Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Angry Joe Show 5/10
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Well first off I am not an idiot to believe those pay x amount a day to feed starving children charities, I do my part personally because I am not a fat prick with a lazy attitude.
Second off: Yes because no one is forcing you to get the founder's pack in a F2P (not P2W, know the difference lad) game.
Third off: Us people pay when we want to not when we're forced to and we choose to pay however much we want (I dropped 60 euros on War Thunder a few weeks ago on one of the ground forces advanced packs and one of the starter packs, if you claim P2W I will tell you: not when your exclusive tank can get knocked out just as easily with 1 shot as any other at your tier). Who wants and can afford 900 dollars a month on a game is welcome to splurge if it makes him/her happy and it does not give that person an unfair advantage (premium items of greater potency than you can ever get through normal gameplay, yes, yes I know your type wants to portray any items in a cash shop as pay to win but unless the game has a player run economy it does not matter as long as the items are on level with those obtainable in-game and not on a different level entirely, see Rift's 1st tier of raid gear in the cash shop).
Fourth off: You are in no position to talk about other people's spending habits especially when I doubt you yourself do not indulge in some form of self-pampering ( better gaming rig than you'd need, designer clothes, "farm raised" food, etc,etc).
And just because you seem to follow the mentality of Aoshi Shinamori before he dropped the idiotic "I shall place the flower on your grave" shit, fifth off:
I used to think B2P or F2P was universally terrible. I began to change my mind a few years later after I watched my subscription dollars finance content that I had no interest in. I'm at the point now where rather than pay a subscription - I would almost rather just be given the ability to buy the content that I want to play and not be "taxed" to subsidize content that I have no interest in.
The most recent game to use the "Founder package" is Landmark and that is nearly purely for early access. I really have no idea why someone would buy more than the $20 package - otherwise, it's just a couple of toys that are not relevant at the end of the tool progression (other than cosmetically).
As for GW2's cash shop, I have recently picked up GW2. I'm 28% complete with the map at level 56 (with 3 other alts) and I have not one time felt like I needed to buy anything from their cash shop. I will probably buy more bank space eventually and obviously I'm not level 80 yet - so I'll leave that caveat there. I'm sure eventually I will buy transmutation charges but I can probably buy a fair amount of that type of stuff for the $15 sub I would otherwise be paying to WoW or another game.
The best thing that I'm liking about GW2 is that I don't feel like I am subsidizing a bunch of raid content. If only games like WoW would limit raid content to DLC-like cash shop mechanisms. If you want it great, buy it and enjoy it with your guild. (little off-topic I know).
Back on topic - Angry Joe was spot on with what I experienced in my beta weekend of playing ESO. I lost desire to play ESO after just a few hours. I knew right off that it was going to have problems.
yea thanks for the update
the original post is filled with so much irony it speaks for itself. maybe the poster did it on purpose. well we knew there were gonna be more "interesting" posts in the thread. i am not agreeing or disagreeing with the scores but i think if devs(or ppl in charge for fixing stuff or w/e) listen to some of the problems that were mentioned by Joe or any other reviewer the game can benefit from it a lot. high scores alone didn't help huge games sticking with p2p model before and they just raised expectations so maybe tough love turns out to be better for ESO in the end.
so far the best argument i saw on this thread was probably this: (haven't read all the posts carefully so there might be better ones)
*sarcasm on
- Joe made a mistake and said " kill n skeletons to get n gold for horse or else" he forgot to mention the unique awesome feature of selling stuff so all his points about low gold drops and still expensive mounts are wrong. who cares if you wanted to be rewarded by killing an npc that seemed important to you! you are gonna get something eventually. awesome design. what a coincidence that you can obtain horse with real money too, what a coincidence that PvP is a pain without horses. i got him.
