Nope. We need less of these F2P cash shop heavy MMOS. Which have started to look more and more like online casino and gambling hubs.
The mmo community needs more games in the line of AA, thats for sure because there is only a few or close to none, and if they come with p2p only option without cash shop even better.
Nope. We need less of these F2P cash shop heavy MMOS. Which have started to look more and more like online casino and gambling hubs.
The mmo community needs more games in the line of AA, thats for sure because there is only a few or close to none, and if they come with p2p only option without cash shop even better.
We need more mmos like FFXIV and ESO.
Even more?
I think he meant in terms of monetization, not in terms of gameplay. ....probably.
Originally posted by dumpcat The concepts are great, they are on to something that could potentially be huge...in another game. A Westernized version of this concept should be the next step IMHO.
I can agree with this.
Hope more games come on the AA line, and theres a huge space to improvement.
Nope. We need less of these F2P cash shop heavy MMOS. Which have started to look more and more like online casino and gambling hubs.
The mmo community needs more games in the line of AA, thats for sure because there is only a few or close to none, and if they come with p2p only option without cash shop even better.
We need more mmos like FFXIV and ESO.
Even more?
I think he meant in terms of monetization, not in terms of gameplay. ....probably.
Hmmm, i dont thing so but if it was, well never mind my replie then.
I agree with the review. It's a shame that PvE isn't really viable for anything. Definitely the worst part of the game. I have tried some of the crafting but there is definitely no way I will ever make any progress there. There is no land and I don't have the money to buy land. It is going to be a long journey to get enough money to do anything.
I will stick with the game because there is nothing else out there like it. This game could have been a 10 with some worthwhile PvE, better combat, limiting land per account and a tweak to the almost overwhelming grind.
There are a lot of very good things about AA that newer sandbox titles can borrow from.
Nope. We need less of these F2P cash shop heavy MMOS. Which have started to look more and more like online casino and gambling hubs.
The mmo community needs more games in the line of AA, thats for sure because there is only a few or close to none, and if they come with p2p only option without cash shop even better.
We need more mmos like FFXIV and ESO.
Even more?
I think he meant in terms of monetization, not in terms of gameplay. ....probably.
Hmmm, i dont thing so but if it was, well never mind my replie then.
It's just that he says in his first paragraph, "We need less of these F2P CASH SHOP HEAVY MMOS. Which have started to look more and more like ONLINE CASINOS AND GAMBLING HUBS." (emphasis mine)
No where in his post did he mention "we need less sandparks" or "we need more theme parks", so I thinkhe's referring to the monetization system.
There has to be the other side to this coin, not everyone will agree with the reviewer and I am simply stating my opinion like all of you.
Maybe I was a little shocked after Bill took this long to write the review and the articles prior to this led me to believe he would have more creative/insightful things to say about the game. When the review finally came, it was nothing more than a summary of what has already been said Ad nauseam. I expected more from him. While I didn't expect a perfect score or even a "9", I didn't expect a "7.3".
I'm confused, other than his opinions differing from yours, what "creative and insightful" things did you expect? He pretty much covered most of the major features of the game.
Just because a game has tons to do doesn't mean that it's fun to do those things, which is the major issue of this game. A game with tons to do is no better than a game with nothing to do if it's not fun doing all those things.
You also keep mentioning that this game is not for people that need instant gratification. It's not how long it takes that bothers me but rather that it's not fun getting there. I have farmed 3 hasla weapons, leveled weapondry and masonry above 30k, have a farm, belong to a large active guild, a clipper, I have done GHA, etc and when I log on it's the same thing every time... I sit there staring at my screen and say to myself what do I feel like doing and the answer is usually nothing really. Why is that? Because whether I chose to farm another weapon, tend to my farm, do a pack run, run GHA, participate in the zergfest that is PvP in this game none of it is that enjoyable.
There has to be the other side to this coin, not everyone will agree with the reviewer and I am simply stating my opinion like all of you.
Maybe I was a little shocked after Bill took this long to write the review and the articles prior to this led me to believe he would have more creative/insightful things to say about the game. When the review finally came, it was nothing more than a summary of what has already been said Ad nauseam. I expected more from him. While I didn't expect a perfect score or even a "9", I didn't expect a "7.3".
