super character. I thought that finally a game where I just get to have fun and not grind or take 10 deaths to try and accomplish a small part of a quest because of all the mobs around it. Then what happens is a patch that makes the adding of one henchman become impossible unless one runs. I know it is different for different powers but some powers make the 2 Villian plus henchman group possible but then a wandering henchman seems to hit the perfect distance to get attracted and runs in it becomes too much. I don't feel like a super character any more in the game. I feel like a character that can save himself and maybe one or two civilians but I am definitely not going to stop a hostage situation in a bank because I am not powerful enough to stop the bad guys quick enough.
A superhero game to me is a game that is suppose to be way easier for almost all parts than any other MMO. I expect to wipe the floor with most mobs and not think about it. I expect a company making such a game to think that way about it. The normal zone content and some instances related to the zone content should be possible with a few places presenting more of a challenge. I expect most instances and select areas in zones to be much more dangerous and require teaming up with 1 or more other heroes to have a good chances of surviving. I don't have that with this game.
I played a lot smarter in CoH but still did not feel superhero enough to want to continue as I knew I needed partners for some of it. That is not because it was bad but that I seemed to have trouble making friends because of my play schedule seemed so screwed up for most times. This game though is different as it seems to be very basic in a ton of ways. I did not realize that every henchman would need to be buffed rather than just buffing the ones in instances as an example. Seems like changes in this game is to the game as a whole and very little is done to select parts. Maybe I am use to what I would consider better made games where select parts were ramped up or down rather than broad across the board changes.
Doubt I will ever consider this a game to keep track of unless I see there is a true move toward what I would consider smarter moves. I don't care what others think of my opinion because it is mine but this game is too simplistic at the moment for me to accept the way the company is running it. I know that I have no desire to see STO after what they have done with this game. They might have the tools to make a game in months (this is something they have stated about their game programs adaptability) but it seems these tools need to be used better. I remember seeing tons of patch notes in different games where they talk about X zone has be redone to make parts harder or easier as well as Y mobs have been enhanced/reduced to come more in line with what we wanted. I also know instances seem to get the most tampering with. When will I feel this is the true direction Cryptic is moving in and not broad changes for everything.
Your article fails to deliver on really what the game offers and brings to the table, what kind of person would like and wouldn't like it. You mostly seem to just be using it as a platform to rant about your beef with devs.
You do understand that this wasn't the review of the game, but rather, as the title indicates, a first impressions piece, right?
What you don't understand is that a First Impression piece should reflect what the average buyer would know upon picking up the game. The average buyer isn't a beta tester, nor do they follow forums that deeply. So the point remains, that you gave first impressions that were heavily influenced by your knowledge of a game while it was in Beta. Things in Beta are subject to change; we all know this going into beta, and we know they can change at any time up until launch.
Judging from the reaction, I am sure Cryptic has learned an important lesson, which is to keep the community informed, even if changes should have been expected since the game was still in beta.
OK, well, it might be a good idea to do some fact-checking before you turn these things in, reviewer. You can retcon from level 40 all the way back to genesis now, it's been this way for a while. So much for "boneheaded mistakes."
I agree. Sounds like whiner using his position to whine to the masses. He goes on to way the game is confusing. Well maybe he needs a game that takes less thinking. What do people want? Players were reaching half the level cap in 2 days. Either they make the game more challenging, or a mindless romp requiring a much higher total of points to level. If dumbing the game down and requiring the higher number of points to level is prefered then make sure the mobs killed at higher levels reflect some kind of bonus for those who prefer a challenge.
This post is intentionally written as to not make any sense what so ever. Thank You Very Much.
It seems like they need more content to me, which I think people could agree with. Not only do you level up quickly, but you generally run out of quests and end up grinding even if you do all the quests you can find. It just feels incomplete. I see your point of view though.
Well, honestly, what else can you expect from Jack Emmert and Company, the same idiots who introduced "Enhancement Diversification" and a whole host of idiotic game-changing power nerfs to CoH that affected just about every character (travel power suppression, anyone?) and changed the game mechanics drastically.
Thank goodness for the split that led them away to do CO and kept a strong development team in place on CoX under NCSoft. They've slowly been bringing CoX game play back up to its former levels, while continuing to deliver quality free content.
So yes, as someone who had firsthand experience from the beta days of CoH up to the nerf-go-round that Emmert was pretty much directly responsible for and beyond, it's not really a surprise that these idiots are sticking with their "mega nerf first, explain and adjust later" policy.