/sarcasm off
even if someone manages to counter some of his points some other huge points will remain in the end until they they are changed in the game. well that argument was still better than calling Joe a p2w supporter and assuming by free he means p2w just because f2p has the potential to become p2w. i am not sure about the ratio of f2p games that are turned into p2w but that doesn't mean one should assume he means p2w by free.
my top MMOs: UO,DAOC,WoW,GW2
most of my posts are just my opinions they are not facts,it is the same for you too.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
You are already so far gone then. So, it's not okay for things like the imperial class to be locked behind an extra edition. But, it's okay for you to be charged for an alpha or a beta because you don't need it to play? Want your character name? Sorry someone else spent money to get it. Want some real advanced knowledge of the game before launch? Oh guess you are out of luck.
Oh funny you bring up rift. If you get to the top tier of their spender program you can unlock a movement speed advantage over everyone else. Granted that was the only advantage I found in their item mall. If you are a pve'er that doesn't mean much. Pvping however totally different story. I'm still waiting to see what tricks Trion has instore for AA. As for war thunder that is again off the grid. That's like saying well world of tanks changed their format and are free to win so let's go to another f2p company's website and try out all they have to offer. People's spending habits have screwed us over in the past and will continue to do so. You could go buy a 30 dollar copy of MGS ground zero while you're at it.
Paying for content in bits and pieces becomes problematic over time. Look at DCUO and their system. The amount of content you would (have to buy) to get the current full game is crazy. However, if you subbed to their legendary system you would unlock everything. People cry about locking content behind walls, yet at the same want everything. How the heck are honest companies supposed to make a living like that? Oh I know by gouging the fk out of players with microtransactions!
What would you recommend? Buy everything so all your opinions are 1st hand?
[mod edit]
In order:
1) Yes because it is pay to play not free to play and even F2P games are eliminating buy to play races;
2) Character name = cosmetic, you will live if you have to be named Limp Biskit instead of Limp Bizkit;
3) Advanced knowledge? You have any idea how paid alpha games change? Hell even true betas will change allot and while you will have advanced knowledge... that is until the NDA lifts during open beta and you find out everything the guys that paid knew from written guides and videos, nice try;
4) P2W? Rift? 10% extra speed? really? are you gonna argue 10% extra riding speed is P2W? Lets say it takes you 20 seconds to get somewhere in pvp, you think 2 seconds will matter that much to the overall pace of the battle? If it was 25-50% yeah, P2W but 10%? a few extra seconds to kiss your ass goodbye? -sighs-
5) Wha? Off the grid? You mean you dislike it proving you wrong? How about hmm... lets see STO,NWO, Therian Saga, Mabinogi,EverEmber, Path of Exile? Want more? We can keep this up all day long.
[mod edit]
If AJ had given ESO a great score he would be lying. ESO has some serious problems as an MMO. It's not great, it's going to take work to make it good, and a whole lot of work to make it really good. Still, it can be enjoyable to some, but I'm getting an SWTOR feeling over this game.
I hope the subs last them long enough to turn the game into a succes, but launching like this is not the best of signs.
Tbh, after ESO failure (at least in my eyes) i m already downloading SWTOR in order to play it until WildStar comes out. Hoping the best for the fans and players of ESO though. Different ppl different tastes
This discussion is entertaining, not so much the review from Angry Joe
.
Because he spend so much time making video's, my guess is that I spend more time actually playing the games. So yes he might have 500+ video's, running a community and have loads of views. That however does not make him a bigger (or lesser) "authority" on video games. That also does not make his opinions more valid then mine.
I think that is also what that person means. So in that regard he is like anyone else, simply giving his opinion about it. It might concern Zenimax, but it should not change our minds more then a review done by someone who has only 10.000 views.
You shouldn't have to play a game for 100+ hours just to get a feel for whether you will like it or not.
I've only watched one Angry Joe video (this ESO video) but I have heard of him before. Youtube personalities that do game reviews don't reach any type of "respected" status by being wildly wrong - viewers would quickly dismiss them as being hacks. That is obviously not what is going on with AJ though - he is respected - demonstrated by a great number of people following his channel.