I'm confused, other than his opinions differing from yours, what "creative and insightful" things did you expect? He pretty much covered most of the major features of the game.
Just because a game has tons to do doesn't mean that it's fun to do those things, which is the major issue of this game. A game with tons to do is no better than a game with nothing to do if it's not fun doing all those things.
You also keep mentioning that this game is not for people that need instant gratification. It's not how long it takes that bothers me but rather that it's not fun getting there. I have farmed 3 hasla weapons, leveled weapondry and masonry above 30k, have a farm, belong to a large active guild, a clipper, I have done GHA, etc and when I log on it's the same thing every time... I sit there staring at my screen and say to myself what do I feel like doing and the answer is usually nothing really. Why is that? Because whether I chose to farm another weapon, tend to my farm, do a pack run, run GHA, participate in the zergfest that is PvP in this game none of it is that enjoyable.
Jack of all trades, ace of none!
Let me correct something for you and the reviewer,
"none of it is that enjoyable, to me".
To state that something is simply not enjoyable is a opinion not a fact. The difference is that when someone with the audience of MMORPG states these things as a fact, it will have a completely different impact than the average player. Fun is relative and unique to every player. What one player finds boring (in my case raiding), others may find it completely engaging.
For me personally immersion is probably my most important engaging feature in MMO's and AA delivers that in spades for me. Another strong point which was completely ignored by this review. The depth of AA, the complex crafting system and how it all fits together which gives everything purpose and very goal oriented, while somewhat covered seemed to be lost to Bill.
I always knew that the combat oriented players would have the hardest time embracing this game. The same crowd who could care less about crafting/housing/non-combat. Those who are perfectly content non-stop killing would be the biggest criticizers of AA and these players have been the most vocal by far.
I also find it telling that the great majority of responses to this review are from players who have already quit or are planning to. So a review that validates your concerns and dislikes will attract those share that same opinion while those who are still actively playing and enjoying the game may not be inclined to chime in.
Well I would not rate this game at higher than a 5. Even with a decent sized farm I grew bored at 50. The end game is extremely weak. I gave my farm to a friend and have unsubbed. Despite all their promises, the bots and gold spam continue along with the teleporters. When cheaters dominate a game it is never a good game.
UO prior to the Age of Shadows expansion was a far better game. That has to be sad that they can't even improve upon a game that was out over ten years ago.
They will be merging servers before summer and won't that be a huge mess the way they designed housing. All Trion did is get a huge amount of egg all over their face.
There has to be the other side to this coin, not everyone will agree with the reviewer and I am simply stating my opinion like all of you.
Maybe I was a little shocked after Bill took this long to write the review and the articles prior to this led me to believe he would have more creative/insightful things to say about the game. When the review finally came, it was nothing more than a summary of what has already been said Ad nauseam. I expected more from him. While I didn't expect a perfect score or even a "9", I didn't expect a "7.3".
I'm confused, other than his opinions differing from yours, what "creative and insightful" things did you expect? He pretty much covered most of the major features of the game.
Just because a game has tons to do doesn't mean that it's fun to do those things, which is the major issue of this game. A game with tons to do is no better than a game with nothing to do if it's not fun doing all those things.
You also keep mentioning that this game is not for people that need instant gratification. It's not how long it takes that bothers me but rather that it's not fun getting there. I have farmed 3 hasla weapons, leveled weapondry and masonry above 30k, have a farm, belong to a large active guild, a clipper, I have done GHA, etc and when I log on it's the same thing every time... I sit there staring at my screen and say to myself what do I feel like doing and the answer is usually nothing really. Why is that? Because whether I chose to farm another weapon, tend to my farm, do a pack run, run GHA, participate in the zergfest that is PvP in this game none of it is that enjoyable.
Jack of all trades, ace of none!
Let me correct something for you and the reviewer,
"none of it is that enjoyable, to me".
To state that something is simply not enjoyable is a opinion not a fact. The difference is that when someone with the audience of MMORPG states these things as a fact, it will have a completely different impact than the average player. Fun is relative and unique to every player. What one player finds boring (in my case raiding), others may find it completely engaging.
For me personally immersion is probably my most important engaging feature in MMO's and AA delivers that in spades for me. Another strong point which was completely ignored by this review. The depth of AA, the complex crafting system and how it all fits together which gives everything purpose and very goal oriented, while somewhat covered seemed to be lost to Bill.
