After all, in all things in life, the worth of a thing is a subjective judgement. One man's treasure is another man's junk. Best wishes to those who have yet to find their treasure.
And sometimes it's just junk, and the other man is crazy.
Sorry, you really don't get to say that, that's just not how the saying works.
Originally posted by gameguy369
Yeah, if IGN drops a score below a 7 on you - that means the game is essentiaully unplayable.
This is incorrect. By IGN's official policy on their scores, a 5.5 (by being in the range of 5.1 to 5.9) reflects mediocrity. It's only games that rank below 2.9 that, "have gameplay and technical problems that are so severe, they border on being completely 'broken.'"
Stop living in your fictional reality. 5.5 means complete trash, have you even looked at the games ranked higher than it? Other games considered complete trash?
"Sometimes people say stuff they don''t mean, but more often then that they don''t say things they do mean"
After all, in all things in life, the worth of a thing is a subjective judgement. One man's treasure is another man's junk. Best wishes to those who have yet to find their treasure.
And sometimes it's just junk, and the other man is crazy.
Sorry, you really don't get to say that, that's just not how the saying works.
Originally posted by gameguy369
Yeah, if IGN drops a score below a 7 on you - that means the game is essentiaully unplayable.
This is incorrect. By IGN's official policy on their scores, a 5.5 (by being in the range of 5.1 to 5.9) reflects mediocrity. It's only games that rank below 2.9 that, "have gameplay and technical problems that are so severe, they border on being completely 'broken.'"
Stop living in your fictional reality. 5.5 means complete trash, have you even looked at the games ranked higher than it? Other games considered complete trash?
Both all points bulletin and star trek online are rated far higher then this. And the score is justified it isn't like one reviewer just smoked something bad and had a hissy fit and didn't understand. I have yet to see a reputable review source support this game. Even at metacritic the ones defending it are no name sites. I quit APB before my 50 free hours were up and didn't think it'd be topped for worst game of the year. I was very very wrong.
IGN.com
APB = 7.7
STO = 6.8
FF14 = 5.5
ps - and dont give me that stuff fanboys about how they changed their review system, it wouldnt make a difference the game is still in worse shape then both APB and STO, sad for a AAA studio to release this on the public.
LOL. Some people will try to argue ANYTHING. Face it, the game sucks. Every respectable review site out there has rated this game lower than almost every MMO released in the last decade. The game is broken in ways that are just unacceptable for a AAA title in 2010. I had the game pre-ordered, and somehow convinced myself threw 3 days of beta that I was having fun.
Then finally I realized I was literally FORCING myself to try and like it - and I *STILL* hated it. I played almost every other MMO I was excited about for at least a month. This game bored me to tears almost one day one. Pathetic. I hope SE loses a ton of money on this - this was nothing more than a money grab.
By IGN's official policy on their scores, a 5.5 (by being in the range of 5.1 to 5.9) reflects mediocrity. It's only games that rank below 2.9 that, "have gameplay and technical problems that are so severe, they border on being completely 'broken.'"
Take my post here, and replace "GameSpy" with "IGN" (obviously the numbers aren't the same). FFXIV falls into the bottom 18% on IGN joining less than 450 other PC-specific games out of nearly 2500. Other than the few minutes that took to figure out, I'm not even going to bother to point out how absurd it is to try and spin these scores. Besides, it's already been pointed out how far down the chain compared to other failures this game is.
Seriously, enjoy the game, but give up the campaign already.
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." George Bernard Shaw
What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. Oscar Wilde
LOL. Some people will try to argue ANYTHING. Face it, the game sucks. Every respectable review site out there has rated this game lower than almost every MMO released in the last decade. The game is broken in ways that are just unacceptable for a AAA title in 2010. I had the game pre-ordered, and somehow convinced myself threw 3 days of beta that I was having fun.
Then finally I realized I was literally FORCING myself to try and like it - and I *STILL* hated it. I played almost every other MMO I was excited about for at least a month. This game bored me to tears almost one day one. Pathetic. I hope SE loses a ton of money on this - this was nothing more than a money grab.