Sadly, my time in the beta completely agrees with the jist of his review video. ESO is a prime example of making awesome cinematics but failing to make a game of the same quality.
Perhaps ESO would be much better if they hadn't dumped so much money into making those awesome cinematics and instead focused on making a game they could be proud of?
Yes, AJ is respected as demonstrated by a great number of people following his channel.
Therefore we can all agree that WoW is the best MMO as demonstrated by having the most subs.
Sorry I had to do it.
Apples and oranges.
I did not say AJ was the best game reviewer. I didn't say he was always right. I said he was respected by the gaming community.
As for WoW, it's the elephant in the room that everything is compared to at some point. Best or not, it's had the most success for a sub-based game and what nearly every game developer (even single player) aspire to these days.
Shoot, you can't hardly even find a single-player game that hasn't inherited at least one thing WoW does - be it talent trees, UI setup or something.
The guys an entertainer. He showboats, he's good for a couple laugh's, power to him
I have to wonder how much of his review are of his own experience and thoughts and how much is from reading forums like this and just going with the flow.
Personally: I cant take him as a serious game reviewer.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Any MMORPG (ESO included) would swap their current user base on the spot to be the "failure" WoW is.
The fact that ESO has less money and less players certainly doesn't make ESO better than WoW, and probably won't help the game in the long run either.
I think the rating is a bit on the low side . I'm enjoying it but he did make some good points . The thing that stands out about TESO for me is that it wouldn't be getting anywhere near as much criticism if had been buy to play and had charged for DLCS when they are available in the same way TSW does . For me theres enough there to keep me interested for at least 4 months as I'm planning on playing 3 characters one of each faction .
A lot will depend on what it has to offer after that but I doubt the developers will be able to put significant amounts of content out once every 6-8 weeks for me to be able to justify the subscription been value for money . I suspect I will probably end up playing it two or three months when theres a new patch .
Its a shame because it really would have shone as a buy to play title instead of that they have got a lot animosity towards it . Partly because they released with a cash shop , partly because it is bugged ( but its not as bad as some I've seen ) , partly because theres mess ups like the recent banning of legitimate accounts without reimbursing them for the time lost and partly because they locked things like the imperials in the delux edition .
Personally I would give it a 8 out of 10 for the game itself from what I have seen so far and a 5 out of 10 for how Zenimax have handled the launch and a 1 out of 10 for their customer relations.
But the 30 days aren't free...
The 30 days actually cost $60, the full box price of the game. So really, you pay $60 for the first month, and $15 for every subsequent month.
Why would a botter be willing to pay $60 a month but not $15 a month???
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I understand how you feel towards AJ and I do agree to an extent that he is an entertainer. However he does have footage of him actually playing the game when he showcases bugs/glitches or points that hes trying to make. I think it is a little unrealistic to assume that he goes through forums for a generic opinion of the game. Hes a good reviewer if you listen to the core of his review and try to block out the necessary fluff.
Right, you said having a lot of followers means he's respected. That's a false equivalency which is why I brought up the WoW false equivalency. Having a lot of followers means he's entertaining. Whether or not those people value his reviews and make decisions based on them because they respect him and his review is another matter.
I remember Joe's reaction to the Xbone, it was over the top, but it was humorous. Sometimes he's funny, most of the time he's douchey because he lacks finesse and knowing when to stop telling the joke. He let things drag on because he wants to prove a point, so his delivery is a bit one-note and simplistic. See that Zero Sum review for someone who deliver a much more scathing overview of the ESO and MMO genre as a whole, but does it in 5 minutes vs Joe's 40 (this might be because Joe spent 8 minutes talking about bugs).
The point.
You.
Not certain many posters here even know who you are referencing. Also, Lum made his name off primarily one particular game. Same for Tweety. Both of whom went to work at Mythic, eventually. As for AJ, he does lots of reviews on many games, across all platforms. Lum might have had his day, but he is no Angry Joe...Lum would have killed to have the following AJ has.