I always knew that the combat oriented players would have the hardest time embracing this game. The same crowd who could care less about crafting/housing/non-combat. Those who are perfectly content non-stop killing would be the biggest criticizers of AA and these players have been the most vocal by far.
I also find it telling that the great majority of responses to this review are from players who have already quit or are planning to. So a review that validates your concerns and dislikes will attract those share that same opinion while those who are still actively playing and enjoying the game may not be inclined to chime in.
Opinions have nothing to do with creativity or insight. His review is an opinion. This much is obvious because all reviews are opinions by nature. So I don't know why you're going on and on about "creativity" and "insight" in regards to something that's an opinion, either.
"Insight" can be tangentally related to a review for cases where reviews highlight the ramifications of various features, but even then the ramifications tend to be a matter of opinion. You seem to be angry at this review just for disagreeing with you and now you're making up all sorts of silly things to discredit it like "lack of insight and creativity" before proceeding to move the goalposts by saying "It's an opinion, not a fact", when the latter statement isn't relevant to your first statement (insight and creativity) at all. As if you're trying to get people to say "Oh, he's right that it's an opinion and not a fact, therefore it must not have insight and creativity!" A classic chewbacca defense, I suppose.
Also, the great majority of responses to this review are from players who have already quit or are planning to probably because lots of players have already quit or are planning to. Perhaps there is a reason for this.
All Trion did is get a huge amount of egg all over their face.
To be fair, that egg all over their face probably came with some really sweet profits. Just look at all the people in this thread who said they brought $150 founders packs (and then regretted it). That's a lot of money in Trion's pockets!
All Trion did is get a huge amount of egg all over their face.
To be fair, that egg all over their face probably came with some really sweet profits. Just look at all the people in this thread who said they brought $150 founders packs (and then regretted it). That's a lot of money in Trion's pockets!
Oh for sure... Trion has made a killing thus far between the $150 alpha packs, robbing people of the free month that they promised during their botched launch, cash shop sales, etc they have probably already made their initial investment back.
I will say though that I have noticed a drop in population the last week. I logged in last night at prime time and only 2 servers were high pop which is a huge difference in only one week.
"I reviewed ArcheAge with an Archeum pack provided by Trion, so I never actually spent any of my own money. That said, I watched as my Credits dwindled every time I wanted to extend my labor, or get some gold by selling items from the Cash Shop."
That's Pay2Win.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
I have a top machine (Core I7 4790k + R9 290x) and the game's graphics with everything maxed out aren't bad, but definitely don't deserve 8/10. And as you said, the art direction is pretty poor.
Social 8 when this is one of the worse MMO communities I've seen in a long time? And I don't only talk about asshats, but also cheaters and hackers, not to mention the tremendous amount of bots.
At least these numbers are within a realistic range. Not like the 2s some dumb asses are putting down @ metacritic.
Just another example of the difference between a reviewer who knows what he's doing and wannabes.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
"I reviewed ArcheAge with an Archeum pack provided by Trion, so I never actually spent any of my own money. That said, I watched as my Credits dwindled every time I wanted to extend my labor, or get some gold by selling items from the Cash Shop."
That's Pay2Win.
Yea, one part of the review which actually IS biased is that he got some hefty cash shop perks without actually having to pay any cash. It's harder to realize pay-to-win aspects if you're cruising with cash shop benefits without paying while everyone else is either not paying but not getting those same perks, or paying an undisclosed amount from their own walletts (which tends to change one's perspective of the game). In the same paragraph where he admits selling items he didn't have to pay for for in-game gold, he says players "can get labor potions cheaply from auctions", but the latter statement becomes difficult to trust when he's not speaking from first hand experience (maybe they are getting them "cheaply" from auctions. Maybe not. But his assessment of the matter is NOT from his own personal experience because he's not the free-player buying those potions with either gold or real life money in the first place. Instead he has his given to him for free and even having enough surplus from those free gifts to sell to others for gold)
........hell, if anything, if the review were more positive about Archeage, I'd question it's integrity because the reviewer clearly got in-game gifts from the parent company to do his review. As it is, though, it generally leaned towards the negative (as you can see from the pissed off reactions of the white knights in the thread and the "general agreement" from the people who are quitting or planning to) so instead I get the feeling of "Wow, game's issues are so clear that Trion tried to subtlely bribe this guy yet still couldn't get a positive review out of it."
(yes, I'm aware some people think it's score of above 7 is too high. However, the numbers are arbitrary and one reviewer's idea of what constitutes a 7 might differ from another's. The important things to look at are the words and, despite Trion giving the reviewer free cash shop items which would probably subconsciously make the experience more positive than it would be for someone paying their own real cash or someone who has to play without cash shop perks, the game still got a review leaning towards the negative)
I didn't experience anywhere near as much of the game as Bill did, But what I played of it was exactly as Bill describes, here.
By the way, Bill, I really like the review strategy you took, here. Looks like it did take alot more work than just one review a month on out, but it seems like it gave time for the honeymoon to end before you made a final decision. All while giving us some detail on the game from the beginning. It allows me to take your longevity rating much more seriously.
I like mostly solo PVE questing and then exploration when I hit max level. This game got me to lvl 33 doing PVE only questing and I mostly enjoyed it. The wall came with forced PVP in order to continue to quest level or wait days for a 2 hour PVE only window to open. It was fun while it lasted.
I knew it was an open world PVP game but I've played and enjoyed games like L2 and Aion before that didn't have PVE choke points. Now I'm off elsewhere. I love all the MMO's that are out now. Always something to do and somewhere else to go.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
In my opinion, land hacks are one of the most detrimental issues in this game. As mentioned in the review land is a necessity to experience what AA has to offer. As I am typing this post , 4 land hackers I have added to my friends list have all logged in . This means that a few homes are being demolished.. They will claim all of them, transfer to an alt, then sell them for huge amount of gold in less than an hour.
Regular players will have to pay them a huge amount of gold to get a small piece of land. It's quite unfortunate (even with a subscription, founders pack etc:) that if you don't cheat you are basically content for the exploiters, cheaters, hackers etc.
Bill why don't you just write about games you really enjoy? Don't be such a hater.
Anyway I thought according to the scoring around here, 7+ is rather good, where as 8.0+ is really good. Few score in the 9's... I thought that's how it's been broken down before, maybe I'm wrong and am just crazy...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Bill why don't you just write about games you really enjoy? Don't be such a hater.
ANyway I thought according to the scoring around here, 7+ is rather good, where as 80+ is really good. Few score in the 9's...
Reviewers are supposed to write about games whether they like them or not. That's part of the whole point of a review (to tell someone if they liked a game or not, and why), and it's even more pronounced if reviewing is that person's job.
Besides, if you'd actually read the "Review in Progress" articles he wrote (and linked to at the start of his review), you'd (hopefully) notice that he DID like the game at first (even if he acknowledged it wasn't perfect even back then).
Then again, LOTS of people liked Archeage "at first". Given that the reviewer had to spend an additional 50+ hours (he mentions "50 hours" in his review in progress, then "100 hours" in his final review) to come to his final opinion, one which apparently became more negative as time went on, I think he's doing a LOT of people a favor and possibly saving them 50 hours of their own time before they potentially come to the same conclusion.
MMOs are time-consumming beasts. If a person can say "Yea, you'll like the first 50 hours, but it kinda wears on you after a while", they're being nice enough to let others know, not "being a hater". Besides, sometimes people hate things, and sometimes there's a reason they do. Bill was rather explicit in his review in pointing out his own reasons for "not adoring the game like a squeeling school girl" (honestly, the review wasn't even THAT negative and gave the game a 7+ yet he's still called a hater. *eyeroll*
(although I do admit I'm not completely sure how serious you were about that "Don't be a hater" remark. It's possible you're joking. Sarcasm can be hard to pick up in text sometimes)
I admit i was wrong when i previously said that AA would get an auto 8.5 and anyone but Bill should review it.
Still the score could have gone lower and settle somewhere around 6.5 if the reviewer would have paid attention to many other baseline issues the game has.
I wouldnt be surprised to see a re-review some day after perhaps major patch hit the game and the score go above 8 then.
I admit i was wrong when i previously said that AA would get an auto 8.5 and anyone but Bill should review it.
Still the score could have gone lower and settle somewhere around 6.5 if the reviewer would have paid attention to many other baseline issues the game has.
