Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Honest review from level 8 and D&D fan--might be surprised
Lamethrower
Member Posts: 82
Well, I'm not going to be nearly so kind as Burrek, sadly (though I have shamelessly stolen his review format). I played it to level 8 on my main character (a rogue) and had various others (bard, barb, cleric, another rogue, wiz, etc.)
Overall : 5.2
Pros: Aesthetically pleasing, varied content, some D&D GM "feel", good grouping setup
cons: More bugs than an ant colony, forced grouping, engine can screw up computers, no community, no world to explore.
Graphics: 8/10
MMO's typically plan their graphics 2-3 years in advance so as to not become an "ugly" game in too short a period of time. This one is no different. It's very sound graphically, certainly better than any other MMO save maybe EQ2. This, however, comes at a price. This game is developing a reputation as a "system killer". The custom engine Turbine designed for this game is horribly inefficient and can cause hardware problems with your computer. There are countless stories out there of the game sucking up a lot more resources from your computer than it should, and working your video card at a disproportionate rate to the type of graphics the game provides. Many, MANY people have experienced for the first time a warning from their computer that their video card was overheating. Many complain that their system has a tendency to "lock up" or "shut down" while playing, not sure why--the culprit is almost assuredly the video card reaching critical temperature and the system safeguards kicking in. A couple people have even experienced system burnout as a result of the strain the game puts on the system. If the safeguards don't kick in in time, the card can overheat to the point to where it can fry whatever components are near it, as well as the motherboard. It has happened, so be warned. Back on the issue of graphics, there are some downsides. There are no cloak animations for one. On another note, since so much of the game is spent exploring "Dungeons" and sewers, the game tends to have a very muted, very depressing feel to it. Gone are the bright, vibrant colors one could find at various cities or stalking grounds in other MMO's. There are glitches in the graphics, causing the screen to "block" and "grey out" (all imaging disappearing, only a solid wall of grey), which can be annoying since it essentially makes you blind.
Sound: 9/10
There are only 2 reasons it's not a 10/10. For one, the game stresses voice chatting. If you don't have a mic or don't want to use one, you will find your options somewhat limited in many groups that demand it. It rather ruins the "feel" of the game, IMO, to hear a man's burly voice coming out of a frail elf female. To say nothing of getting stuck grouped with someone who's signature word is "like"...as in "So I, like, have this like +2 morningstar and it's like, really sweet. Like, what do you have to trade for it? I'd like, ya know, like a nice set of like bracers or something like that". Educated wizard, indeed. The other reason is much, much more minor: There's just not much of a collection of background music. They tend to regurtitate the same music over and over for similar situations. Could use some more variant.
On the plus side, however--the GM's voice has a very "GM-y" feel to it, and the music the game does have is spectacular. The music in the taverns is what you would expect the music to be if you really were in a medieval tavern, and the ambient background music is quite fitting and a nice change of pace from the hectic action fighting you find in the dungeons.
Replayability factor/long-term worthiness: 3/10
The lack of content is, to say the least, disappointing. Since there's no world to explore, you end up rather pigeonholed with regards to the amount of content in the game. Turbine's idea of "varied" content is to have you do the same quest over and over, just with different difficulty settings. This would work if the dungeons were randomly generated, but they aren't They're the same every. single. time. The traps are always in the same spots, the mobs are always in the same spots, everything. I'm still waiting for an MMO to figure out that if you randomly generate dungeons or instances, you instantly have a game that has almost unlimited replay factor. There are something like 120 quests in the game at present--problem is you can knock every last one of them out (on all 3 difficulty settings) in less than a month. The storyline never really progresses...you go from having to kill a bunch of kobolds to recover a missing badge to having to kill a bunch of troglodytes to recover a missing badge. Recover this missing person from the trogs, recover that one from the undead. Unlike other MMO's, you aren't really working towards any sort of ultimate goal--you're just trying to make Stormreach a better place, and there's more crime than Detroit in there. Beyond that...if you aren't in a dungeon, there's absolutely nothing to do. There's no crafting, there's no exploring, there's no real NPC interaction. The game has "gambling", but it's completely random and the odds are stacked SEVERELY against you. You can't study for new spells, you can't make enchantments, nadda.
