Steven, you do realize that Zenith got a 6 (okay) and Dual Universe got a 5 (average), right? Chimeraland also released and got a 6.5. None of those scores are bad. And don't forget Heh, I almost typed that out without laughing. We all know that most people see anything less than an 8 as crap.
If you are going to do a full review on a game, it should receive an unbiased score, and the same scale should be used for all games. The real question is whether indie games should even be scored in the first place? Most indie MMOs are content to simply exist in the niche space they inhabit. Most of them never get a score. And most of them know they aren't competing with the AAA titles. If you're going to put on your big boy pants and want your game to be put in front of the masses, you deserve to be judged just like any other major game, for better or worse.
Steven, you do realize that Zenith got a 6 (okay) and Dual Universe got a 5 (average), right? Chimeraland also released and got a 6.5. None of those scores are bad. And don't forget Heh, I almost typed that out without laughing. We all know that most people see anything less than an 8 as crap.
That's because for hardware reviews on this site, anything less than 8 is crap. MMOs aren't rated on the same scale as hardware.
No. But ALL games should be scored on whether or not they deliver what they said they would. Whether it's fun or not is quite subjective. But if a company says they will deliver X,Y and Z... then that should be a large component of any review. Did they actually deliver X, y and Z?
Doesn't matter if they are Blizzard or if they are 2 guys in a garage. Do what you say you will do.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
How i look at a good Indie mmo vs an aaa mmo.
1. The mechanics of an mmo is the core, the thing that will make or break a game. If a game has excellent mechanics - that causes stickiness and ensures a solid base to keep building on. Indie or not - fail here and the game itself is a total failure
2. An indie game can be excused for not having voice overs, high quality cinematics, motion capture animations and state of the art graphics, however - there are plenty of game engines and texture packs you can license and use (unreal, unity etc). If it looks like it was drawn by a gori
3. An indie mmo has to charge an indie price, trying to push 60-70 dollars for a low budget game is out of the question
1. The mechanics of an mmo is the core, the thing that will make or break a game. If a game has excellent mechanics - that causes stickiness and ensures a solid base to keep building on. Indie or not - fail here and the game itself is a total failure
2. An indie game can be excused for not having voice overs, high quality cinematics, motion capture animations and state of the art graphics, however - there are plenty of game engines and texture packs you can license and use (unreal, unity etc). If it looks like it was drawn by a pack of drunk monkies, its a failure
3. An indie mmo has to charge an indie price, trying to push 60-70 dollars for a low budget game is out of the question
Ah, so cute. Reviewers think people care about scores.
The scores are of course subjective, but the context and descriptions of the various elements of the gameplay and experience are the real values in reviews.
A game is a game. It's either fun or it is not. Doesn't matter if it's "indie" or "AAA made by huge corporatation". So there's absolutely no need to come up with any "different scale" nonsense.
This all the way. It's all about the fun factor which, while still a bit subjective, doesn't matter if it is an indie or AAA game.
Nobody with any sense would hold Embers Adrift to the general standard set by the most successful of MMORPGs. Allowances would have been made for many of the shortfalls between a game made by a small, independent team and one by a major corporation with abundant resources.
The score of 4.0 doesn't represent how Embers Adrift stacks up with MMORPG giants but how it did against the appropriately lowered expectations for the game.
Fun factor is a rather amorphous element. Overall there are many differences in what people consider fun and some can sharply vary from one person to the next. I don't care how fun the reviewer feels game to be. What matters to me is that the elements of the game are well and accurately provided so I can determine whether or not I'd likely feel that the game would be fun to me.
Nobody with any sense would hold Embers Adrift to the general standard set by the most successful of MMORPGs. Allowances would have been made for many of the shortfalls between a game made by a small, independent team and one by a major corporation with abundant resources.
Totally disagree. If they want to compete in the space then they need to be competitive in the product they send out. Was Valheim made by a huge company? No. Was their product comparable to that produced by bigger companies? Yes.