What a pity.... simultaneously, after beta-testing CO, I am so glad that I fought the desire to purchase this game.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq Adnihilo Beorn Judge's Edge Somnulus Perfect Black ---------------------- Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2 Everquest / Everquest 2 Anarchy Online Shadowbane Dark Age of Camelot Star Wars Galaxies Matrix Online World of Warcraft Guild Wars City of Heroes
Least balanced game in terms of mob difficulty. In open beta I could solo 4-6 mobs without getting hurt, but there are also some mobs that were so OP that I died twice before killing them. Besides the rare instance where a mob was hard, the game was so easy, and that's why I showed no interested besides it being a single-player game mentality.
The game didn't make me feel like a superhero, it made me feel like a god. I loved character creation, but when it came down to game-time this game doesn't cut it.
It would have been more appropriate to have a first impressions article written by someone, who either had not previously played the game, or a writer who could give an impartial impression of the launched game without referring to beta. Any prospective player that read this article would leave with the impression that something big changed between beta and launch, which is true, but no real idea of whiether the writer recommended the game.
The article is more of a rant than a first impression piece.
How is the MT store? I always figured they made resources scarce to fuel that thing. Have they scaled it back? I was always worried it would effect game play on a base level. Because like it or not, hell you don't even have to believe it, but game design is effected by adding a dedicated store. Greedy sods.
I wanted to make it known that I understood Cryptic Studios' motives with the patch, but found the fact they didn't allow their testers to put the changes through the paces during beta a boneheaded move. Make more sense?
There's that word again. "Boneheaded." Implies a lack of intelligence or unwillingness to learn.
You really think they didn't realize this thing was going to upset some players? I'm relatively certain that the people who made the game are experienced professionals, intelligent people with degrees and everything.
Yes, they knew it would upset the players. They simply don't care. Get used to it, it's par for the course for this crew.
You're a writer for this website so I can only assume you know how this works: Patches take time to develop. They take time to test. They take time to get feedback on, and they take time to alter based on that feedback. Roll all that up into a sum and you get X, X being the amount of time it takes to properly create and implement a patch.
You strike me as a relatively inexperienced MMORPG player if the concept of a "test server" to allow your subscribers to test patch content BEFORE it goes live eludes you. You don't just dump it on the players, specifically at launch. Of course, this crew is well-known for exactly this type of idiocy.
Since this isn't a live product, we must also factor for Y, Y being the launch date. Y is a fixed number, one mutually agreed on by Cryptic and Atari. Or maybe not, maybe Atari issued an ultimatum saying they had to launch on Y, regardless of the state of the product. It has happened before. In either case, Y is a date that, by the time it was realized the critical patch had to happen, couldn't be moved.
Wrong. You release AS IS, continue to develop the changes you feel are necessary and test them on the test server, and then release a thoroughly tested update while also keeping your subscribers informed.
Again, something that hasn't been a strong suit for this crew in the past.
X was too big to fit into Y. They had to trim the process down. Since there was no time to even do so much as get patch notes up for it before it went live, I'm guessing they managed to get the thing into a workable state just under the wire by pulling triple shifts. They squeezed it onboard just in time, and the player feedback portion of the process became an unfortunate casualty. All done to make the patch content go live *before* the primary customer base could get their hands on the game and have the rug yanked out from under them days later.
The player feedback portion became an unfortunate casualty? Hmmm. So I guess they won't have any heartburn if the subscriber portion of the game becomes a casualty?
The point is; there was no need to pull the rug out from under anyone. They should have tested it thoroughly, got player feedback, explained the necessity, and balanced the patch out before releasing. With thorough testing and balancing, the patch probably wouldn't have been released for at least a month, giving the subscribers the opportunity to test it and provide input.
The point I'm making is this: Hasty, it was. Boneheaded, it was not. There can be no "boneheaded" decision when your back is to the wall, the gun is to your head, and the man is in the process of squeezing the trigger, because the only truly stupid thing you can do in that situation is nothing.
Boneheaded it was. Releasing may have been a foregone conclusion; injecting an untested and unexpected patch that changed game mechanics entirely was NOT. They had an extensive beta and multiple open-beta weekends wherein their potential market played the game and either liked the mechanics or did not.
Those that liked the game enough to purchase it as it was could not have been pleased by the changes, and in fact, it seems as though many were not.
So yes, that is what I would call boneheaded.
And, before you ask, why am I making such a big deal out of this? Because this statement goes on to set the tone of the rest of your review. By writing in this fashion you make yourself more than you are, writing as though you know more than the devs. You come off sounding like--forgive me, fellow posters--an angry nerd on a video game forum, one of the ones who believes in his bones that he knows more about making and running an MMO than the people actually doing it for a living. The ones who arrogantly spout their ideas and scream things like, "They never listen to me!" when their pet cause goes ignored.