Gameplay: 4/10
A 5 is probably generous. The game interface is really clunky, macro options are nil, the camera controls are unwieldy, and some of the interfaces don't even work with one another like they are supposed to. This game differs from most MMO's in that where you're positioned matters. If you're in front of a mob, it can hit you...if you're behind it, it can't. Vice versa applies. Which makes the game more of an action MMO than an RPG MMO. There are certain button combinations you have to press (and time) in order to dodge or roll out of the way. The hotkey bar can't be modded like WoW--so the 10 you have on screen are the 10 you have...if you want to use the other bars you're gonna have to assign a key to them, switch over to them, use them, then switch back to your main one. The various on screen menus tend to clutter the whole thing up and sometimes make it difficult to see what's going on. All in all, it's very unwieldy.
The classes are, for the most part, balanced. Rangers are probably too strong, and sorcerors are definitely too weak, but all in all Turbine did a nice job with this part. Each class has it's own area of specialization, and no class is "useless" as many dungeons require the various specializations. For example, there are always traps and doors for rogues to contend with, as well as hidden doors and passageways to find. There are oftentimes runes that require the intellect of a wizard or sorceror. Doors that can only be opened with the brute force of a fighter. The lack of prestige classes really hinders the character portion of things, though. Wizards and (particularly) sorcerors are most hampered by this, as they tend to only realize their actual potential by prestiging. This severely hampers their usefulness.
Alignment is a joke. Not only does it essentially mean nothing, but get this: There's no evil! You're choices are the varying degrees of good and neutral. What does this mean? Well, not a whole lot. NPC's don't treat you any differently, and you aren't forced to act in any certain way based on alignment. There are a couple of pieces of armor that will provide a slight bonus if you are one alignment over another, but they are few and far between and generally not worn anyways. Turbine utterly, thoroughly and completely dropped the ball on this one.
As mentioned previously, there's nothing to do but run dungeons. If you aspire to be a wondrous enchanter, or the finest crafter of mithril armor in all the land, you can forget about it. There's no crafting, there's no enchanting, there's no enterprise whatsoever. No components to collect, no rare artificats to find to complete a spell, nothing. Wanna roleplay? Well, you've got the tavern and...the other taverns. Problem is they all lag horribly, are infested with people who are afk, and nobody ever really talks in them. And you're left to create your own rp--again, no NPC interaction. You can't interact with the world either (ie you can't sit in a chair, enjoy an ale, or the like). If you want to "perform" an action, your options are basically /emote because there aren't many programmed into the game other than things such as "dance", "sleep", "kneel", "sit", etc. And if you go to /emotes...your character will just be standing there while you are /emoting "hops on one foot" or anything else.
Bugs: Oh my god so many bugs. More bugs than an ant colony. Bugs everywhere. There are quests that don't work. There are quests that work, but not if you exit the dungeon through the door--you have to recall out. There are quests that sometimes work, and sometimes don't. There are named mobs that sometimes appear, and sometimes won't. There are times you are conversing with an NPC and the conversation window (which is huge) becomes permanently affixed to your screen, forcing you to relog. There are times you are interacting with an NPC and you click on a response only to not have it take. Basic functions don't work. The chat interface being the most prevalent. You can't /party chat when you're in the general tab, and you can't see the general chat when you're in the party tab (nor can you see tells). There is a great idea in the lfg/lfm thing they have constructed, but oftentimes when you send a join request, it errors out. This game is nowhere near completion or readiness to go gold, but Turbine is sticking with it on schedule regardless.
Forced grouping: No way around it, you have to have a group at all times. There are only a couple of quests that can be done solo. Most people don't always want to be surrounded by others--in this game, you don't have a choice. The team element is very well done, but there should be options for people just looking to blow off some steam or spend some time doing a dungeon alone. Maybe class specific dungeons or the like.
Community: 1/10
With all due respect to Burrek, I believe he gave this one an incomplete simply because he wanted to espouse the greatness of the game and didn't want to say anything terribly negative about it.--not because he didn't know the truth about it. The "community" can be summed up in one phrase: There isn't one. This is the first time I've ever seen an MMO where the general chat channel was like a ghost town. Nobody EVER speaks. If you do, you don't get a response. There are always 40 people milling about a tavern, and everybody is mute. If you say something, you'll get no response, usually. Part of all this is due to the above mentioned bug where you have to either choose to see your party chat or the general chat, but in general there is just NO sense of community whatsoever. Everybody is just off in their little group doing their own little thing, and the rest of the world doesn't exist to them. This of course would severely hinder roleplay--if there were the tools to rp in the first place. The city of Stormreach is like a heavily populated ghost town. The voice chat is an interesting feature, but can get annoying for reasons I've already mentioned.