Did people buy it because it was made by a small team or because it was a game they wanted to play?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
As many others have said if you compete in the same space you're subject to the same rating criteria. Does a family owned restaurant get a break in Yelp reviews compared to chain restaurants? No. Same deal here. You want to build an MMO? Be prepared to be graded against WoW, ESO, FFXIV, and others of that caliber.
Nobody with any sense would hold Embers Adrift to the general standard set by the most successful of MMORPGs. Allowances would have been made for many of the shortfalls between a game made by a small, independent team and one by a major corporation with abundant resources.
Totally disagree. If they want to compete in the space then they need to be competitive in the product they send out. Was Valheim made by a huge company? No. Was their product comparable to that produced by bigger companies? Yes.
Did people buy it because it was made by a small team or because it was a game they wanted to play?
That's a good point about Valheim. It makes me ponder 2 questions though.
1. What if Valheim would have hyped itself up before release? Would streamers have been as kind to it if they went in with higher expectations? Would reviewers have given it a low score based on the graphics and other flaws? Valheim didn't oversell itself, and was able to pick up steam by word of mouth. And that word of mouth spread that the graphics sucked but it was worth playing because of the gameplay. So new players went in expecting bad graphics but ignored it because they expected it.
2. What if Valheim would have been made by a AAA studio? Would we have given it the same pass on the graphics quality? Would we have torn apart some of the jankiness of the gameplay elements? Just imagine if EA or Bethesda had made Valheim. I think it would have been a completely different story.
Nobody with any sense would hold Embers Adrift to the general standard set by the most successful of MMORPGs. Allowances would have been made for many of the shortfalls between a game made by a small, independent team and one by a major corporation with abundant resources.
Totally disagree. If they want to compete in the space then they need to be competitive in the product they send out. Was Valheim made by a huge company? No. Was their product comparable to that produced by bigger companies? Yes.
Did people buy it because it was made by a small team or because it was a game they wanted to play?
That's a good point about Valheim. It makes me ponder 2 questions though.
1. What if Valheim would have hyped itself up before release? Would streamers have been as kind to it if they went in with higher expectations? Would reviewers have given it a low score based on the graphics and other flaws? Valheim didn't oversell itself, and was able to pick up steam by word of mouth. And that word of mouth spread that the graphics sucked but it was worth playing because of the gameplay. So new players went in expecting bad graphics but ignored it because they expected it.
2. What if Valheim would have been made by a AAA studio? Would we have given it the same pass on the graphics quality? Would we have torn apart some of the jankiness of the gameplay elements? Just imagine if EA or Bethesda had made Valheim. I think it would have been a completely different story.
Valheim cost less than 20€. I think that was the most important reason why people were so kind to it: We expect game quality to match its release price.
Steven, you do realize that Zenith got a 6 (okay) and Dual Universe got a 5 (average), right? Chimeraland also released and got a 6.5. None of those scores are bad. And don't forget Heh, I almost typed that out without laughing. We all know that most people see anything less than an 8 as crap.
That's because for hardware reviews on this site, anything less than 8 is crap. MMOs aren't rated on the same scale as hardware.
Well, there is no way that hardware and software could use the same score surely, the concept of excellence is not the same, nor is the way you would rate them in relation to other similar (for hardware often near identical) products. On this site the scores have the same look, but you can immediately see the different thought processes going into generating that score. Having typed this, I am thinking I may be crossing wires here?
I think indie must get a review, and the review must use the same scoring system, if the reviewer wants to take pains to point out it is only £10, that's fine. Most gaming reviews do not mention price, if you want a "fairer" review for indie, just mention how cheap they are.
Nobody with any sense would hold Embers Adrift to the general standard set by the most successful of MMORPGs. Allowances would have been made for many of the shortfalls between a game made by a small, independent team and one by a major corporation with abundant resources.
Totally disagree. If they want to compete in the space then they need to be competitive in the product they send out. Was Valheim made by a huge company? No. Was their product comparable to that produced by bigger companies? Yes.