Couldn't agree less. The reviewer was fair and even-handed in the review and simply stated the facts as s/he knew them and their opinion.
The only thing I would disagree with in the review is the "First Impressions" moniker. It should have been titled "Release Impressions". A true first impressions review would not have introduced any information from the state of the game at beta.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq Adnihilo Beorn Judge's Edge Somnulus Perfect Black ---------------------- Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2 Everquest / Everquest 2 Anarchy Online Shadowbane Dark Age of Camelot Star Wars Galaxies Matrix Online World of Warcraft Guild Wars City of Heroes
Comments
I don't agree with everything the OP put in but we all have to remember that Cryptic has done this in the past. They have gotten better and I expect CO to get better not worse, but I don't like their respec ( I don't want to say the other way respec is all I know being a 5+ year CoX vet) is a bit off. I have my problems with the game but those are mine and not really a problem for most who play and enjoy CO.
"You think this "A" stands for France?" Captain America
Also, since so much time was devoted to saying how hard the game is now since beta I think it's worth noting that some of us only started playing since launch. This fact renders almost half of Michaels argument moot.
Originally posted by GTwander:
How are you an MMO? Or any of us for that matter?
I say we strike all users from the site for not being MMOs.
I have a few things to comment on. You say that from beta to release there will be changes. That's completely inaccurate. A GOOD developer will not release their game until ALL beta content has been ironed out. To release a game as a beta is a rip off for the consumer. I say this for two reason: I AM a tester, and I'm also a consumer.
Now, I will go about explaining (as I believe a beta-tester should) my gripes on releasing a beta version. CoH did it. SWG did it (and if people must know, that's what really did it in for the game... I continued to play it, but many of my guild mates never touched the game after the first month---and we're die hard Star Wars fans). To release a game that lacks integrity is just bad business on the developers.
However, you ARE right when you say that testers forget to do their job during beta. Many people just run around or get to end-game just so they can release images of the game or video (which is usually illegal per devs standards), while the few of us who DO enjoy beta-testing because we WANT the game to succeed, because we TRULY care about the MMO franchise, are getting weeded out with them. Beta-testing should be done by those that care. Simple as that. I didn't test CO, but I didn't really show interest in the art style.
And you go on to say that the job of listening to players and only implementing what they deem worthy is not the devs job, yet you're not a dev. So, it is here I find you contradicting your opening statement. Players don't know best? While I agree, tell Blizz that. They've turned their community into a completely casual-friendly yawn fest. Ask yourself why.
THE Rooster Nash
I agree with some of what the writer is saying.
If you are going to host an open beta as a means of promotiong your game (Which is what Cryptic did) then you need to sell the consumers the product as advertised. Everyone is aware the product was a prerelease test, but it was still a promotional stunt how ever you want to look at it, and that's ok. They are in a niche market and needed to put out the word to tall the hero game fans out there that they had a product worth spending some time and money on. It also served the purpose of stress testing servers with greater populations prior to launch. This could likely have been achieved just as easily by announcing open beta earlier than they did to the fans in order to make changes and get feed back prior to launch, and then get feedback on the changes, and so on a few times.
I'm not sure what to say about the early bird deal on the lfie time subs, that was just plain handled poorly by both customers who were upset, and Cryptic. They fixed it in the end but things should have never escalated to the point they did. If you advertise a product's availability for a set length of time then you have to honor that commitment, and they did, but only after some threatened legal action. If they had advertised the lifetime subs as limited quantities available and only the first 5000 customers will receive a limited lifetime sub, then things may have gone differently for them.
The nerf to player powers and defenses and increase in difficulty at launch was unbelievable. I couldn't believe the difference. I would have never sigined up for a 6 mo. sub had I played the post launch game in the open beta. so I cancelled the 6 mo. sub and will pay monthly if the game is improved to a place where I want to continue paying for it by the end of my first free month. As it stands past couple of patches have made things alot more enjoyable. I had a large patch come in on Thursday, then a smaller one Friday , and a smaller one Saturday. All the patching is a little frustrating but the game is much better over all for me now.
I do have a problem with the Thursday patch in that there was some sort of unannounced graphical requirement change or something to that effect. Several people includung a close friend at work were unable to play the game any longer. My friend has a Radeon 4650 and it wasn't running well; numerous crashes even after he updated the drivers. The card is not brand new or a power house by any stretch but it's no slouch either. This was an unacceptable change, and the fact that there was no warning is an unacceptable way to treat a customer.
I read an article on here the other day with a title something to the effect of "The Customer is not Always Right" that's true, one customer doesn't make a difference, but 20,000 that are all angry do, and they show it with their wallets by doing things like I did and cancelling subscriptions. 1 customer can inform and influence up to 55 other people's opinions of any given product and the decision to purchase or not to purchase, so in effect the customer is only right when you want the customer's money.