I underlined something and thought i'd clarify a scary thought... what if it wasn't actually a money grab and everyone at the SE office has been smelling their own farts so long they actually thought this was not only ready for release, but going to be a big hit? SE just seems like a company lost in time, just another many one of the gaming companies long past its prime that will eventually go the way of the proverbial Dodo they make me kill in FF in every freakin zone. The head developer hasn't played anything but FF11 since it was released and didn't touch his own game until it was in OB. This sad excuse for a game will become a running gag amonst gamers for years to come, maybe even finally replacing SWG NGE as the worst thing to hit the MMO scene this decade. Congrats SE on the MMO fail of the decade
I actually think that the reviews XIV has been getting are a bit low when you consider some other MMOs. RF Online, APB, Matrix Online, and just about every MMO other than Archlord have higher average review scores. While XIV is bad, it at least has a possible upside.
I actually think that the reviews XIV has been getting are a bit low when you consider some other MMOs. RF Online, APB, Matrix Online, and just about every MMO other than Archlord have higher average review scores. While XIV is bad, it at least has a possible upside.
matrix online was better, though only marginally. never played apb, rf online was also better.
After all, in all things in life, the worth of a thing is a subjective judgement. One man's treasure is another man's junk. Best wishes to those who have yet to find their treasure.
And sometimes it's just junk, and the other man is crazy.
Sorry, you really don't get to say that, that's just not how the saying works.
Originally posted by gameguy369
Yeah, if IGN drops a score below a 7 on you - that means the game is essentiaully unplayable.
This is incorrect. By IGN's official policy on their scores, a 5.5 (by being in the range of 5.1 to 5.9) reflects mediocrity. It's only games that rank below 2.9 that, "have gameplay and technical problems that are so severe, they border on being completely 'broken.'"
Scary part is, IGN kinda has a rep of being a tad too kind to Final Fantasy games. So if they gave this a 5.5, they probably really, wanted to give it a 4. I'm not trying to troll with this - I played in the beta - but it's annoying as hell when a company clearly puts out a game that ignores EVERYTHING that their players want and just assume the name will sell itself. FF11 is a MUCH better game then FF14.
I use to go off gamespot reviews until i started going to IGN i like there reviews better if they gave a game is a 7 it's playable and you will prob have fun that same review gamespot would give it a 5-6 and try to make the game worse then it is. I find ign to be more accurate in there reviews if the game is getting a bad from IGN it's bad gamespot it can be bad and still be a good game. I first notice this with namco urban reign fighing game gamespot gave it a crappy score because of the single player difficulty it was a hard and unfair at times After i saw IGN review i went out a brought it me and my friends to this day play the multiplayer mode that's amazing 4 player battle that alone could gives the game a 8-9 rating i like ign and trust them a lot more then any other gaming site.
LOL. Some people will try to argue ANYTHING. Face it, the game sucks. Every respectable review site out there has rated this game lower than almost every MMO released in the last decade. The game is broken in ways that are just unacceptable for a AAA title in 2010. I had the game pre-ordered, and somehow convinced myself threw 3 days of beta that I was having fun.
Then finally I realized I was literally FORCING myself to try and like it - and I *STILL* hated it. I played almost every other MMO I was excited about for at least a month. This game bored me to tears almost one day one. Pathetic. I hope SE loses a ton of money on this - this was nothing more than a money grab.
I underlined something and thought i'd clarify a scary thought... what if it wasn't actually a money grab and everyone at the SE office has been smelling their own farts so long they actually thought this was not only ready for release, but going to be a big hit? SE just seems like a company lost in time, just another many one of the gaming companies long past its prime that will eventually go the way of the proverbial Dodo they make me kill in FF in every freakin zone. The head developer hasn't played anything but FF11 since it was released and didn't touch his own game until it was in OB. This sad excuse for a game will become a running gag amonst gamers for years to come, maybe even finally replacing SWG NGE as the worst thing to hit the MMO scene this decade. Congrats SE on the MMO fail of the decade
Quite interesting post, really. It's quite possible that the feeling of invincibility has come on after nearly 20 years of pure successes with Final Fantasy. Quite the same happen with Enron, and they didn't realize they were 10 feet deep in sh!t before they finally snapped out of it. Same thing with the Challenger. So much success for so long makes you feel like you can never go wrong.
LOL. Some people will try to argue ANYTHING. Face it, the game sucks. Every respectable review site out there has rated this game lower than almost every MMO released in the last decade. The game is broken in ways that are just unacceptable for a AAA title in 2010. I had the game pre-ordered, and somehow convinced myself threw 3 days of beta that I was having fun.
Then finally I realized I was literally FORCING myself to try and like it - and I *STILL* hated it. I played almost every other MMO I was excited about for at least a month. This game bored me to tears almost one day one. Pathetic. I hope SE loses a ton of money on this - this was nothing more than a money grab.
I underlined something and thought i'd clarify a scary thought... what if it wasn't actually a money grab and everyone at the SE office has been smelling their own farts so long they actually thought this was not only ready for release, but going to be a big hit? SE just seems like a company lost in time, just another many one of the gaming companies long past its prime that will eventually go the way of the proverbial Dodo they make me kill in FF in every freakin zone. The head developer hasn't played anything but FF11 since it was released and didn't touch his own game until it was in OB. This sad excuse for a game will become a running gag amonst gamers for years to come, maybe even finally replacing SWG NGE as the worst thing to hit the MMO scene this decade. Congrats SE on the MMO fail of the decade
Quite interesting post, really. It's quite possible that the feeling of invincibility has come on after nearly 20 years of pure successes with Final Fantasy. Quite the same happen with Enron, and they didn't realize they were 10 feet deep in sh!t before they finally snapped out of it. Same thing with the Challenger. So much success for so long makes you feel like you can never go wrong.
Indeed, it seems that SE has lost its touch. Or rather, I'd say that Squaresoft lost its touch, as it melted with Enix. Both did great games in their own respect, but together (since 2003 or 2004 I think) the J-RPG giants have been rather erratic, clumsy, too often trying to "innovate" at a cost that was too high, in a way that was too devious: it's to the extent that their game are almost non-playable--either too tedious, ala XIV, or simply too easy, like XII and now even worse, XIII.
Such a balance on gameplay and general difficulty of achieving in the game (from simple basic actions to grander schemes like beating a boss or dungeon) isn't some kind of grail that devs long for. It's on the contrary the basics of any game: whatever system you create, it needs to be fun, playable of course, but more than that (pace, rhythm, delay, degree of control... it all matters, somehow). The only way to reach that is to test, test, and test again, at all stages of development (from the most simple 'alpha' of a character walking in an empty room, to the latest OB client...) Why so much testing? Because you simply cannot know how something so complex (even a basic mario jump) will behave, so you gotta test. That which they did not do with XIV, obviously.
You may have invented the best theoretical system for a video game, if it's not playable and enjoyable, then it's worth nothing and will flop. You'd better have written something else than a game. I would have said a movie if SE were still master at scenario, but that too... went away with Sakaguchi I guess.
To me, somewhere around Y2K, Squaresoft first lost that "magic" that FF had up until VII or so; then they lost the gameplay magnificence that made any Squaresoft game a true quality product. You could blindly go for any of them. It was like those cakes you die to buy everytime you drive in front of the shop, they're just so high in quality, and it shows, even when not your favorite flavour, you know? Well, I'm sorry to realize that Squaresoft, somehow, lost their skill at making enjoyable games--they used to be able to do great even with a shoot-em-up going by the name of Einhander back on PS.
I'm not saying that Enix is guilty for that, nor the joining of both in itself. I'm more inclined to think that as the market changed in the years 2000, SE chose to focus on what they did best (cinematics, battle systems) and forgot all the others things that make a game a great game. As time went by, they progressively lost grasp on concepts and technologies of things they thought they could do alone, by themselves, even teach the market a lesson or two like they used to. Well... Tough, but you can't be great at just everything when game-making has become so professional and so blended in the general computer industry. Yet a game or a movie does need more than just an idea to be "great": it needs to deliver. Which SE's game haven't really been doing for me for too long now, or at too high a cost, time-consuming or too harsh on hidden features--and I'll stop there because we're back on the now "classic" flaws of any FF game for 10 consistent years now. Geez, to think they used to know just how to do exactly those things!
Suffice it to say, the systems created by Squaresoft in 90's, from the ATB-basis to Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, Bahamut Lagoon... were all blasts. Their games were polished, more-than-finished products, and they killed their rivals mostly because of that: no one could believe that such games indeed existed (again, FF VI, Seiken 2, Chrono, FF VII anyone?). I can't say I appreciate as much what they did since the high of the PlayStation era.
But this year of 2010, things got a lot worse. Squaresoft becoming SE was losing its touch; but now I feel SE is worse than, say Cryptic. There, I said it. SOE, Blizzard and NCSoft have nothing to fear for the next 5 to 8 years: SE needs to work a lot on its own methods and policies in a modern, matured gaming market.
gamespot is one of the most unreliable sources. ign made a (too long) review. but this review was well done and looked at a lot of things this game has to offer. but in the end yes: this game is work.
Deserves even less of a score in my opinion. It's like they took all the basic things that people expect in an MMO and ruined them on purpose. Wish I could return my copy and get a full refund for this POS.
User Interface
Controls
Auction Houses
Vendors
Chat
Account Creation
Payment System
Mob placement
Zone design
All these basic things are a disaster in this game. Oh but wait, it has pretty graphics.
Chat is subjective on whether you want to hear chuck norris jokes all day long or not. Chat is one of the few nice things about the game to me. No barrens BS going on.
One does not guarantee the other. Plenty of other MMOs have regional chat channels, and they're not all overrun with Chuck Norris jokes.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
The reviewer wasn't all that objective with his scoring. I don't see how you can go on and on about the graphics being great, and then not give it a 10/10, just because you need a semi-decent rig (mine is a year old and it runs it on high graphics with ease) to run it doesn't mean it doesn't deserve the right score for graphics.
Also the reviewer is another quest addict. Quests don't give xp in tis game so there isn't a need for more of them. In FFXIV they are meant to provide income and free crafting supplies. Go out and kill on your own accord. If you can't handle that, this isn't the game for you.
it''s funny how the fanboys try to cover it up with "it's a niche game" or "you're a WoW fanboy."
I'm lukewarm. A 5.5/10 review is an interesting thing really.
Is the review slightly over half full, or slightly under half empty?
It's both, and if you insist it's only one way or the other, you're the biased one, not I.
Closing Comments
With its newest MMO in its flagship franchise, Square Enix delivers a gigantic, beautiful fantasy world to explore. The flexible class system means you'll be able to mix and match abilities from many different roles so you can change your specialization at will. Much of the promise of the combat system and depth of the crafting mechanics are drowned, unfortunately, under a sea of interface and performance issues that hinder the experience at nearly every step. While there's a lot to consider when building your ideal class, there's far too little interesting structured content to chew on, resulting in an experience that quickly grows tedious and tiresome. All MMOs are designed to keep players logging in for long into the future, but at launch Final Fantasy XIV's questing mechanics feel more like a subway commute than a fun gameplay experience. Patches over the course of the next few months may address many of the technical issues, but for now this is not a world worth visiting.
I can live with that. Sounds to me like a solid foundation that's being built on. I never asked for anything more in a release-day MMORPG, as I tend to regard these things as works in progress. It's the whole reason I pay for a subscription.
Well, when you set your expectations that low, it's easy to be satisfied. Almost any MMORPG could be said to be "a solid foundation to build on". Unfortunately, games are reviewed based on how they are *now*, not on the promise of what they could blossom into down the road somewhere.
While many are clearly fine, or at least tolerant of how FFXIV was launched, it's very clear than many others expect something more from a AAA game developer with 25+ years experience, and with SE's reputation across their career, spending 5+ years working on their 2nd MMORPG, in a genre that's been around over 10 years now.
One of the other reviews summed it up best: It's as though SE developed FFXIV in a vacuum...
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
After all, in all things in life, the worth of a thing is a subjective judgement. One man's treasure is another man's junk. Best wishes to those who have yet to find their treasure.
And sometimes it's just junk, and the other man is crazy.
Sorry, you really don't get to say that, that's just not how the saying works.
Originally posted by gameguy369
Yeah, if IGN drops a score below a 7 on you - that means the game is essentiaully unplayable.
This is incorrect. By IGN's official policy on their scores, a 5.5 (by being in the range of 5.1 to 5.9) reflects mediocrity. It's only games that rank below 2.9 that, "have gameplay and technical problems that are so severe, they border on being completely 'broken.'"
Stop living in your fictional reality. 5.5 means complete trash, have you even looked at the games ranked higher than it? Other games considered complete trash?
Yep, any game getting below at least an 8 is typically interpreted as "passable".
Of course, you have to consider who we're talking about here. A review can be 99.5% negative, ripping it to shreds. Geld will latch on to some even remotely positive remark, such as "it has nice graphics", and spin it into something more significant.
For example, he'd quote or highlight the one positive remark about graphics and then respond with something like:
"See, they acknowledge that SE achieved a technological feat by making a game that looks as good as it does and can still run on modern hardware, so the review isn't all negative. Besides, certainly a developer who can do that can also develop a great game. The people reviewing it just didn't "get" what SE is trying to do. The game didn't "click" with them and so they didn't like it. That's the only conclusion I can come to for why they reviewed it so low".
Every MMO needs its tireless defender. FFXIV has Geld. It at least keeps the threads marginally entertaining.
That said, I don't need "validation" to support my own opinions on something - I played the game extensively and know what I experienced. However, it is somewhat affirming (in an unfortunate way) to see my overall impressions of the game being echoed by so many. It's unfortunate 'cause I'd much rather have been on the other side of the fence, enjoying the game.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
The reviewer wasn't all that objective with his scoring. I don't see how you can go on and on about the graphics being great, and then not give it a 10/10, just because you need a semi-decent rig (mine is a year old and it runs it on high graphics with ease) to run it doesn't mean it doesn't deserve the right score for graphics.
Also the reviewer is another quest addict. Quests don't give xp in tis game so there isn't a need for more of them. In FFXIV they are meant to provide income and free crafting supplies. Go out and kill on your own accord. If you can't handle that, this isn't the game for you.
FFXIV does not deserve a 10/10 graphic score. no way a game with such low level of details and high amount of copy pasted terrain objects can ever score that high. Just because a game has a lots of bump mapping and anti aliasing doesnt guarantee a perfect ten in graphics.
After all, in all things in life, the worth of a thing is a subjective judgement. One man's treasure is another man's junk. Best wishes to those who have yet to find their treasure.
And sometimes it's just junk, and the other man is crazy.
Sorry, you really don't get to say that, that's just not how the saying works.
Originally posted by gameguy369
Yeah, if IGN drops a score below a 7 on you - that means the game is essentiaully unplayable.
This is incorrect. By IGN's official policy on their scores, a 5.5 (by being in the range of 5.1 to 5.9) reflects mediocrity. It's only games that rank below 2.9 that, "have gameplay and technical problems that are so severe, they border on being completely 'broken.'"
Stop living in your fictional reality. 5.5 means complete trash, have you even looked at the games ranked higher than it? Other games considered complete trash?
Both all points bulletin and star trek online are rated far higher then this. And the score is justified it isn't like one reviewer just smoked something bad and had a hissy fit and didn't understand. I have yet to see a reputable review source support this game. Even at metacritic the ones defending it are no name sites. I quit APB before my 50 free hours were up and didn't think it'd be topped for worst game of the year. I was very very wrong.
IGN.com
APB = 7.7
STO = 6.8
FF14 = 5.5
ps - and dont give me that stuff fanboys about how they changed their review system, it wouldnt make a difference the game is still in worse shape then both APB and STO, sad for a AAA studio to release this on the public.
I understand IGN's ratings like this. If there is nothing technically wrong with the game it starts at 6.5 or so. Forget they're lack of labeling 5.5 as "complete crap". It's called being nice. There is a reason 6.0 is called "passable". So 5.5 is below passable and just above "meh".
Good comparisons. I'll give you one more. Anyone ever play Neocron? Yeah, probably just me. No name game (was it even AA?) from a no name German company. Yet it still managed to pull down a 6.5 from IGN an entire point higher then a AAA release from one of the biggest game companies.
Sure FFXIV might over time become a good game. But some of the base mechanics are highly flawed and won't be fixed in a month or two if at all. But as of right now, it sucks.
It seems like nobody (gaming sites) wants to pass up the opportunity to hammer away at this game.
Or... these gaming sites are offering an objective viewpoint for gaming consumers. This allows people to be more responsible about what they chose to spend their money on.
Comments
Stop living in your fictional reality. 5.5 means complete trash, have you even looked at the games ranked higher than it? Other games considered complete trash?
"Sometimes people say stuff they don''t mean, but more often then that they don''t say things they do mean"
I respect that score! At least they spent time to review this unlike some people.
Both all points bulletin and star trek online are rated far higher then this. And the score is justified it isn't like one reviewer just smoked something bad and had a hissy fit and didn't understand. I have yet to see a reputable review source support this game. Even at metacritic the ones defending it are no name sites. I quit APB before my 50 free hours were up and didn't think it'd be topped for worst game of the year. I was very very wrong.
IGN.com
APB = 7.7
STO = 6.8
FF14 = 5.5
ps - and dont give me that stuff fanboys about how they changed their review system, it wouldnt make a difference the game is still in worse shape then both APB and STO, sad for a AAA studio to release this on the public.
LOL. Some people will try to argue ANYTHING. Face it, the game sucks. Every respectable review site out there has rated this game lower than almost every MMO released in the last decade. The game is broken in ways that are just unacceptable for a AAA title in 2010. I had the game pre-ordered, and somehow convinced myself threw 3 days of beta that I was having fun.
Then finally I realized I was literally FORCING myself to try and like it - and I *STILL* hated it. I played almost every other MMO I was excited about for at least a month. This game bored me to tears almost one day one. Pathetic. I hope SE loses a ton of money on this - this was nothing more than a money grab.
Take my post here, and replace "GameSpy" with "IGN" (obviously the numbers aren't the same). FFXIV falls into the bottom 18% on IGN joining less than 450 other PC-specific games out of nearly 2500. Other than the few minutes that took to figure out, I'm not even going to bother to point out how absurd it is to try and spin these scores. Besides, it's already been pointed out how far down the chain compared to other failures this game is.
Seriously, enjoy the game, but give up the campaign already.
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
George Bernard Shaw
What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Oscar Wilde
Amen to that, one zealot can not stem the ensuing flood of people away from this game.
I underlined something and thought i'd clarify a scary thought... what if it wasn't actually a money grab and everyone at the SE office has been smelling their own farts so long they actually thought this was not only ready for release, but going to be a big hit? SE just seems like a company lost in time, just another many one of the gaming companies long past its prime that will eventually go the way of the proverbial Dodo they make me kill in FF in every freakin zone. The head developer hasn't played anything but FF11 since it was released and didn't touch his own game until it was in OB. This sad excuse for a game will become a running gag amonst gamers for years to come, maybe even finally replacing SWG NGE as the worst thing to hit the MMO scene this decade. Congrats SE on the MMO fail of the decade
I actually think that the reviews XIV has been getting are a bit low when you consider some other MMOs. RF Online, APB, Matrix Online, and just about every MMO other than Archlord have higher average review scores. While XIV is bad, it at least has a possible upside.
matrix online was better, though only marginally. never played apb, rf online was also better.
Mediocre is OK though.
He who keeps his cool best wins.
I use to go off gamespot reviews until i started going to IGN i like there reviews better if they gave a game is a 7 it's playable and you will prob have fun that same review gamespot would give it a 5-6 and try to make the game worse then it is. I find ign to be more accurate in there reviews if the game is getting a bad from IGN it's bad gamespot it can be bad and still be a good game. I first notice this with namco urban reign fighing game gamespot gave it a crappy score because of the single player difficulty it was a hard and unfair at times After i saw IGN review i went out a brought it me and my friends to this day play the multiplayer mode that's amazing 4 player battle that alone could gives the game a 8-9 rating i like ign and trust them a lot more then any other gaming site.
LMAO
Quite interesting post, really. It's quite possible that the feeling of invincibility has come on after nearly 20 years of pure successes with Final Fantasy. Quite the same happen with Enron, and they didn't realize they were 10 feet deep in sh!t before they finally snapped out of it. Same thing with the Challenger. So much success for so long makes you feel like you can never go wrong.
He who keeps his cool best wins.
I think the game is less than a 5.5, but I have to respect other opinions. This game is horrid though.
Indeed, it seems that SE has lost its touch. Or rather, I'd say that Squaresoft lost its touch, as it melted with Enix. Both did great games in their own respect, but together (since 2003 or 2004 I think) the J-RPG giants have been rather erratic, clumsy, too often trying to "innovate" at a cost that was too high, in a way that was too devious: it's to the extent that their game are almost non-playable--either too tedious, ala XIV, or simply too easy, like XII and now even worse, XIII.
Such a balance on gameplay and general difficulty of achieving in the game (from simple basic actions to grander schemes like beating a boss or dungeon) isn't some kind of grail that devs long for. It's on the contrary the basics of any game: whatever system you create, it needs to be fun, playable of course, but more than that (pace, rhythm, delay, degree of control... it all matters, somehow). The only way to reach that is to test, test, and test again, at all stages of development (from the most simple 'alpha' of a character walking in an empty room, to the latest OB client...) Why so much testing? Because you simply cannot know how something so complex (even a basic mario jump) will behave, so you gotta test. That which they did not do with XIV, obviously.
You may have invented the best theoretical system for a video game, if it's not playable and enjoyable, then it's worth nothing and will flop. You'd better have written something else than a game. I would have said a movie if SE were still master at scenario, but that too... went away with Sakaguchi I guess.
To me, somewhere around Y2K, Squaresoft first lost that "magic" that FF had up until VII or so; then they lost the gameplay magnificence that made any Squaresoft game a true quality product. You could blindly go for any of them. It was like those cakes you die to buy everytime you drive in front of the shop, they're just so high in quality, and it shows, even when not your favorite flavour, you know? Well, I'm sorry to realize that Squaresoft, somehow, lost their skill at making enjoyable games--they used to be able to do great even with a shoot-em-up going by the name of Einhander back on PS.
I'm not saying that Enix is guilty for that, nor the joining of both in itself. I'm more inclined to think that as the market changed in the years 2000, SE chose to focus on what they did best (cinematics, battle systems) and forgot all the others things that make a game a great game. As time went by, they progressively lost grasp on concepts and technologies of things they thought they could do alone, by themselves, even teach the market a lesson or two like they used to. Well... Tough, but you can't be great at just everything when game-making has become so professional and so blended in the general computer industry. Yet a game or a movie does need more than just an idea to be "great": it needs to deliver. Which SE's game haven't really been doing for me for too long now, or at too high a cost, time-consuming or too harsh on hidden features--and I'll stop there because we're back on the now "classic" flaws of any FF game for 10 consistent years now. Geez, to think they used to know just how to do exactly those things!
Suffice it to say, the systems created by Squaresoft in 90's, from the ATB-basis to Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, Bahamut Lagoon... were all blasts. Their games were polished, more-than-finished products, and they killed their rivals mostly because of that: no one could believe that such games indeed existed (again, FF VI, Seiken 2, Chrono, FF VII anyone?). I can't say I appreciate as much what they did since the high of the PlayStation era.
But this year of 2010, things got a lot worse. Squaresoft becoming SE was losing its touch; but now I feel SE is worse than, say Cryptic. There, I said it. SOE, Blizzard and NCSoft have nothing to fear for the next 5 to 8 years: SE needs to work a lot on its own methods and policies in a modern, matured gaming market.
Gamespot dropped a 4, and its fairly honest review is describing very well what most players may think of FFXIV's game mechanics.
Unfortunately, this quite sums it up: "Final Fantasy XIV isn't fun; it's work".
Link: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/finalfantasy14/review.html?tag=tabs%3Breviews
gamespot is one of the most unreliable sources. ign made a (too long) review. but this review was well done and looked at a lot of things this game has to offer. but in the end yes: this game is work.
One does not guarantee the other. Plenty of other MMOs have regional chat channels, and they're not all overrun with Chuck Norris jokes.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
The reviewer wasn't all that objective with his scoring. I don't see how you can go on and on about the graphics being great, and then not give it a 10/10, just because you need a semi-decent rig (mine is a year old and it runs it on high graphics with ease) to run it doesn't mean it doesn't deserve the right score for graphics.
Also the reviewer is another quest addict. Quests don't give xp in tis game so there isn't a need for more of them. In FFXIV they are meant to provide income and free crafting supplies. Go out and kill on your own accord. If you can't handle that, this isn't the game for you.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Yep, any game getting below at least an 8 is typically interpreted as "passable".
Of course, you have to consider who we're talking about here. A review can be 99.5% negative, ripping it to shreds. Geld will latch on to some even remotely positive remark, such as "it has nice graphics", and spin it into something more significant.
For example, he'd quote or highlight the one positive remark about graphics and then respond with something like:
"See, they acknowledge that SE achieved a technological feat by making a game that looks as good as it does and can still run on modern hardware, so the review isn't all negative. Besides, certainly a developer who can do that can also develop a great game. The people reviewing it just didn't "get" what SE is trying to do. The game didn't "click" with them and so they didn't like it. That's the only conclusion I can come to for why they reviewed it so low".
Every MMO needs its tireless defender. FFXIV has Geld. It at least keeps the threads marginally entertaining.
That said, I don't need "validation" to support my own opinions on something - I played the game extensively and know what I experienced. However, it is somewhat affirming (in an unfortunate way) to see my overall impressions of the game being echoed by so many. It's unfortunate 'cause I'd much rather have been on the other side of the fence, enjoying the game.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
FFXIV does not deserve a 10/10 graphic score. no way a game with such low level of details and high amount of copy pasted terrain objects can ever score that high. Just because a game has a lots of bump mapping and anti aliasing doesnt guarantee a perfect ten in graphics.
I understand IGN's ratings like this. If there is nothing technically wrong with the game it starts at 6.5 or so. Forget they're lack of labeling 5.5 as "complete crap". It's called being nice. There is a reason 6.0 is called "passable". So 5.5 is below passable and just above "meh".
Good comparisons. I'll give you one more. Anyone ever play Neocron? Yeah, probably just me. No name game (was it even AA?) from a no name German company. Yet it still managed to pull down a 6.5 from IGN an entire point higher then a AAA release from one of the biggest game companies.
Sure FFXIV might over time become a good game. But some of the base mechanics are highly flawed and won't be fixed in a month or two if at all. But as of right now, it sucks.
It seems like nobody (gaming sites) wants to pass up the opportunity to hammer away at this game.
"When it comes to GW2 any game is fair game"
Or... these gaming sites are offering an objective viewpoint for gaming consumers. This allows people to be more responsible about what they chose to spend their money on.