Lag/Performance: 4/10
Burrek again sugar coats things in his review, which I shall not do. The game engine is custom for DDO, it's not the AC2 engine. It's a resource hog to the umpteenth degree. Zoning into a tavern is like asking for a 30 second break to go get a drink while you wait for the game to catch up. You will lag horribly in these taverns for the first 30 seconds unless there's nobody in it. The servers can't seem to handle the load of too many people in one general area, either. You will often be running through an area such as the marketplace and your character will start to stutter. He'll take a few steps, then stop for a second, then take a couple more, etc. At first you'll think it's your keyboard acting up, or if you use a wireless, that your batteries are dying...right up until you see everybody else doing the same thing.
The game's solution to this is to have multiple dimensions of the same zone. In other words, on one server there is a Marketplace 1, marketplace 2, etc. So while you may be in the same marketplace as your buddy, you might not actually be in the same marketplace as your buddy because he'll be in a different dimension of it. You can teleport between them, but it's really rather annoying. This is also a contributing factor to lack of interaction between players.
Back to the game engine. As I mentioned before, this game is a resource hog, and is very hard on computer systems. The game will slow down considerably even if you are using the most top-end system around if your settings are high up there to maximize the graphics--which aren't good enough to validate the heavy stress it puts on a computer. The lag from this, lockups, freezeups and heat alerts gets to be very annoying very quickly. Other factors such as rain obviously affect system performance and lag as well--and there's no way to turn off the weather.
Customer Service: -/10
I, like Burrek, never had interaction with a CSR for the game, so can't speculate
Risk level: Moderate to high
My risk equation has to do with the long term feasability of the game. The D&D name will mandate that the game will do well at least initially by people who are drawn in by the thought of playing dungeons and dragons in an MMO setting. Countless people will hope against hope that Turbine got it right, and sign up. I feel the way Turbine has interpreted the game, and has left out such key elements will result in many cancellations after a short while, however. This game is going to essentially be a smaller niche game, not a major player in the MMO market. Which is too bad because of the potential it had.
Most importantly however, is the lack of trust one could have in Turbine. This is definitely a case of buyer beware--we're talking about a company who stooped so low as to release an expansion for Asheron's Call 2, and then pulled the plug on the game very shortly after the expansion was released. Given the fact that this game will not be the raging success everyone imagined when the game was announced, one must be leery about investing too much time, energy or emotion into it as there is a definite risk of the game going dark within 2 years. Most people I've talked to about this game are busy trying to convince themselves they like the game because they like D&D. Anytime you have to convince yourself you like something, you're in trouble--and the feeling generally won't last. This game definitely has a feel to it of a "rebound" game. People are tired of WoW, and are going to try and play this one until the next big MMO comes out. It just doesn't have the feel of a game that people are going to be playing 5 years later.
Comments
You've got some cojones there posting that with all the self righteous DDO zealots in this forum. Here, you can borrow my flame proof suit, you'll need it.
/salute
Nope...I think he's pretty much hit it right on the money! I don't think even diehards could fault the review.
For instance, I really really like the game, it plays fun, and the underlying D&D system is (of course) good (and interesting), but I can tell already that around the 3 to 4 week mark I'll be looking for something else. So, I want to take a break from dungeoneering...there's nothing else to do! I can go and hand in my collectibles, and sell off some of my found armor/weps/trinkets in the pawn shops...AND THAT'S IT. And then, when I want to start an alt, I'll be forced to start in the SAME place, with the same 5 to 10 first up missions, and then progress to the next area where I'll do the same 10 to 20 missions for that level, etc.
And that's ignoring the bigger problem: that only 2 or 3 of the missions are really worth doing at all (at each stage of your chars' advancement). I know in release you'll end up with most people proclaiming, "nah, that mission doesn't give good enough rewards/xp, let's do WW again (or Shan-to-Kor, or Redwillow, or whatever)". Not only do they HAVE to add more content (and LOTS of it) but they have to BALANCE the current content so that not everyone is "forced" to do the same mission over and over just to get "value" from their playing time.
Also, the graphics aren't that great (not that I really care about graphics that much, I prefer DDO on medium graphic setting actually...any higher and it just looks weird), but like the OP said they put a hefty strain on resources (even on the lower settings funnily enough).
Forced grouping is a big problem, but this too would be reduced if there was something else to do. You could take a break and do some crafting or exploring and get back to grouping again later. Instead of making quests Easy/Med/Hard, they could have made Solo/Group/Raid or similar, it would have been far far better. Plus a more "random" dungeon (not totally random, but varied) would be much better. All the challenge is removed when someone knows what's coming. Eg. (happened last night) "Oh, this is the bit with fire mobs, I'll just go back and rest, put my fire resist spell in and cast it on everyone before we do it". All fine and dandy, cause our group didn't wipe, but for me, who hadn't done the dungeon before...it left me with a "meh" feeling. What is the POINT! If the game is supposed to be hard, knowing what is coming is NOT GOOD, it takes away immersion, and also removes the "hard" part. (And btw, makes the Sorcerer, as currently implemented, TOTALLY worthless except maybe as an "extra mana" 1-lvl class for a cleric, which is also a rule-glitch IMHO).
Oh, and speaking of "hard"...it's NOT! I was playing my level 3 pally last night, doing level 5 and 6 instances with a group of mixed level 4s & 5s. In 4 or 5 hours of dungeon-time my pally never got below half-health and tanked up to lvl 10 & 11 mobs (yes they are lvl 11 mobs in lvl 6 instances) with no problem at all (except I had trouble hitting ONE of the level 11s with obviously high armor). This is a LEVEL 3 pally (actually a Pally2/Ranger1) against Level 6 to 11 mobs, with hardly a heal from the cleric!! (and yes the mobs were trying to hit me). I can't see any reason (or hinderance once you get past the WW Chpt 1) for groups to place a "twink/powerlevel" char at the start of the dungeon and just let it collect xp points, it's not like you have to kill (or even hit) a mob to get full xp.
I agree with most of what was said although the reviwer does not seem to have an ojective scale and simply gives scores based on his personal feelings.
Here is a short list of things the reviewer mentiond that are not true ( I'm sure he was not aware of them because he never tried to experiment nor read any manual for the beta):
- The chat windows let's you funnel all your chat channels based on prefferences and your not locked into the different tabs as the reviwer specified, i.e. you can have all the different channels like part, guild,say, combat,etc. in one chat tab. It is also possible to create multiple transparent chat windows which let's you view all tabs at the same time if you so desire.
- It is possible to have multiple hot-key bards on the screen and you can drag them around and flip alignemnt from vertical to horizontal at will... unlike WoW.
Since these are the only issues he specified I'd suggest that the reader look at my review to see the "real" issues with the interface.
He also says that DDO does NOT use AC2 engine. Here is a quote from an official FAQ found here http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/dndonline.php
To boot I find this review to be lacking any sort of objective rating system.
Graphics: he rates the graphics based on glitches with performance, and I'd like to see a credible source that states the problems he mentioned.
Sound: he complaints that the game has inegrated voice chat (WTF?!)
Value: comapred to any single player game DDO wins hands down, compared to most MMOs it is on the low end of the spectrum. Compared to the MMO market DDO deserves a very low score yet the fact that the game does not artificially induce gameplay ( by adding travel, long downtime, and other time sinks) and has content that keeps you entertained at all times makes the fun/time ratio result in a pretty decent score. This part was acctualy rather well put togather even though it was strongly flavored by the reviewer.
Gameplay: hey, even the people that dislike the game do admit that quests are more fun than any other MMO. This game does what it does well( as hadz says himself), it just does not have anything else. Since this is a gameplay score and not a value score blaming the game for lack of content hardly fits this category. Once again a flame bait... not suprising comming from soneone who has 2 posts and is named Lamethrower.
Community: Right, whatever makes your boat float. What would you give Guild Wars for community, a -20? I do admit that people are not as inpired to go shouting "WTS +6 knife of ogre slaying" or "wiz 4 LFG!" in taverns but from what you wrote I find it hard to belive you got past the Leaky Dinghy. Nor do I think that describing a mishmash of a community during beta to be any idication of the final game.
Performnace: the game runs better than EQ2 on my system and the stress test had less lag than your average WoW servers
As to the "risk factor" I fully agree. This game will not last.
Oh I get it. Because i haven't posted here as much, my views aren't as valid as yours even though they're well-formulated and accurate? Well, these views won't "matter" then, but some rebuttals for you:
On the heat/performance issue: If you were a regular reader/contributor to the DDO forums over at Turbine (which you obviously weren't/aren't) you would know that there were many threads in the general forum regarding the game and how it hogs resources and overheats video cards. There was a HUGE thread about it in the technical/bug issues forum. MANY people have affirmed this issue. Ironically enough, it tends to happen more often with high end systems. I later found out this is because higher end components generate more heat, which leaves less room for a game like this to abuse them.
On the modability of the interface: I've heard that the chat channels can be combined, but nowhere does the game tell you you can do this or how to do it. Beyond even that, one shouldn't HAVE to filter everything into one super channel. The channels should function properly. If that's how they decided to "fix it", that's definitely the lazy way of doing it and reflects poorly on them.
On the "it's all my opinion" dig...yeah, and? Your review was all YOUR opinion as well. That's all ANY review is. Because I wasn't as drully verbose and made no attempt to make my review sound like a pep rally for the game and its capabilities doesn't lessen it.
On the engine: An "evolved" version of an engine does not an old engine make. AC2 wasn't a resource hog. AC2 didn't overheat systems. AC2 wasn't such a drain. It's not the AC2 engine. That's like saying I took this big block 409 out of a '69 GTO and bored out cylinders and bolt patterns to turn it into a Hemi 440. It's no longer the same engine.
You'd like to see a credible source as to the graphics glitches? How about firsthand experience? I'd say that's pretty credible.
Ranks beyond other MMO's in terms of values? The game costs just as much as any other MMO out there except the bargain bin ones (and Sony's attempt to save EQ2). The monthly fee is just as much as most of them. Yet you get a fraction of the "world", a fraction of the quests, one starting point and remaining point (the city of Stormreach), and fewer play options. That doesn't rank it up there in the "value" section of things.
As to community: Anybody who played the beta. Did ANY of you experience lively chat in a tavern or on general? Anybody at all? Waiting...waiting...I'm gonna be waiting all night, because it was just one server, I was on it, and I know there wasn't any. Community isn't "WTS" notices. It's general chat. And there was none.
I think you're largely blinded by your fanboi-ism of this game. I listed as many positives as I could think of with my review, as well as the negatives...you glossed over the negatives and focused almost exclusively on positive...which one is more objective? Thought so.
You're right...one of us is laying flame bait...but it's not the guy using a play on the world "flamethrower"
Lamethrower does himself a service here by being open to correction even in a flame fest.
I found his review to be pretty even handed & open minded. Any review of this game should draw attention to it's very limited content.
The damage that learning an instance off can do to any game is further compounded in a game that has so little to learn.
I'm not going to finalise my opinion of a game based of a beta version, but there is allot of work to do to make this title something more than a weak product relying on name recognition.
Nick
The race doesn't always go to the swiftest, nor the battle to the strongest, but that's the way to bet.
Well, my work is done on that fight. You've exposed yourself as a troll or a shill for Turbine there, Burrek. With such gems as "There is "educated opinion", and there is "opinion". I'll come back to this later on in my counter-flame." and proclaiming to be the only guy who saw "lively chat" during the 10 day preorder window (yes, I was in the 10 day period as well as closed, though not that first Thursday when the masses came in--and there wasn't anything in terms of speaking), you've shown your true intentions--to try and state that anyone who doesn't slurp this game top to bottom is an uneducated twit. No need to respond to most of it since you have been invalidated (and in the case of the video card issue, something you could have easily researched on your own up until Turbine removed the technical issues forum), but I will say this as far as credentials. I have been "MMO-ing" since the days of T-Lord and TradeWars and MajorMud...all the way up through the grandfather of the graphic MMO (Meridian 59) to UO to EQ to DDO and just about everything in between...hell, I was even on the development staff of one (Asheron's Call 1 back when it was a Microsoft product). That's over 15 years of experience. I'm pretty sure my opinions are "educated".
And with that, your attempt to start a flame war is done. I'm sure you'll want the last word--don't worry, I'll give it to you. I don't "do" flame wars.
I must say that OP really nails down DDO. I agree with everything...well except DDO being system hog , because comparing to EQ2 it runs like a charm
As for the defenders of DDO like Bourrek (who i had luck to group with on several occasions) , well I have only to remind you of great MXO debates - and a guy who spended year eagerly defending the honor of MXO - Only to quit the game two months after release and publically express that game was shit...
"Before this battle is over all the world will know that few...stood against many." - King Leonidas
I never use "burrek" as a character name so unfortunatly it isn't me who you are thinking of.
I udnerstand that there are many people that are so hyped about a game that they lose any sense of ojectivity yet I assure you that my fan-boism of the game comes from gameplay and not from some exagerating expectation. As you may, or may not, have noticed I have only frequented this board since the open stress tests started and have become and even more ardent supporter after my 10-day beta. I did not expect DDO to be any better than AC2 being that it is based on the same engine (AC2 was all flash and no bang) yet DDO has won my heart with its great atmospher and innovative gameplay.
I also do not expect to play DDO for longer than a month or two. Oblivion will be here soon and DDO should keep me happy until that game arrives. Hopefully I'll have enaugh gaming here to last till the next big time-sink comes out.
We have open a pool in another post for tester.
"I played the beta. Would i buy DDO?"
Can you vote it, please?
Please, vote!
Thanks,
The OP's review was extremely even-handed and highly accurate. I would personally endorse his review over yours, burrek, because honestly it was more accurate.
He detailed both what the game was and, possibly even more importantly, what it was NOT. While making comparisons of one MMORPG to another for any other game in development would be less than fair to a certain extent, detailing what a game based on an established franchise does not include from that franchise is perfectly reasonable. That was something that was definitely missing from your review, burrek. Certainly, many of those items are known facts, published in the game information FAQs on the official site. Still, they bear repeating for the very reasons the OP included them; not including options such as crafting and choosing to instance the game "world" rather than having an open design that could be explored severely limits what a player can do when they simply do not feel like doing another dungeon, or doing the same dungeon for the second, third or fourth time.
The engine driving DDO is most definitely NOT the AC2 engine, as it has been heavily modified (which was part of the statement you quoted, burrek). The analogy used by the OP was accurate in that as well. The DDO engine and the AC2 engine do not perform in the same manner, nor should they. It is worth noting that the original AC2 engine had some of the same performance issues on release when all of the available graphics options were used at maximum, although I personally never saw any reports on hardware difficulties as a result of using any of the options.
If you were to tell id Software that their Quake III engine is the same as their initial Quake engine, I am certain they would be quite irate and for good reasons. Anyone who has done any development work using the Quake engines know that there are enormous differences between them. Of course, no one has to take my word for it; the initial Quake and Quake II engines are royalty free to download and use for game development, if you care to take them for a spin. Certainly, they are both Quake engines; but the original Quake engine is NOT the Quake II or III engine.
Finally, burrek, as to your statement that even people who dislike DDO have commented positively on the quests in the game; certainly, people have (myself included). However, the OP's points about the relative value of those quests due to the lack of random spawns, traps, etc., were perfectly in line with a good majority of posters to this and even Turbine's DDO forums. Nothing Turbine has stated indicates that this is likely to change.
Unfortunately, experiences with Asheron's Call in the past eight months or so and Asheron's Call 2 throughout its life tend to make myself and other prior customers of Turbine a little leery about promises of updated content.
In its current state, DDO is actually closer to a single player game in terms of content than it is to an MMORPG, regardless of how many players are logged on to their servers. Which in my mind does not validate a monthly fee.
Turbine would be better off releasing DDO as a single-player and marketing their development toolset with the game, similar to NWN. Too bad that option most likely isn't open to them due to existing licensing agreements between WotC and BioWare.
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
The fact remains that Burrek focuses on facts rather than personal taste and expectations - while the OP here did not (for example his community rating - completly bullshit to rate the community of a open beta).
As such - like it or not - Burreks review is much better. That still wont change he fact that you (or other people) will not like the game for what it is...but this has N O T H I N G to do with a neutral review of a game. What you are talking about is called "my opinion ..."
If you claim to be a reviewer you have to keep things neutral...you cant say things like " the engine is crap because my 3 year old computer cant run it on highest settings..."
However, I agree that the value of DnD probably does not justify a monthly fee of 15$...if they dont add quality content on a monthly basis, that is.
dp...
The fact remains that Burrek focuses on facts rather than personal taste and expectations - while the OP here did not (for example his community rating - completly bullshit to rate the community of a open beta).
As such - like it or not - Burreks review is much better. That still wont change he fact that you (or other people) will not like the game for what it is...but this has N O T H I N G to do with a neutral review of a game. What you are talking about is called "my opinion ..."
If you claim to be a reviewer you have to keep things neutral...you cant say things like " the engine is crap because my 3 year old computer cant run it on highest settings..."
However, I agree that the value of DnD probably does not justify a monthly fee of 15$...if they dont add quality content on a monthly basis, that is.
I can't agree with your assessment either, Lasastard; the beta community, especially open beta or invitational beta communities, are often indicators of the players you can reasonably expect to meet and interact with in game after release. The people playing the game in beta are the people who had enough interest in the game to apply for beta and are the ones who have displayed initial interest in purchasing the finished product.
If they are not talking or interacting with one another during the beta except for world broadcasts trying to sell or buy items, there is a reasonable expectation that this is what the player can expect after the game's release. Because the game is beta has absolutely nothing to do with the amount of open, general chat occurring in the game, which is an indication of the robustness of the community. If, by community, you consider small, insular groups the "community" of the game, then again, DDO should aim for a NWN-type market.
My own personal experiences in DDO during the beta match the OPs as far as the community, and as burrek did not provide a rating and the OPs experiences matched my own and were not exaggerated, I find his rating factual. Considering the number of betas I have participated in, I was honestly surprised at how little conversation was occurring in open chat.
I also didn't note the OP make any kind of statement in the review that the engine was "crap"; on the contrary, the OP rated the graphics very highly. He simply noted that there had been performance and hardware issues, and he also noted accurately that the colors in the game tended to be muted and more bland than one would normally expect. He also accurately noted that there were times when a player could turn to go down a dungeon corridor or into the next room and be faced with a blank, gray wall that did not disappear until they walked through it. The OP is hardly the only person who has had difficulty with performance in the game, nor the only person who has noted that the extra graphics functions of the engine adversely affected game performance. So again, I find the OP's review to be accurate.
Here are the system requirements, copied directly from EBGames:
System Requirements:
Minimum System Requirements:
Processor: Intel Pentium 4 1.6GHz or compatible (must support SSE)
Video: GeForce 2 or equivalent with 32MB
RAM: 512MB or more
Disk Space: 3GB, 5GB for high resolution
DirectX: DX9c+
DVD ROM Drive
OS: Windows XP Home and Pro
Recommended System Requirements:
Processor: Intel Pentium 4 3.0GHz or compatible (must support SSE)
Video: GeForce FX or Radeon 9800 or better with 128MB
RAM: 1GB or more
Disk Space: 3GB, 5GB for high resolution
DVD ROM Drive
DirectX: DX9c+
OS: Windows X
Now, is it only me, or is there quite a disparity between the minimum processor required to play and the recommended? It is practically twice the processing power. The video card requirement between the two is four times the minimum, and the graphics processor difference is twice the minimum.
I couldn't imagine attempting to play DDO on a system that met the minmum requirements as stated here.
Finally, both reviews are "opinion". They are both the opinions of two people who have played the game. My experiences and impressions from beta more closely match the OPs and thus, I find it more accurate. That again is opinion, and as I stated originally (which you quoted) I would PERSONALLY endorse the OP's review over burrek's. Meaning that as an avid MMORPG player and a fan of D&D PnP, if asked, I would recommend against purchasing the 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
I thank you for being civil and expressing your solidarity with the OP.
edit: I do agree that almost everything the review stated is true (except the few things I mentioned earlier). All I wanted to point out that he does not weigh his review with diligent judgment and adds personal flavor, which is perfectly allright since he does not work for a respected website and can have his own opinion. We all have opinions and the forum serves as a place to compare and contrast what we think. The conflict stems from the OPs inability to recognize that he might not be fully impartial.
I think your movie analogy is out of place here. Movies have a whole different set of rules all together and for that particular movie there is a book to compare against. Regardless, those movies stayed as close to the source material as possible, which DDO on the other hand does not.
As for the engine whether it is modified or not, it's still reusing AC2 and that in and of itself is a horrible engine to use and shows lack of any desire to make DDO something fresh and new. There are no lugians, they are called warforged this time, I could argue they used the same model with different textures.
Comparing Prince of Persia to Rainbow Six is also mind boggling, Rainbow Six is a tactical squad combat simulation in real time and Prine of Persia is an action/platformer. It would be wrong to even call Rainbow Six a first person shooter. DDO calls itself an "MMORPG" and that is their own fault for getting blasted in doing so, as it clearly is not and lacks features that it's peers in the "MMORPG" market have in common. Thus being a baseline for any comparison to any existing and future "MMORPG" games. By your analysis you are just validating that DDO should be compared against Guild Wars and Diablo as they are all action games, and DDO still fails.
Also, if you admit this game is just something to waste time with until Oblivion is out and has no staying power. Why be so defensive, about it? I think you are arguing for the sake of your own vindication as being the only voice of reason/truth what have you here.
I was hoping you were gone for good but we meet again!
I suppose your right in pointing out that my PoP-R6 analogy was a tad extreme. It would have been better to compare R6 and Doom 3.
Since there are so many different types of RPGs (just like there are many different kinds of action games) I don't see why all MMORPGs have to follow the basic EQ clone format.
" I think you are arguing for the sake of your own vindication as being the only voice of reason/truth what have you here." ... maybe
.
Cheers!
Oh, I almost forgot... Thanks for the begining of your post... I try... Tho I don't always succeed.
And I enjoy sparring with you...
Again, I will have to disagree with you, burrek. The major difference between leaving Tom Bombadil out of the Lord of the Ring movies and leaving crafting, an expansive world and many other mechanics common to D&D PnP out of DDO is that Tom Bombadil added absolutely nothing to the storyline of Lord of the Rings. Reading the pertinent section where Frodo, Sam, Pippin and Merry meet Tom Bombadil, it is easy to see that it has nothing to do with the main plot of the story; no critical items were passed to the small band of hobbits, no other major character was introduced and Tom Bombadil never reappears during the entire trilogy. Whereas leaving out a comparison between what are certain to be the expectations of your average D&D PnP player of DDO and the reality of the game mechanics is a serious omission.
And neither one of those examples are applicable here, burrek; as I stated, comparing DDO to D&D PnP is reasonable because D&D PnP is the existing franchise that DDO is supposed to be based on, as opposed to comparing DDO to another MMORPG or another game, which would not be reasonable because they simply are not the same game.
If I told you a studio was making a MMO based on the PnP game Shadowrun but they were leaving Hacking out of the list of features, it would prejudice the Shadowrun PnP player against the game immediately because that is an integral feature of the PnP game. It would definitely be reasonable to mention the omission and to assign a rating to the game based on the lack of that feature because it is supposed to be a virtual representation of the PnP game. I have yet to see an industry magazine or television program that did not list omissions of content in their pros and cons when reviewing a game. Normally, the pro and con section is right next to the overall game rating so that a reader can at a glance, see if the game matches their expectations.
It actually has quite a bit to do with being a different engine, for all of the reasons you just stated. After working with game engines, it is clear that there is a distinct difference between engine versions and how they handle graphics, lighting, textures, bump mapping, physics and effects. In nearly every case (and I haven't seen one yet where this was not true) the new engine could not be used to run the older game unless the older game was redesigned to match the new engine.
Actually, the core of the Quake II engine was the original Quake engine, as the core of the Quake III engine is the Quake II engine. I quote from Quake's engine licensing page;
"QUAKE II is one of id Softwares all time best-selling titles, and as of December, 2001 this critically acclaimed engine is also available under the GNU General Public License ("GPL") [2]. With more advanced hardware and software rendering and updated network code, the GPL'd QUAKE II engine is the best value in engine licensing - period. The recent success of Soldier of Fortune and Anachronox prove that in the hands of a talented developer, the QUAKE II engine can power a game that looks as good as almost any action game on the market."
And so on. An updated engine, built from the existing engine.
No one is limiting DDO to being an EQ clone; the only thing limiting DDO is its design. There is no one dictating what an MMO should or shouldn't have, but there is a concrete expectation on the part of the now-mature MMO-playing audience that a new MMO will have an amount of content at release that equals their initial investment and validates their subscription fee. At this point in time, in my opinion, DDO does not have that content.
The real issue here that COULD be reviewed is the bare fact that upon release, you will be paying for and subscribing to the existing content, which is not concurrent with the content expectations of a good portion of the target audience. It is also a fact that purchase and subscription of DDO based on the promise of future content to be released on a currently unknown schedule is akin to purchasing air. The reality of future content does not have to be previewed to state that it currently does not exist and the subscribers are being left to imagine when it will occur and what form it will take.
The bottom line, again, is that both reviews are opinion. Well structured, but still opinion. And as I have my own opinion that more closely follows the OP's review and I find the additional items that he covered to more accurately portray DDO and those items were not unreasonably prejudicial, I'm afraid that I still find his review more accurate.
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
I was one of the lucky ones that got into the early alpha. I've decided not to purchase DDO either for very similiar reasons that the OP expressed. DDO in it's current form is simply not worth $50 plus $15/month.
I won't bother going into details because I simply cannot restrain myself and try to give an "unbiased" description of the condition of DDO. The OP has done an excellent job of describing how little content there is in this game as well as the other shortcomings.
If you are someone who never tried the beta and are considering DDO then I strongly urge you to carefully read the OP post.
I'll end by saying that I found the DDO beta to be overwhelming similiar to the AC2 beta (i beta tested both). By similiar I mean that both beta's had a high level of beta testers who overwhelming disliked the game. DDO isn't even released yet and it already has a bad word of mouth. Unlike AC2 however I'm actually going to be smart and not purchase DDO. If reviews are good on DDO 6 months down the road I may consider it. Right now though DDO is simply headed for the same fate AC2 is.