I am in sales and the most important thing I learned was very simple and stuck weith me to this day.
"Don't treat other people how you want to be treated, treat them how they want to be treated." In other words find out what the customers wants and needs are, and then fill them. Percieved value is worth more than anything when selling goods and services. Trying to say that the in the MMO world the normal rules of customer service and supply and demand dont apply is ludicrous. Customer service is of paramount importance to this industry. CoH and WoW both in my experience prove that good customer service goes along way, where as poor customer service can ruin chances of any future business from a customer on new items.
Cryptic has put together an amazing MMO here with some nice innovations that could be putting them ahead of the pack. Instead they are instituting changes that they are deciding upon rather than truly focusing on customer feedback, and sort of piecnailing what they like from the feedback ino the patches that are coming out. This is sort of a shotgun approach to customer satisfaction and results in a handful of hits and a handful of misses.
Anyways these are just some of my opinions on things thus far. I may be totally wrong and am sure others will agree/ disagree which is fine. I just wanted to relate things as I see them from someone who has been playing the game since closed beta.
The game is still very fun and has the potential to be great.
The customer service experience has been less than exemplary, though Cryptic has tried to go back and fix their mistakes.
It's been a rocky start that's for sure, and I wish Cryptic the best of luck with Champions Online and do hope it succeeds.
Read the First Impressions
Your certainly not playing the CO I'm playing.
Written with utter contempt for the Dev team and the hard work that has obviously been put into this game, all because they tried to add the challenge back into the game, how short sighted you are.
I've been playing since Open Beta, got into the head start program, and play about every other day. I currently maintain 5 toons, and did hear all the complaining in the zones about the nerfs.
My own experience with the game has taught me some things that most people need to understand, and that I don't get the impression that the reviewer necessarily understood:
In the end, I think the reviewer's emotions got the better of him due to the loss of what once was. Time to take a step back and do an honest comparison of the state of the game as it is (not as it was) compared to what else is available.
There's that word again. "Boneheaded." Implies a lack of intelligence or unwillingness to learn.
You really think they didn't realize this thing was going to upset some players? I'm relatively certain that the people who made the game are experienced professionals, intelligent people with degrees and everything.
You're a writer for this website so I can only assume you know how this works: Patches take time to develop. They take time to test. They take time to get feedback on, and they take time to alter based on that feedback. Roll all that up into a sum and you get X, X being the amount of time it takes to properly create and implement a patch.
Since this isn't a live product, we must also factor for Y, Y being the launch date. Y is a fixed number, one mutually agreed on by Cryptic and Atari. Or maybe not, maybe Atari issued an ultimatum saying they had to launch on Y, regardless of the state of the product. It has happened before. In either case, Y is a date that, by the time it was realized the critical patch had to happen, couldn't be moved.
X was too big to fit into Y. They had to trim the process down. Since there was no time to even do so much as get patch notes up for it before it went live, I'm guessing they managed to get the thing into a workable state just under the wire by pulling triple shifts. They squeezed it onboard just in time, and the player feedback portion of the process became an unfortunate casualty. All done to make the patch content go live *before* the primary customer base could get their hands on the game and have the rug yanked out from under them days later.
The point I'm making is this: Hasty, it was. Boneheaded, it was not. There can be no "boneheaded" decision when your back is to the wall, the gun is to your head, and the man is in the process of squeezing the trigger, because the only truly stupid thing you can do in that situation is nothing.
And, before you ask, why am I making such a big deal out of this? Because this statement goes on to set the tone of the rest of your review. By writing in this fashion you make yourself more than you are, writing as though you know more than the devs. You come off sounding like--forgive me, fellow posters--an angry nerd on a video game forum, one of the ones who believes in his bones that he knows more about making and running an MMO than the people actually doing it for a living. The ones who arrogantly spout their ideas and scream things like, "They never listen to me!" when their pet cause goes ignored.
Taking into consideration your theory on x,y (which is moreless accurate), and going along with your assumption that the game was only dumped out onto the floor because that bully Atari gave poor Cryptic no choice, I'd say thablame should be reflected onto Atari. Wouldn't you agree? I mean, I know that if I had a gun held to my head over a silly release date that could potentially make or break the longevity of the game and possibly ruin my chances of really having a customer base ever again, I'd do what the gunman said and release it all "willy nilly".
Actually, I take that back. Knowing me as well as I do, I'd have my own protection. A 300 lb Amazonian woman named... Amazonia... and uh, bullets would just bounce off her bouncing bossom while I escaped to my secret lair.
While your post was extremely candid and contained some brilliant rhetoric, I'm going to have to disagree with EITHER of those companies being the letters x or y. It's just not realistic. But then again, I've never heard of an x or a y developing a game before, so maybe that's just pure ignorance on my part.
Otherwise, I love you and I tend to humor the idea of us having babies together. Nothing more though. I couldn't see us moving in together. Your opinions are too smart for me. And I tend to digress from the point on a... well, I'm doing it now.
Good day to you all,
THE Rooster Nash
THE Rooster Nash
What I would like to know, what is going to happen when DC Comics comes out. There are not enough players to support 3 subscription MMO's in this niche. Something is going to have to give. If you want to condemn the developers, do it for a good reason like choosing to do another game in the hero niche instead of something different.
Firstly, you're not staying on topic at all. Secondly, some might say that "high Medieval fantasy" MMO's are a fairly niche market yet WAR, WOW, and LOTRO seem to all be doing fine.
Originally posted by GTwander:
How are you an MMO? Or any of us for that matter?
I say we strike all users from the site for not being MMOs.
Um... I don't know if you're being ignorant on purpose or aren't reading it correctly. He's saying they patched on launch, and gave no feedback on the day of the launch. There was no warning. There were no patch notes. And hours and hours passed before an initial response was given by the devs.
That's a completely unaceptable approach towards your community in the opinion of most people paying money.
. . . No?
The line in question says, "Well, in a boneheaded move, Cryptic Studios thought it would be a good idea to dump major, far-reaching changes into the game in a launch day patch with absolutely no feedback from players."
So, it would seem it is you who did not read correctly. The review says nothing about Cryptic's communication. Yes, it did suck, no, that's not what the reviewer was talking about, nor was it what *I* was talking about. He's griping about the fact that the patch went live without the testers getting the chance to provide feedback on it. He is, in other words, upset that Cryptic Studios lacks the power to fundamentally alter the space-time continuum.
Proper feedback on a patch that size and scope might have taken weeks. It was launch day. Time was up.
No... It is still you who is not reading correctly, or rather has no reading comprehension.
"Well, in a boneheaded move, Cryptic Studios thought it would be a good idea to dump major, far-reaching changes into the game in a launch day patch with absolutely no feedback from players."
I will explain it for you I guess.
What this actually means is that cryptic released a patch on launch day, without consulting players for feedback on how it might actually impact the game. They just did it. No warning, no "Hey everyone, we think we might drop this on your in a few days, how do you feel about it" nothing.
Just dumped the patch completely changing the style of game it was from beta to launch.
Beta's are used for 2 purposes.
1. To test out bugs and gather feedback from players, to stabilize the game and iron out any issues it might have, while listening to players and trying to adjust the game to give the players a better product.
2. To get word of mouth out there, because let's face it, no beta tester abides by the "shhhhhh philosophy" when it comes to betas. Devs know joe blow out there is gonna tell all his buddies about the game and how they should get it cause it is good.
That is where the problem lies.
Joe Blow told all his buddies to go grab CO cause it was awesome!!!!! and you REALLY had the feeling of being a super hero and could just plow down the enemies.
Launch Day comes and the devs make it so you aren't so super anymore and you are kinda a chump, just dieing to random thugs.
All joe blows buddies got CO and now are pissed cause everything Joe told them about the game turned out to be a lie.
Joe gets beat up after school.
It's not cool to change shit on launch day to this extreme level, without at least consulting the player base or at a minimum letting them know in advance the changes are coming.
It borders on bait and switch tactic.
I described many of the game's features in great detail in our preview of the game which I linked to in the opening of the first impressions, the full review will evaluate all of these areas. I decided to take the first impressions to specifically evaluate the impact of the launch day patch on the game as frankly the changes that were made were going to greatly color new players' first impressions and so I felt it was appropriate.
You are correct in that the difficulty is now on par with the games you cited. I mentioned in my article that were this any traditional fantasy MMOG, the changes would be received with likely a lot less uproar, but that this was a superhero game, and henchmen should serve the role of simply being cannon fodder to create a sense of being super. The changes made Champions Online feel much like the games you mentioned ,which I found to be a negative first impression since players who are playing Champions Online are likely looking to feel like a superhero, not to meet a spawn of 2-4 enemies with trepidation.
This issue is exacerbated by the fact the game is open and classless. Unintentionally poor character choices made due to the fact new players will likely be confused and misinformed highlight the game's new level of difficulty even further. While experienced players like myself can mostly adapt, the experience is that much worse for those who are still confused and learning. Made worse is the fact that once new players do learn more of the game as they progress, they are unable to course correct their characters, due to the largely prohibitive respec situation.