I wouldnt be surprised to see a re-review some day after perhaps major patch hit the game and the score go above 8 then.
I think it was worth 5 points alone in that it isn't the same damn thing we have been force fed for the last 10+ years in this genre. Someone is going to make a 9+ game with many of these ideas. Maybe pure themeparkers can't see any good in the game but the rest of us can see some good.
Bill why don't you just write about games you really enjoy? Don't be such a hater.
ANyway I thought according to the scoring around here, 7+ is rather good, where as 80+ is really good. Few score in the 9's...
Reviewers are supposed to write about games whether they like them or not. That's part of the whole point of a review (to tell someone if they liked a game or not, and why), and it's even more pronounced if reviewing is that person's job.
Besides, if you'd actually read the "Review in Progress" articles he wrote (and linked to at the start of his review), you'd (hopefully) notice that he DID like the game at first (even if he acknowledged it wasn't perfect even back then).
Then again, LOTS of people liked Archeage "at first". Given that the reviewer had to spend an additional 50+ hours (he mentions "50 hours" in his review in progress, then "100 hours" in his final review) to come to his final opinion, one which apparently became more negative as time went on, I think he's doing a LOT of people a favor and possibly saving them 50 hours of their own time before they potentially come to the same conclusion.
MMOs are time-consumming beasts. If a person can say "Yea, you'll like the first 50 hours, but it kinda wears on you after a while", they're being nice enough to let others know, not "being a hater". Besides, sometimes people hate things, and sometimes there's a reason they do. Bill was rather explicit in his review in pointing out his own reasons for "not adoring the game like a squeeling school girl" (honestly, the review wasn't even THAT negative and gave the game a 7+ yet he's still called a hater. *eyeroll*
(although I do admit I'm not completely sure how serious you were about that "Don't be a hater" remark. It's possible you're joking. Sarcasm can be hard to pick up in text sometimes)
Pure sarcasm ..
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Comments
The mmo community needs more games in the line of AA, thats for sure because there is only a few or close to none, and if they come with p2p only option without cash shop even better.
Even more?
I think he meant in terms of monetization, not in terms of gameplay. ....probably.
I can agree with this.
Hope more games come on the AA line, and theres a huge space to improvement.
Hmmm, i dont thing so but if it was, well never mind my replie then.
I agree with the review. It's a shame that PvE isn't really viable for anything. Definitely the worst part of the game. I have tried some of the crafting but there is definitely no way I will ever make any progress there. There is no land and I don't have the money to buy land. It is going to be a long journey to get enough money to do anything.
I will stick with the game because there is nothing else out there like it. This game could have been a 10 with some worthwhile PvE, better combat, limiting land per account and a tweak to the almost overwhelming grind.
There are a lot of very good things about AA that newer sandbox titles can borrow from.
It's just that he says in his first paragraph, "We need less of these F2P CASH SHOP HEAVY MMOS. Which have started to look more and more like ONLINE CASINOS AND GAMBLING HUBS." (emphasis mine)
No where in his post did he mention "we need less sandparks" or "we need more theme parks", so I thinkhe's referring to the monetization system.
I'm confused, other than his opinions differing from yours, what "creative and insightful" things did you expect? He pretty much covered most of the major features of the game.
Just because a game has tons to do doesn't mean that it's fun to do those things, which is the major issue of this game. A game with tons to do is no better than a game with nothing to do if it's not fun doing all those things.
You also keep mentioning that this game is not for people that need instant gratification. It's not how long it takes that bothers me but rather that it's not fun getting there. I have farmed 3 hasla weapons, leveled weapondry and masonry above 30k, have a farm, belong to a large active guild, a clipper, I have done GHA, etc and when I log on it's the same thing every time... I sit there staring at my screen and say to myself what do I feel like doing and the answer is usually nothing really. Why is that? Because whether I chose to farm another weapon, tend to my farm, do a pack run, run GHA, participate in the zergfest that is PvP in this game none of it is that enjoyable.
Jack of all trades, ace of none!
Let me correct something for you and the reviewer,
"none of it is that enjoyable, to me".
To state that something is simply not enjoyable is a opinion not a fact. The difference is that when someone with the audience of MMORPG states these things as a fact, it will have a completely different impact than the average player. Fun is relative and unique to every player. What one player finds boring (in my case raiding), others may find it completely engaging.
For me personally immersion is probably my most important engaging feature in MMO's and AA delivers that in spades for me. Another strong point which was completely ignored by this review. The depth of AA, the complex crafting system and how it all fits together which gives everything purpose and very goal oriented, while somewhat covered seemed to be lost to Bill.
I always knew that the combat oriented players would have the hardest time embracing this game. The same crowd who could care less about crafting/housing/non-combat. Those who are perfectly content non-stop killing would be the biggest criticizers of AA and these players have been the most vocal by far.
I also find it telling that the great majority of responses to this review are from players who have already quit or are planning to. So a review that validates your concerns and dislikes will attract those share that same opinion while those who are still actively playing and enjoying the game may not be inclined to chime in.
Well I would not rate this game at higher than a 5. Even with a decent sized farm I grew bored at 50. The end game is extremely weak. I gave my farm to a friend and have unsubbed. Despite all their promises, the bots and gold spam continue along with the teleporters. When cheaters dominate a game it is never a good game.
UO prior to the Age of Shadows expansion was a far better game. That has to be sad that they can't even improve upon a game that was out over ten years ago.
They will be merging servers before summer and won't that be a huge mess the way they designed housing. All Trion did is get a huge amount of egg all over their face.
Opinions have nothing to do with creativity or insight. His review is an opinion. This much is obvious because all reviews are opinions by nature. So I don't know why you're going on and on about "creativity" and "insight" in regards to something that's an opinion, either.
"Insight" can be tangentally related to a review for cases where reviews highlight the ramifications of various features, but even then the ramifications tend to be a matter of opinion. You seem to be angry at this review just for disagreeing with you and now you're making up all sorts of silly things to discredit it like "lack of insight and creativity" before proceeding to move the goalposts by saying "It's an opinion, not a fact", when the latter statement isn't relevant to your first statement (insight and creativity) at all. As if you're trying to get people to say "Oh, he's right that it's an opinion and not a fact, therefore it must not have insight and creativity!" A classic chewbacca defense, I suppose.
Also, the great majority of responses to this review are from players who have already quit or are planning to probably because lots of players have already quit or are planning to. Perhaps there is a reason for this.
To be fair, that egg all over their face probably came with some really sweet profits. Just look at all the people in this thread who said they brought $150 founders packs (and then regretted it). That's a lot of money in Trion's pockets!
Oh for sure... Trion has made a killing thus far between the $150 alpha packs, robbing people of the free month that they promised during their botched launch, cash shop sales, etc they have probably already made their initial investment back.
I will say though that I have noticed a drop in population the last week. I logged in last night at prime time and only 2 servers were high pop which is a huge difference in only one week.
"I reviewed ArcheAge with an Archeum pack provided by Trion, so I never actually spent any of my own money. That said, I watched as my Credits dwindled every time I wanted to extend my labor, or get some gold by selling items from the Cash Shop."
That's Pay2Win.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/At least these numbers are within a realistic range. Not like the 2s some dumb asses are putting down @ metacritic.
Just another example of the difference between a reviewer who knows what he's doing and wannabes.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Yea, one part of the review which actually IS biased is that he got some hefty cash shop perks without actually having to pay any cash. It's harder to realize pay-to-win aspects if you're cruising with cash shop benefits without paying while everyone else is either not paying but not getting those same perks, or paying an undisclosed amount from their own walletts (which tends to change one's perspective of the game). In the same paragraph where he admits selling items he didn't have to pay for for in-game gold, he says players "can get labor potions cheaply from auctions", but the latter statement becomes difficult to trust when he's not speaking from first hand experience (maybe they are getting them "cheaply" from auctions. Maybe not. But his assessment of the matter is NOT from his own personal experience because he's not the free-player buying those potions with either gold or real life money in the first place. Instead he has his given to him for free and even having enough surplus from those free gifts to sell to others for gold)
........hell, if anything, if the review were more positive about Archeage, I'd question it's integrity because the reviewer clearly got in-game gifts from the parent company to do his review. As it is, though, it generally leaned towards the negative (as you can see from the pissed off reactions of the white knights in the thread and the "general agreement" from the people who are quitting or planning to) so instead I get the feeling of "Wow, game's issues are so clear that Trion tried to subtlely bribe this guy yet still couldn't get a positive review out of it."