Did people buy it because it was made by a small team or because it was a game they wanted to play?
Is Valheim the standard? No, it is an outlier. It is exception, not the rule.
That's a good point about Valheim. It makes me ponder 2 questions though.
1. What if Valheim would have hyped itself up before release? Would streamers have been as kind to it if they went in with higher expectations? Would reviewers have given it a low score based on the graphics and other flaws? Valheim didn't oversell itself, and was able to pick up steam by word of mouth. And that word of mouth spread that the graphics sucked but it was worth playing because of the gameplay. So new players went in expecting bad graphics but ignored it because they expected it.
2. What if Valheim would have been made by a AAA studio? Would we have given it the same pass on the graphics quality? Would we have torn apart some of the jankiness of the gameplay elements? Just imagine if EA or Bethesda had made Valheim. I think it would have been a completely different story.
Just an FYI, Valheim didnt go into release. It was put out as Early Access. Its still in Early Access.
Embers when it was in beta people were giving it alot more leniency (rightfully so) because nobody was certain what the final product would be. However once they said "full release", they better have a complete product there.
To the larger point you made, I do think overpromising and underdelivering is a problem. If you sold yourself as an MMO, but have zero MMO features, yes, thats a problem.
Well the answer to the question is so obvious no, that it imho actual damage the understanding of the deeper issue there is in how do we discern between AAA and Indie produkts, in a meaningful way.
The analogy that comes to my mind is that of small stores and big supermarkets.
If a small general store is compared to a much bigger supermarket it should loose in every category.
If the small store is also a specialist store, it should still loose out in nearly every category, except the ones that it is really special at.
The real difference is that the comparison doesn't always make sense the same way now as before.
Because the important question is then if the special stuff is important enough that it warrant a visit to the small general store, instead of the big supermarket, and if the general store other stuff is ok enough that you can accept to shop there instead of at the supermarked.
The First part is the hard part to answer in general because it is the special part and depend totally if that is your thing to go for, (and btw if it was common asked for the supermarked would get it as a product asap). The second part is just where the big supermarket anyway comes out best nearly everywhere when we compare them.
So if we go back to AAA games vs Indie games, a general rating can't do the job to tell if the thing that Indie games does well is special enough for you to be interested in. And a special rating will only till if it does something well. It will not help discern if that thing is your thing.
No, because it shouldn't matter if the game is developed by independent developers or a AAA company. They are both in the same genres after all. That would be like ranking cars or phones by brand and not together, it makes no sense.
Yes, because it can be unfair for both indie and AAA. For example if an AAA game is so bad that indie ones are ranked higher than it, it is indicative of where each one stands. Also if they are separated in their own quotas, it will be hard for people to decide which game stands where and it will make everything just a bit more complicated.
If a small general store is compared to a much bigger supermarket it should loose in every category.
If the small store is also a specialist store, it should still loose out in nearly every category, except the ones that it is really special at.
I sort of agree with you, but dont agree that a general store loses to a big box retailer everytime. There are other factors like service, speed, information, convenience, that they can provide to compete.
I remember going fishing in a remote area fishing off the rocks on the coast, on the way in I could have stopped into a big box tackle bait store, and a big box retailer.
I knew the general store was going to have what I needed, they could tell me where the hot spots were, what bait was getting bites, they also had the equipment I needed for that area. Who cares if they didnt have deep sea fishing gear, or 100 different drinks to choose from. I knew they had what I needed, it was quick, easy with good service.
Bringing that back to MMO's. If a game is going to go niche, it better bring a solid product to its target audience AND its target audience needs to be big enough to support the game. If its target audience doesnt even like the game, there is a huge problem.
So whether its FFA PVP, Arena PVP, Group PVE, Solo PVE, RP, Questing, Crafting, etc... the small MMO can focus in and target a couple of areas. The AAA titles will dabble in all of that. If you dont care about all the other things, you can get a super dose of fun out of what you actually like.