I made note of my beta experiences in order to contrast them to a game I actually found fun, and not because I abused the overpowered abilities (I honestly didn't , I played Claws with the offensive passive in beta, 'nuff said). As I said in the article, the changes to those abilities were quite warranted, it was only those changes combined with the changes to mobs that really messed things up. Also, there were many completely new players who learned their ropes with the game during the head start and actually got a different game on official launch day, while also being left with a potentially unplayable character due to the breadth of the changes made. The early start program was not beta.
I wrote the piece trying to best imagine myself in the shoes of a new player, and as such, I felt all the subtle nuance and beauty would be overshadowed by the largely cumbersome and confusing new player experience. It's important to note that this would have been the case pre-patch, but was made far worse by the difficulty being raised to unforgiving levels for new players, and to disappointing levels for experienced ones. Given the language and attentiveness Cryptic Studios has exhibited since the whole fiasco I can confidently say I expect them to dial it back some and meet somewhere in the middle, but this isn't the case right now, and so I felt the commentary was warranted.
I did also mention that the game was 'playable from day one' with respect to the technical aspects (billing, servers etc) in the opening of the article.
I hope this clears up any confusion, back to work for me.
I'm sorry but do we have any editors on here to actually check over these articles and keep a rein on these writers?
"a boneheaded move" doesn't sound like professional writing to me at all. Then he goes on to contradict himself "...a launch day patch with absolutely no feedback from players" followed shortly by "...launch day patch... was put out in response to player feedback..." So they put out a patch with absolutely no feedback from players, but it was put out in response to player feedback. A "boneheaded move" indeed?
Personally I feel the article is poorly written, and mostly amounts to a bunch of complaining. Some of which seems more a personal opinion of where the author thinks the game should be compared to perhaps where the developers think the game should be. Not to mention the contradictions and other things in the article.
As far as the overall tone of the article, it feels to me more like just a forum complaint about the game's initial growing pains. I assure you, CO is not the first game in the genre to have them. Perhaps some people forget the state WoW was in it's first month+ of gameplay.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
I like the game but i must say its not a easy game at least from lvl 14 to 16 for me as i am running out of quests and the ones i do have i cannot solo for the life of me. I will stay playing though. Getting groups together can be easy at peak times and a pain when not at peak.
Spankthetoad
This isn't a "First Impression" article. It's a rant about a patch that was released on the day the game launched. Your article wreaks of nerd rage against the devs. I think MMORPG needs to do a read through of some of these articles before posting. I used to enjoy reading the articles, but some of them lately have been nothing but biased nonsense. I think MMORPG should have chosen someone that has played the game from launch day, not someone that was in the beta, to do the first impression.
The game does have faults, but whining about a patch that went live on LAUNCH DAY, should not comprise 2/3 of the article. There are other faults with the game that should have been further expounded upon...teaming, cross-shard chat (when looking for a team), and content gaps at later levels. This article is just full of fail.
Since this is continuing to pop up, I'd like to address the people who are confused about the no feedback vs. response to player feedback part of my article: you're not reading in context here.
In the first instance, I am saying that the changes were dumped on players without taking into account player feedback on the specific changes implemented to rectify the situation that the game was too easy. Just making things harder isn't the answer, how you go about it, and to what extent is important and for that player feedback was necessary. Generally, when an MMO developer wants to make changes of such breadth and scope they will get player feedback on the specific changes before they release them to the general populace.
The second instance was to reassure the conspiracy theorists out there that Cryptic Studios' motive with the patch wasn't to "screw" the player -- but was intended as a response to player feedback that the game was in fact too easy, an assessment Cryptic Studios agreed with. That's all there is to it -- there is no contradiction.
If you go to your barber for a haircut and he's leaving things too long, you tell him to cut your hair shorter, but he immediately goes from leaving your hair too long to breaking out the razor and shaving your head bald, you'd probably be unhappy, no? You want him to gradually shorten it and ask you if its short enough, instead of a pendulum swing from one extreme to the next.
Players needed to see these changes during the beta test or on the Public Test Server which was implemented after launch so that they could evaluate them and give feedback to the developers on the changes themselves. Instead, they were dumped all of a sudden on the live population without any warning, and not even on day one of early start, so there were players playing the live game that were treated to an entirely experience than the game they woke up to only a few days later. That was the "boneheaded" move, and I certainly don't regret that assessment!
Yes, the game was too easy. Now, the game is too hard. A middle ground could have been achieved were some feedback taken into account before these changes were released to the live servers. Now, I imagine that middle ground will still be achieved, but only after the live environment serves as the test bed, that's generally not something you want to do.
