Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Metacritic Speaks
sonoggi
Member Posts: 1,119
almost a 9:1 ratio lovers:haters
over 90% score by all but one professional reviewer
some of the highest user score in gaming history
leaves other AAA MMO's in the dust when it comes to user score, professional review score, or both. study scores of Cataclysm, TSW, TERA, TOR, whatever. you will notice them all failing in either user review, or critic review categories (i.e. 50% of reviews are mixed or bad, which is a big failure)
most importantly, my gf who has despised PC games all her life is now exploring Tyria with me every day.
i encourage everyone to study the trends before bashing the game as sucky or whatever. you can, but your reasons will be very private and within a tiny minority. i think Metacritic trends speak volumes.
Comments
Not sure how she can quest with you when there's no quests.
Pretty much every major mmo release has had favorable reviews. Having the bestest doesn't really mean much.
I like the game and it should get a good score..
but I take professional reviewers opinions with a grain of salt.
completely untrue. every major release has failed either the users, or the critics.
lol I just thought about this statement.
so what you want is for people who dislike the game to discard their own opinions because it doesn't mesh with a trend?
Is this the first MMO you've followed the metacritic on because it's your pride and joy?
Because when TERA first released it was high 80s in critic and user score both on Metacritic and here on MMORPG.COM, honey moon phases end and games scores drop over time.
Just wait.
lol where were you abou 10 months ago? SWTOR launched with critical acclaim, rabid fanboyism, and a generally optimistic attitude about the game. It wasn't until people started reaching endgame that people realized all the fun is in the levelling, and has no lasting value outside of pvp.... Kind of like GW2
SWTOR?
...Was that neccesary? Not only is that completely untrue, with places like Orr, PvP, WvWvW, map completions, awards, hidden areas, exploring in general, and you dare come up with that baseless statement? Now, seeing that this thread is not on GW2 endgame, I will not argue here about whether Gw2 has an endgame (which it obviously does...) here. Also, is this not a troll post devs? You know, posting things like that with no facts? Mod Edit please?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
I wouldn't put so much weight on reviews now days to be honest. Professional reviews often time inflate scores to keep gaming companies (who advertise on their websites) happy. In a way, they're in the business of selling you games too. User reviews are easy to fake. I mean, there's people who create hundreds of fake facebook accounts. You are crazy if you think people don't do the same with user reviews.
Basically the only review you can trust is your own.
MMOs are long term games. Any review of an MMO presented within the first month of release are next to useless for anything outside of simple impressions about graphics, sound, etc.
I have absolutely zero respect for an MMO view that doesn't look at (and have experience with) long term viability, whether that review is positive or negative. Reviewers who review them under the same criteria as single player games are just wasting my time.
He made my argument easy, didn't he?
And the majority of the population consists of idiots. I'm glad at least this crap statistic study can capture that.
Sorry, had to get that out of my system because I HATE ARENANET SUPPORT. 10 days without my account, and they just send us automated messages. SOO UPSET.
You have to understand what Metacritic user scores speak of. Most voter there are not even trying to rate how good the game is, they are rating it up or down based on whether they want it to succeed or fail. While it's good that many people want Guild Wars 2 to succeed, that does not tell much about the quality of the game.
Well, yeah. It's a popularity poll. But it's a poll that more likely represents the people who've played the game. The "critical" reviews are the "before purchase" scores, and the user reviews are the "after purchase" scores. If one or the other are high, then something about the game isn't really right. If both are high, then the developer has done something right, even if it's bribing reviewers and slipping their players some addictive video signals.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I think that I can think on my own thank you very much. Pretty sure the reason people like this game isn't because metacritic says so. I doubt I can go into an argument with my basis evolved around "well this is what metacritic said, and 90% of professional reviewers say so. Are you a professions reviewer for video games? Then your statement and opinion is not valid. Check and mate."
Not to be debby downer but I'm sure that the red is probably people who might actually not like the game. It's true that it could be people who have never played, but I honestly couldn't care if they gave the game a 50%.
You enjoy your one tracked mind though while I play this game because I like it rather than because metacritic does. I hear that Metacritic also gave wrist cutting a 80%. Don't bother looking it up thou, Metacritic wouldn't lie to you about fun and enjoyment.
Execpt GW2 doesn't have a sub and isn't a CoOp rpg. End game isn't much different than other games execpt you don't have to do it to keep up with people in terms of power WHICH MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE to many many people who are tired of gear grind hamster wheels
Games:
Currently playing:Nothing
Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
Past games:
Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
Xpiher's GW2
GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
Warhammer - Xpiher
Should be a law against using metacritic, steam, xfire as any type of valid arguement .. I would only ever value something like metacritic if they didn't allow reviews until 2-3weeks after launch.
If you look at a lot of games on there ,, people start to score the game 10/10 or 0/10 within hours of it going live .. and people hold value in it ? *shakes head*
Last week ppl bashed metacritic for having gw2 in a non favourable light.
This week metacritic be praised because it gives gw2 positive spin!
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
There is a whole thread about it.TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
The formulation was " It wasn't until people started reaching endgame that people realized all the fun is in the levelling, and has no lasting value outside of pvp.... Kind of like GW2
" and there are at least following problems with the reply from KingJiggly:
My own personal rating for GW2 is 8 / 10. The only rating that matters to me is my own.
However, i find it interesting that if game gets low scores Metacritic is unreliable but when a game gets very high score suddenly metacritic becomes credible source.
Bite Me
Ups, someone told the truth. The thing is, you're talking about GW2... the perfect game, the best game ever, the WoW killer, the MMO messiah, so yeah this scores must be true and really prove that the game is the best.
The thread I guess you're thinking of was just about those 10% who rated it low. It was never about the average score, which has actually come down a little. Was at 8.6 last week.
TOR, OTOH, only got as high as 6.1 and then went back down. I don't know why people remember otherwise.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.