The problem arises when the Indie game cant even make 1 single area better than a AAA title even when its focusing. Thats why they get rated low. Got to be good at something, and it needs to be FUN.
No, because it shouldn't matter if the game is developed by independent developers or a AAA company. They are both in the same genres after all. That would be like ranking cars or phones by brand and not together, it makes no sense.
Cars aren't ranked all together usually. They are generally rated individually or comparatively to other cars in the same class. Economy cars are generally compared to each other, as are performance and luxury vehicles. You don't see budget vehicles typically compared to luxury ones as there is little point in doing so.
No, because it shouldn't matter if the game is developed by independent developers or a AAA company. They are both in the same genres after all. That would be like ranking cars or phones by brand and not together, it makes no sense.
Cars aren't ranked all together usually. They are generally rated individually or comparatively to other cars in the same class. Economy cars are generally compared to each other, as are performance and luxury vehicles. You don't see budget vehicles typically compared to luxury ones as there is little point in doing so.
Type of car is one thing, just like MMO vs FPS vs RTS etc...
Luxury vs Budget doesnt speak to the size of the company making the product. Large companies can make a budget car the same as small companies can make luxury cars.
The problem with judging MMO's fully on price, is all the different models of payment out there. F2P games can actually cost thousands, Subs can cost $180 over a year with only a small investment upfront.
The other problems is the price is really not that large in the first place. $20 - $100 is not a large price difference. There really isnt any MMO's out there that cost $1000's to play other than maybe Diablo Immortal. The AAA titles are pretty cheap overall, so if you want a real quality game you cant go up in price to the next teir really.
Comments
If you are going to do a full review on a game, it should receive an unbiased score, and the same scale should be used for all games. The real question is whether indie games should even be scored in the first place? Most indie MMOs are content to simply exist in the niche space they inhabit. Most of them never get a score. And most of them know they aren't competing with the AAA titles. If you're going to put on your big boy pants and want your game to be put in front of the masses, you deserve to be judged just like any other major game, for better or worse.
Doesn't matter if they are Blizzard or if they are 2 guys in a garage. Do what you say you will do.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
1. The mechanics of an mmo is the core, the thing that will make or break a game. If a game has excellent mechanics - that causes stickiness and ensures a solid base to keep building on. Indie or not - fail here and the game itself is a total failure
2. An indie game can be excused for not having voice overs, high quality cinematics, motion capture animations and state of the art graphics, however - there are plenty of game engines and texture packs you can license and use (unreal, unity etc). If it looks like it was drawn by a gori
3. An indie mmo has to charge an indie price, trying to push 60-70 dollars for a low budget game is out of the question
The scores are of course subjective, but the context and descriptions of the various elements of the gameplay and experience are the real values in reviews.
This all the way. It's all about the fun factor which, while still a bit subjective, doesn't matter if it is an indie or AAA game.
Nobody with any sense would hold Embers Adrift to the general standard set by the most successful of MMORPGs. Allowances would have been made for many of the shortfalls between a game made by a small, independent team and one by a major corporation with abundant resources.
The score of 4.0 doesn't represent how Embers Adrift stacks up with MMORPG giants but how it did against the appropriately lowered expectations for the game.
Fun factor is a rather amorphous element. Overall there are many differences in what people consider fun and some can sharply vary from one person to the next. I don't care how fun the reviewer feels game to be. What matters to me is that the elements of the game are well and accurately provided so I can determine whether or not I'd likely feel that the game would be fun to me.
If they want to compete in the space then they need to be competitive in the product they send out. Was Valheim made by a huge company? No. Was their product comparable to that produced by bigger companies? Yes.
Did people buy it because it was made by a small team or because it was a game they wanted to play?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
1. What if Valheim would have hyped itself up before release? Would streamers have been as kind to it if they went in with higher expectations? Would reviewers have given it a low score based on the graphics and other flaws? Valheim didn't oversell itself, and was able to pick up steam by word of mouth. And that word of mouth spread that the graphics sucked but it was worth playing because of the gameplay. So new players went in expecting bad graphics but ignored it because they expected it.
2. What if Valheim would have been made by a AAA studio? Would we have given it the same pass on the graphics quality? Would we have torn apart some of the jankiness of the gameplay elements? Just imagine if EA or Bethesda had made Valheim. I think it would have been a completely different story.
Is Valheim the standard? No, it is an outlier. It is exception, not the rule.
Just an FYI, Valheim didnt go into release. It was put out as Early Access. Its still in Early Access.
Embers when it was in beta people were giving it alot more leniency (rightfully so) because nobody was certain what the final product would be. However once they said "full release", they better have a complete product there.
To the larger point you made, I do think overpromising and underdelivering is a problem. If you sold yourself as an MMO, but have zero MMO features, yes, thats a problem.
The analogy that comes to my mind is that of small stores and big supermarkets.
If a small general store is compared to a much bigger supermarket it should loose in every category.
If the small store is also a specialist store, it should still loose out in nearly every category, except the ones that it is really special at.
The real difference is that the comparison doesn't always make sense the same way now as before. Because the important question is then if the special stuff is important enough that it warrant a visit to the small general store, instead of the big supermarket, and if the general store other stuff is ok enough that you can accept to shop there instead of at the supermarked.
The First part is the hard part to answer in general because it is the special part and depend totally if that is your thing to go for, (and btw if it was common asked for the supermarked would get it as a product asap). The second part is just where the big supermarket anyway comes out best nearly everywhere when we compare them.
So if we go back to AAA games vs Indie games, a general rating can't do the job to tell if the thing that Indie games does well is special enough for you to be interested in. And a special rating will only till if it does something well. It will not help discern if that thing is your thing.
No, because it shouldn't matter if the game is developed by independent developers or a AAA company. They are both in the same genres after all. That would be like ranking cars or phones by brand and not together, it makes no sense.
Yes, because it can be unfair for both indie and AAA. For example if an AAA game is so bad that indie ones are ranked higher than it, it is indicative of where each one stands. Also if they are separated in their own quotas, it will be hard for people to decide which game stands where and it will make everything just a bit more complicated.
https://biturl.top/rU7bY3
Beyond the shadows there's always light
I sort of agree with you, but dont agree that a general store loses to a big box retailer everytime. There are other factors like service, speed, information, convenience, that they can provide to compete.
I remember going fishing in a remote area fishing off the rocks on the coast, on the way in I could have stopped into a big box tackle bait store, and a big box retailer.
I knew the general store was going to have what I needed, they could tell me where the hot spots were, what bait was getting bites, they also had the equipment I needed for that area. Who cares if they didnt have deep sea fishing gear, or 100 different drinks to choose from. I knew they had what I needed, it was quick, easy with good service.
Bringing that back to MMO's. If a game is going to go niche, it better bring a solid product to its target audience AND its target audience needs to be big enough to support the game. If its target audience doesnt even like the game, there is a huge problem.
So whether its FFA PVP, Arena PVP, Group PVE, Solo PVE, RP, Questing, Crafting, etc... the small MMO can focus in and target a couple of areas. The AAA titles will dabble in all of that. If you dont care about all the other things, you can get a super dose of fun out of what you actually like.
The problem arises when the Indie game cant even make 1 single area better than a AAA title even when its focusing. Thats why they get rated low. Got to be good at something, and it needs to be FUN.
Luxury vs Budget doesnt speak to the size of the company making the product. Large companies can make a budget car the same as small companies can make luxury cars.
The problem with judging MMO's fully on price, is all the different models of payment out there. F2P games can actually cost thousands, Subs can cost $180 over a year with only a small investment upfront.
The other problems is the price is really not that large in the first place. $20 - $100 is not a large price difference. There really isnt any MMO's out there that cost $1000's to play other than maybe Diablo Immortal. The AAA titles are pretty cheap overall, so if you want a real quality game you cant go up in price to the next teir really.
start small before you make a mmo