This article seems to have a number of fanbois following it trying to give MMORPG.com and the author flaming responses. It was an impression article. Was not a review, was not a rating, was not to make people not play the game. The article talked about "boneheaded" moves (which to me is just accurate since letting people know what was coming would have been the correct move) and yet it seems to offend people because they think they can insult but that others in an official capacity should not. How many of you that are complaining about this article are doing the same about what Jordan did for his acceptance speech?
I might not be in total agreement with the article. Doesn't really matter as I was not trying to decide if I agreed. I played beta and headstart with intention of playing for a while. I felt like a super character. I thought that finally a game where I just get to have fun and not grind or take 10 deaths to try and accomplish a small part of a quest because of all the mobs around it. Then what happens is a patch that makes the adding of one henchman become impossible unless one runs. I know it is different for different powers but some powers make the 2 Villian plus henchman group possible but then a wandering henchman seems to hit the perfect distance to get attracted and runs in it becomes too much. I don't feel like a super character any more in the game. I feel like a character that can save himself and maybe one or two civilians but I am definitely not going to stop a hostage situation in a bank because I am not powerful enough to stop the bad guys quick enough.
A superhero game to me is a game that is suppose to be way easier for almost all parts than any other MMO. I expect to wipe the floor with most mobs and not think about it. I expect a company making such a game to think that way about it. The normal zone content and some instances related to the zone content should be possible with a few places presenting more of a challenge. I expect most instances and select areas in zones to be much more dangerous and require teaming up with 1 or more other heroes to have a good chances of surviving. I don't have that with this game.
I played a lot smarter in CoH but still did not feel superhero enough to want to continue as I knew I needed partners for some of it. That is not because it was bad but that I seemed to have trouble making friends because of my play schedule seemed so screwed up for most times. This game though is different as it seems to be very basic in a ton of ways. I did not realize that every henchman would need to be buffed rather than just buffing the ones in instances as an example. Seems like changes in this game is to the game as a whole and very little is done to select parts. Maybe I am use to what I would consider better made games where select parts were ramped up or down rather than broad across the board changes.
Doubt I will ever consider this a game to keep track of unless I see there is a true move toward what I would consider smarter moves. I don't care what others think of my opinion because it is mine but this game is too simplistic at the moment for me to accept the way the company is running it. I know that I have no desire to see STO after what they have done with this game. They might have the tools to make a game in months (this is something they have stated about their game programs adaptability) but it seems these tools need to be used better. I remember seeing tons of patch notes in different games where they talk about X zone has be redone to make parts harder or easier as well as Y mobs have been enhanced/reduced to come more in line with what we wanted. I also know instances seem to get the most tampering with. When will I feel this is the true direction Cryptic is moving in and not broad changes for everything.
You do understand that this wasn't the review of the game, but rather, as the title indicates, a first impressions piece, right?
What you don't understand is that a First Impression piece should reflect what the average buyer would know upon picking up the game. The average buyer isn't a beta tester, nor do they follow forums that deeply. So the point remains, that you gave first impressions that were heavily influenced by your knowledge of a game while it was in Beta. Things in Beta are subject to change; we all know this going into beta, and we know they can change at any time up until launch.
Judging from the reaction, I am sure Cryptic has learned an important lesson, which is to keep the community informed, even if changes should have been expected since the game was still in beta.
I agree. Sounds like whiner using his position to whine to the masses. He goes on to way the game is confusing. Well maybe he needs a game that takes less thinking. What do people want? Players were reaching half the level cap in 2 days. Either they make the game more challenging, or a mindless romp requiring a much higher total of points to level. If dumbing the game down and requiring the higher number of points to level is prefered then make sure the mobs killed at higher levels reflect some kind of bonus for those who prefer a challenge.
This post is intentionally written as to not make any sense what so ever. Thank You Very Much.
This article speaks the truth.
replying to the guy above my first post:
It seems like they need more content to me, which I think people could agree with. Not only do you level up quickly, but you generally run out of quests and end up grinding even if you do all the quests you can find. It just feels incomplete. I see your point of view though.
Well, honestly, what else can you expect from Jack Emmert and Company, the same idiots who introduced "Enhancement Diversification" and a whole host of idiotic game-changing power nerfs to CoH that affected just about every character (travel power suppression, anyone?) and changed the game mechanics drastically.
Thank goodness for the split that led them away to do CO and kept a strong development team in place on CoX under NCSoft. They've slowly been bringing CoX game play back up to its former levels, while continuing to deliver quality free content.
So yes, as someone who had firsthand experience from the beta days of CoH up to the nerf-go-round that Emmert was pretty much directly responsible for and beyond, it's not really a surprise that these idiots are sticking with their "mega nerf first, explain and adjust later" policy.