(yes, I'm aware some people think it's score of above 7 is too high. However, the numbers are arbitrary and one reviewer's idea of what constitutes a 7 might differ from another's. The important things to look at are the words and, despite Trion giving the reviewer free cash shop items which would probably subconsciously make the experience more positive than it would be for someone paying their own real cash or someone who has to play without cash shop perks, the game still got a review leaning towards the negative)
I didn't experience anywhere near as much of the game as Bill did, But what I played of it was exactly as Bill describes, here.
By the way, Bill, I really like the review strategy you took, here. Looks like it did take alot more work than just one review a month on out, but it seems like it gave time for the honeymoon to end before you made a final decision. All while giving us some detail on the game from the beginning. It allows me to take your longevity rating much more seriously.
Hope you do it this way for future reviews!
I like mostly solo PVE questing and then exploration when I hit max level. This game got me to lvl 33 doing PVE only questing and I mostly enjoyed it. The wall came with forced PVP in order to continue to quest level or wait days for a 2 hour PVE only window to open. It was fun while it lasted.
I knew it was an open world PVP game but I've played and enjoyed games like L2 and Aion before that didn't have PVE choke points. Now I'm off elsewhere. I love all the MMO's that are out now. Always something to do and somewhere else to go.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
In my opinion, land hacks are one of the most detrimental issues in this game. As mentioned in the review land is a necessity to experience what AA has to offer. As I am typing this post , 4 land hackers I have added to my friends list have all logged in . This means that a few homes are being demolished.. They will claim all of them, transfer to an alt, then sell them for huge amount of gold in less than an hour.
Regular players will have to pay them a huge amount of gold to get a small piece of land. It's quite unfortunate (even with a subscription, founders pack etc:) that if you don't cheat you are basically content for the exploiters, cheaters, hackers etc.
Very sad indeed.
I must add that I do enjoy the game.
http://www.entropiapartners.com/?r=22415
Bill why don't you just write about games you really enjoy? Don't be such a hater.
Anyway I thought according to the scoring around here, 7+ is rather good, where as 8.0+ is really good. Few score in the 9's... I thought that's how it's been broken down before, maybe I'm wrong and am just crazy...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Reviewers are supposed to write about games whether they like them or not. That's part of the whole point of a review (to tell someone if they liked a game or not, and why), and it's even more pronounced if reviewing is that person's job.
Besides, if you'd actually read the "Review in Progress" articles he wrote (and linked to at the start of his review), you'd (hopefully) notice that he DID like the game at first (even if he acknowledged it wasn't perfect even back then).
Then again, LOTS of people liked Archeage "at first". Given that the reviewer had to spend an additional 50+ hours (he mentions "50 hours" in his review in progress, then "100 hours" in his final review) to come to his final opinion, one which apparently became more negative as time went on, I think he's doing a LOT of people a favor and possibly saving them 50 hours of their own time before they potentially come to the same conclusion.
MMOs are time-consumming beasts. If a person can say "Yea, you'll like the first 50 hours, but it kinda wears on you after a while", they're being nice enough to let others know, not "being a hater". Besides, sometimes people hate things, and sometimes there's a reason they do. Bill was rather explicit in his review in pointing out his own reasons for "not adoring the game like a squeeling school girl" (honestly, the review wasn't even THAT negative and gave the game a 7+ yet he's still called a hater. *eyeroll*
(although I do admit I'm not completely sure how serious you were about that "Don't be a hater" remark. It's possible you're joking. Sarcasm can be hard to pick up in text sometimes)
I admit i was wrong when i previously said that AA would get an auto 8.5 and anyone but Bill should review it.
Still the score could have gone lower and settle somewhere around 6.5 if the reviewer would have paid attention to many other baseline issues the game has.
I wouldnt be surprised to see a re-review some day after perhaps major patch hit the game and the score go above 8 then.
Been waiting for inverted Y Axis on the mouse since March 2014!!!!
Still waiting.
I think it was worth 5 points alone in that it isn't the same damn thing we have been force fed for the last 10+ years in this genre. Someone is going to make a 9+ game with many of these ideas. Maybe pure themeparkers can't see any good in the game but the rest of us can see some good.
Pure sarcasm
..
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson