Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Review done by MMORPG.com on MO
Diekfoo
Member Posts: 583
Regardless of the bugs and slight unfinished feel, Mortal Online is supremely enjoyable. There are enough developed class-types to keep you occupied while more updates roll out and the game is more than stable enough to play. |
Final Score 6.9.
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/361/view/reviews/load/128/page/1
A pretty fair review. I can see the reviewer knows what he is talking about and understand most of what the MO players likes about MO. AH hall is needed and know SV is working on adding a solution to this. MO will only get better and better.
Looking forward when SV patch in more PvE and Social the next coming weeks.
Comments
I can see that the author is another old school veteran hoping for a remake of UO in 3D. Potential alone doesnt make a game good, and imho a 5 would be a fair score considering how little content there is and how bugged the game is. Shame that Author allowed him self to be fooled by all false promises Henrik makes.
i think the closest to old style UO is linkrealm though but i haven't try it yet and nobody knows when next beta going to start
That is your opinion. The reviewer got his and I got mine. Imo MO is the best MMO on the market for me, even thou it got some bugs.
I would give MO a 8 at it's current state. A 9-10 when the bugs get fixed and we get more mobs. But bugs will be fixed. Soon MO wont be that empty you know. Next patches will include more mobs and feats.
The review is BS IMO. 4 out of 10 is a more realistic score.
They should offer a free trial. I'm not going to buy the game just to see that it gets to the splash screen and crashes like what happened on their open beta.
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
As a person who regularly plays MO I think this review is pretty fair considering current state of the game.
I personally think that both groups, people who give higher as well as lower grades to MO see only what they want to see.
lol, again, it's your opinion, no one else, you know. You see what u want to see.
Um, its not really. How do review something which doesn't exist currently in-game? APB had potential, Aion had potential to a lot of people, Warhammer had a lot of potential to 800,000+ people. Hell, its like reviewing Guild Wars 2 and saying "yeap the game has a lot of potential".
In other news, I heard people reconstructed 13's island keep and the keep was created with 30+ days of unpaid taxes plus 13's guild stone. Now THAT's potential.
Potential is not something you stake on a game without even trying it, like the 800k that blindly hopped on WAR only to realize it's not the game they expected. Nor Aion.
I can say APB had potential, because I played it, and enjoyed the hell out of it. WAR and Aion simply did not, at least in my eyes, because they would still be stuck as a boring treadmill of PvE that disappointed in the areas they toted as nuance (RvR and flying).
Now I played MO during the OB, and the game (especially the players) frustrated the hell out of me... but I still look back on it as something I could have totally loved if they could just "get it right". The game *has* potential, because at it's core, it's something really special. The problem here is that I seriously have doubts that the people working on it have the skill to take it where it needs to be. It will be years before they perfect the methods needed to work on their own game, if the game even lasts that long... which is a shame, because MO deserves a fighting chance to do something better with itself.
I think the review was spot on.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
The game has potential to every individual on a subjective level. It has potential to you, it has potential to 10 other guys here, it has potential to me. To 12 million WoW players, its "lol? dude gtfo". You cannot review based on taste, and any good review needs to remain impartial to the author's dreams in order to inform everyone equally about the game.
But the review itself is accurate, since the author clearly states that pretty much everything is broken and bugged but it has potential to be something in 2-3 years.
How the hell can the reviewer give it 6.9 then? Particularly as the reviewer says it is in a 'closed beta-state'. The reviewer is reviewing the game as a 'released game'. Surely, by definition, to say it is in a closed beta state is to say it is not even up to a release / gold standard let alone 6.9 out of 10!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Focus less on the number, more on the pros/cons, and the word "mediocre" that's right under the 6.9.
If all you take from a review is the score, you're "doing it wrong".
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
Yes I understand what you are saying RE focus on what is said. Still, I do think the number sitting there in a very large font and a bright colour needs to reflect these comments you point out.
By the reviewer sayings alone the game should get a score below 5. It's clear the potential played a role and it shouldn't.
Is it really only about the potential? The reviewer also say:
"Regardless of the bugs and slight unfinished feel, Mortal Online is supremely enjoyable. There are enough developed class-types to keep you occupied while more updates roll out and the game is more than stable enough to play."
It is fun to see how everybody would have scored it x/x, or x/x. Well, the reviewer scored it 6,9/10 and this is his view of the game and no others right!?
Mortal Online got scored 6,9/10 and Darkfall got scored 6/10! What does this say?
If you are comparing the numbers, it means Mortal Online is 0,9 better than Darkfall! Does everyone agree that Mortal Online is that much better? Probabely not since we all have different opinions on matters.
I would rate WoW 1/10 since I do not like it, but that does not mean that everyone else rates it the same way!
Imho the review is fair and accurate, and after some more polish, I'd go for a even higher score since it is (for me) the best/the most fun fantasy mmo out right now! In the end it is your own opinion that counts thank god!
I just cannot take what you say seriously wmada2k.
The game is in a closed beta state and they are charging full price for it. Basic game features do not work. If they were even charging a discounted price and kept the "Beta" tag on there I could see it. It's just a new low in finding out what people are desperate enough to pay for.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Scores tend to be quite subjective as each reviewer gives greater weighting to some items versus others. Some can overlook less than stellar graphics in favor of game play while others give graphics much more importance. So such numbers tend to be inaccurate at best, and totally mis-leading at worst.
If you really hate games with lots of bugs, you might give the game a 1, but some players will overlook such things as long as they can continue playing (even if painfully) and rate it much higher.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Well, sorry then!
But it is still up the the one reviewing a game/product/service or whatever to score it from his/her point of view! And this will not be shared with all human beings obviously! This review is from his point of view, and what he feels for the game in this case, is it not?
I've never played the game, but I am definitely interested in it, which is why I follow it. I thought the review itself was fine, but that the score and mmorpg.com's definition of what "mediocre" means didn't match the review.
Yes, each reviewer's score is subjective, but this is further mired in the fact hat there aren't any specific metrics by which a reviewer scores the game. As such, the score seems incredibly arbitrary and this review underscores that. mmorpg.com needs to implement published categories for it's revewiers by which each game is scored and those categories need to be represented in their reviews. Yes, even scoring within those categories can be subjective, but at least they'll qualify the overall averaged score for the game. I'd even be fine with a "potential" category as long as it's factored into the average with equal weight.
None of my issues are with the review, or even the reviewer. They're more to do with the credibility of the score and mmorpg.com's apparent lack of guidelines for the reviews it publishes. The score attached to this particular review simply underscores the point that mmorpg.com needs to change it's policies for reviews.
~Ripper
I pretty much agree with everything you said rhinok.
The review appears to be nothing more than viral marketing.
The game needs to be reviewed for what it is currently, period!
Potential's been the one thing MO has/had, but month after month we dont seem any closer.
I win!!! LOL@U
Your inferring the author of the review works for StarVault by stating the review is "viral marketing". The only thing this review is marketing is MMORPG.com and nothing more.
If anything this review didn't give Mortal Online enough credit as it is not yet 6 months old and 3 patches had already been released since this was written.
Never trust a screenshot or a youtube video without a version stamp!
Please dont put words in my mouth! Anyone can market the game, its done on this very forum daily by means of fans. Its my opinion the "reviewer" clearly has a agenda which became evident in the Survior Guy series. He's entiled to review,preview or write about MO he deems necessary.
I win!!! LOL@U