What a pity.... simultaneously, after beta-testing CO, I am so glad that I fought the desire to purchase this game.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
Least balanced game in terms of mob difficulty. In open beta I could solo 4-6 mobs without getting hurt, but there are also some mobs that were so OP that I died twice before killing them. Besides the rare instance where a mob was hard, the game was so easy, and that's why I showed no interested besides it being a single-player game mentality.
The game didn't make me feel like a superhero, it made me feel like a god. I loved character creation, but when it came down to game-time this game doesn't cut it.
It would have been more appropriate to have a first impressions article written by someone, who either had not previously played the game, or a writer who could give an impartial impression of the launched game without referring to beta. Any prospective player that read this article would leave with the impression that something big changed between beta and launch, which is true, but no real idea of whiether the writer recommended the game.
The article is more of a rant than a first impression piece.
How is the MT store? I always figured they made resources scarce to fuel that thing. Have they scaled it back? I was always worried it would effect game play on a base level. Because like it or not, hell you don't even have to believe it, but game design is effected by adding a dedicated store. Greedy sods.
There's that word again. "Boneheaded." Implies a lack of intelligence or unwillingness to learn.
You really think they didn't realize this thing was going to upset some players? I'm relatively certain that the people who made the game are experienced professionals, intelligent people with degrees and everything.
Yes, they knew it would upset the players. They simply don't care. Get used to it, it's par for the course for this crew.
You're a writer for this website so I can only assume you know how this works: Patches take time to develop. They take time to test. They take time to get feedback on, and they take time to alter based on that feedback. Roll all that up into a sum and you get X, X being the amount of time it takes to properly create and implement a patch.
You strike me as a relatively inexperienced MMORPG player if the concept of a "test server" to allow your subscribers to test patch content BEFORE it goes live eludes you. You don't just dump it on the players, specifically at launch. Of course, this crew is well-known for exactly this type of idiocy.
Since this isn't a live product, we must also factor for Y, Y being the launch date. Y is a fixed number, one mutually agreed on by Cryptic and Atari. Or maybe not, maybe Atari issued an ultimatum saying they had to launch on Y, regardless of the state of the product. It has happened before. In either case, Y is a date that, by the time it was realized the critical patch had to happen, couldn't be moved.
Wrong. You release AS IS, continue to develop the changes you feel are necessary and test them on the test server, and then release a thoroughly tested update while also keeping your subscribers informed.
Again, something that hasn't been a strong suit for this crew in the past.
X was too big to fit into Y. They had to trim the process down. Since there was no time to even do so much as get patch notes up for it before it went live, I'm guessing they managed to get the thing into a workable state just under the wire by pulling triple shifts. They squeezed it onboard just in time, and the player feedback portion of the process became an unfortunate casualty. All done to make the patch content go live *before* the primary customer base could get their hands on the game and have the rug yanked out from under them days later.
The player feedback portion became an unfortunate casualty? Hmmm. So I guess they won't have any heartburn if the subscriber portion of the game becomes a casualty?
The point is; there was no need to pull the rug out from under anyone. They should have tested it thoroughly, got player feedback, explained the necessity, and balanced the patch out before releasing. With thorough testing and balancing, the patch probably wouldn't have been released for at least a month, giving the subscribers the opportunity to test it and provide input.
The point I'm making is this: Hasty, it was. Boneheaded, it was not. There can be no "boneheaded" decision when your back is to the wall, the gun is to your head, and the man is in the process of squeezing the trigger, because the only truly stupid thing you can do in that situation is nothing.
Boneheaded it was. Releasing may have been a foregone conclusion; injecting an untested and unexpected patch that changed game mechanics entirely was NOT. They had an extensive beta and multiple open-beta weekends wherein their potential market played the game and either liked the mechanics or did not.
Those that liked the game enough to purchase it as it was could not have been pleased by the changes, and in fact, it seems as though many were not.
So yes, that is what I would call boneheaded.
And, before you ask, why am I making such a big deal out of this? Because this statement goes on to set the tone of the rest of your review. By writing in this fashion you make yourself more than you are, writing as though you know more than the devs. You come off sounding like--forgive me, fellow posters--an angry nerd on a video game forum, one of the ones who believes in his bones that he knows more about making and running an MMO than the people actually doing it for a living. The ones who arrogantly spout their ideas and scream things like, "They never listen to me!" when their pet cause goes ignored.
Couldn't agree less. The reviewer was fair and even-handed in the review and simply stated the facts as s/he knew them and their opinion.
The only thing I would disagree with in the review is the "First Impressions" moniker. It should have been titled "Release Impressions". A true first impressions review would not have introduced any information from the state of the game at beta.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes