They gave them what they gave them. The press also didn't have a "beta weekend" in the sense that beta testers had it, they had press access which was even extended.
It's easy to blame the press saying "they should have done their jobs" etc. But you tell me: if a critic's first impression of a game is bad, isn't it his job to tell you exactly that his first impression was bad?
I heard none of the previews claiming that they saw everything about the game, even the most negative one I saw (the Rock Paper Shotgun one) was very clear on that.
You may have missed the point of the OP. He wasn't focusing on good reviews or bad reviews at all, but whether the amount of time allotted was long enough to really form a fully shaped opinion on the game with which to report.
It's clear from your post that you believe any amount of time is enough to type up an article, whether positive or negative. A first impression is a first impression, after all, and I agree with you on that. I'd say they had enough time to give a decent snapshot previewing the game, but not nearly enough time for a full review.
Had the reviews been positive, not a single fanboi here would question the objectivity of the reviewers.
And, to be fair, wiseversa for us haters.
I'm far from being a fanboi but I still think that most reviews were shite. There were several critical reviews which I liked as well btw.
Eurogamers review wasn't positive but was detailed and you could see that he tried playing the way the devs meant it to be played but still weren't convinced. As I said, it's all about credibility:you can have any opinion but if you base it on errors it won't be really credible
Had the reviews been positive, not a single fanboi here would question the objectivity of the reviewers.
And, to be fair, wiseversa for us haters.
I'm far from being a fanboi but I still think that most reviews were shite. There were several critical reviews which I liked as well btw.
Eurogamers review wasn't positive but was detailed and you could see that he tried playing the way the devs meant it to be played but still weren't convinced. As I said, it's all about credibility:you can have any opinion but if you base it on errors it won't be really credible
I don't mind critical reviews at all until they are based on facts. They are still opinions though and people like different things. Most reviewers hyped up GW2 but I did not like that game at all. For me ESO will be a good passtime for a while but I can live with the knowledge that many don't like this game. What I don't like are the reviews made by overgrown teeners like Angry Joe and emos sitting in forums 24/7.
It does make you wonder why ZOS allowed a NDA lift for the media to review the early part of the game. It's pretty well known at this point that the game doesn't truly open up until after you leave the starter areas and reach main land. It's almost like ZOS is intentionally trying to drive down the hype of their own game. I think for most people, the weekend really isn't enough to get to the appropriate level to access some of the more interesting features that actually make the game start to shine.
Had I not already had a character on the main land, I wouldn't have seen it for myself either. That took me all of the previous beta weekend to do as well. Thank goodness I didn't have to slog through that starter area for the third straight time.
That whole "slow start" thing has been overstated to death. I stick by my impression that most of that is unfamiliarity with a game system--combat, advancement, crafting, etc.--that is different enough from other current MMOs that you have to slow yourself down to get the hang of it.
the first thing you need to get used to is that advancement here is not just about levelling: finding 3 sky shards gives you the same amount of skill points, one, as going up a level...and there are 5 or 6 of those in each starting island. That's 2 extra skill points for the taking if you explore. And make no mistake, this isn't just about improving your weapon with use; skill point allocation into your actives AND passive is what it's all about. When you get to the next 5-15 area, there will be about 15 more to find... Your lore book gives you fair but a bit obscure hints about where they are.
Crafting... Any campfire in the world lets you cook... the provisioning skill you use there makes some very nice long duration buffs while still in the noob island.
Chests... There are tons of chests to find in that noob island... There is no better way to gear up early. Well worth learning the pick lock mechanics early.
Treasure maps.... Yes, noob island had them too.
Side quests... many to find in out of the way places even in noob island. Once in the second zone, there are a shit-ton of those.
So...is that enough "boring" slow shit in the first 10 levels for you?
Regardless how succesfull ESO is going to be, I think that the whole leading up to release has been handled wrong. Starting preorders and a beta while the NDA is still in place. Players are not allowed to discuss the beta because of that and press only part of it. And then on top of that they added an exlusive in the pre order that could be very important for some players (free faction choice).
Atm people are bashing the press for being so stupid as only previewing the first few lvls. But what do they expect? Zenimax doesn't allow otherwise. So if the impression of those first levels is mediocre at best, then it just means that Zenimax is handling PR in the wrong way.
I think the doubts about ESO, well at least about how they handle this half assed NDA crap, is justified. Now it is Zenimax's job to prove at release that the doubts are unfounded. It is not the customer's job to just give a company the benefit of the doubt. The company is supposed to convince the customer. So if anyone at this point is not convinced , for whatever personal reason, they are simply right.
It does make you wonder why ZOS allowed a NDA lift for the media to review the early part of the game. It's pretty well known at this point that the game doesn't truly open up until after you leave the starter areas and reach main land. It's almost like ZOS is intentionally trying to drive down the hype of their own game. I think for most people, the weekend really isn't enough to get to the appropriate level to access some of the more interesting features that actually make the game start to shine.
Had I not already had a character on the main land, I wouldn't have seen it for myself either. That took me all of the previous beta weekend to do as well. Thank goodness I didn't have to slog through that starter area for the third straight time.
That whole "slow start" thing has been overstated to death. I stick by my impression that most of that is unfamiliarity with a game system--combat, advancement, crafting, etc.--that is different enough from other current MMOs that you have to slow yourself down to get the hang of it.
the first thing you need to get used to is that advancement here is not just about levelling: finding 3 sky shards gives you the same amount of skill points, one, as going up a level...and there are 5 or 6 of those in each starting island. That's 2 extra skill points for the taking if you explore. And make no mistake, this isn't just about improving your weapon with use; skill point allocation into your actives AND passive is what it's all about. When you get to the next 5-15 area, there will be about 15 more to find... Your lore book gives you fair but a bit obscure hints about where they are.
Crafting... Any campfire in the world lets you cook... the provisioning skill you use there makes some very nice long duration buffs while still in the noob island.
Chests... There are tons of chests to find in that noob island... There is no better way to gear up early. Well worth learning the pick lock mechanics early.
Treasure maps.... Yes, noob island had them too.
Side quests... many to find in out of the way places even in noob island. Once in the second zone, there are a shit-ton of those.
So...is that enough "boring" slow shit in the first 10 levels for you?
Actually, to many players, all of the highlighted activities are of no interest and they prefer to focus on more combat related PVE or PVP activities.
Cooking. Really? I've never done cooking in any MMORPG, ever, and only tolerate crafting if it is the most economically efficient way to earn gold, otherwise I leave it to others so enjoy.
Chests, yeah, I can see the benefits of lockpicking.... if i was a thief, as a mage i would expect to blast them off with spells, or as a warrior break them off with my axe. (early single player RPG's were designed like this)
Treasure maps.... no clue what they are or why i want them, to find chests I suppose, so I'd probably like that one.
Side quests - OK, I'm big on those too, in fact, I'll usually do them to the point that I'm over-leveled for the next zone, because at the end of the day I prefer being overpowered to being challenged. (not a lot of free time in my life for redos)
Personally, I'd probably enjoy the early levels, I always enjoy the journey far more than the end game of most any title, but I find I'm more patient than most and more tolerant of activities that others consider to be a grind. (except cooking.....not going there)
Seriously though, time to get down off the mountain, no need to vigorously defend this title from the detractors, unless of course you are just doing it for fun, if so, have at it then.
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
The problem with DAOC, is even at it's height it didn't have many people, just emphatic players. What I'm getting at is so many recent games are trying to recreate DAOC... but then you look at the #'s is was total niche. Perhaps they are over-thinking how awesome the masses will think it is. Then DAOC was the master of multiple-accounts, is this able to do that? If not, well that is a big part not like DAOC.
Beta weekend is enough to review if you state you are basing your review on the beta. If we can't figure that out on our end, it's our problem.
i think its so refreshing to get a game once again that i havent played to death in an "open beta".
i dont need to know every endgame detail in advance. on the contrary, teso already did surprise me in many ways as i didnt know anything before playing the weekends.
it was not nearly on my radar. after the second hour in Cyrodiil i preordered the imperial edition and cant wait for it to start. thats much better than chewing on every detail years before the game is out.
Ultimately, the success or failure of an MMO depends upon its endgame - what activities are there to do once you've ground through all the leveling content. Good PVP certainly helps, as it gives people a reason to keep playing, but for the non-PVPers, most games end up falling to a "grind through dungeons to gear up" and then "grind through raids to gear up more" scheme. SWTOR may only have failed early on because of its quick grind (it took only a few instance playthroughs to get raid ready), for instance.
If ESO's beta didn't include end-game content, then it's impossible to speculate whether the game mechanics that make it awesome now will matter at all after people grind through all that content.
TL;DR -> no, they couldn't possibly.
If you want a living world, there will always be new things. End game means just that the End of the Game. This is the issue I have with most posters on this forum. They want a living world but they want end game to infinitely grind on. A living world will have new stories and new things to do.
You can speculate on end game content, just by how Bethesda has done in this game (first few levels) and what they have done in other games they produced. It is not that hard to infer. The game mechanics are awesome? From what I saw, they are mediocre at best and pretty simple.
i think its so refreshing to get a game once again that i havent played to death in an "open beta".
i dont need to know every endgame detail in advance. on the contrary, teso already did surprise me in many ways as i didnt know anything before playing the weekends.
it was not nearly on my radar. after the second hour in Cyrodiil i preordered the imperial edition and cant wait for it to start. thats much better than chewing on every detail years before the game is out.
I think you are raising some interesting points. But my problem with this is that in the past other companies hid higher lvl areas behind a NDA (almost) untill release. Just to show that those areas were barely (or not at all) finished.
So I prefer a lifted NDA with full press access. Also, if I could play a game to death in just the beta, then it wouldn't be a long term game for me anyway. I would never buy it then. So that would be a good thing for me to know before release. I have always list of games to play. Companies like Zenimax make chosing which game I play next a lot simpler.
It does make you wonder why ZOS allowed a NDA lift for the media to review the early part of the game. It's pretty well known at this point that the game doesn't truly open up until after you leave the starter areas and reach main land. It's almost like ZOS is intentionally trying to drive down the hype of their own game. I think for most people, the weekend really isn't enough to get to the appropriate level to access some of the more interesting features that actually make the game start to shine.
Had I not already had a character on the main land, I wouldn't have seen it for myself either. That took me all of the previous beta weekend to do as well. Thank goodness I didn't have to slog through that starter area for the third straight time.
That whole "slow start" thing has been overstated to death. I stick by my impression that most of that is unfamiliarity with a game system--combat, advancement, crafting, etc.--that is different enough from other current MMOs that you have to slow yourself down to get the hang of it.
the first thing you need to get used to is that advancement here is not just about levelling: finding 3 sky shards gives you the same amount of skill points, one, as going up a level...and there are 5 or 6 of those in each starting island. That's 2 extra skill points for the taking if you explore. And make no mistake, this isn't just about improving your weapon with use; skill point allocation into your actives AND passive is what it's all about. When you get to the next 5-15 area, there will be about 15 more to find... Your lore book gives you fair but a bit obscure hints about where they are.
Crafting... Any campfire in the world lets you cook... the provisioning skill you use there makes some very nice long duration buffs while still in the noob island.
Chests... There are tons of chests to find in that noob island... There is no better way to gear up early. Well worth learning the pick lock mechanics early.
Treasure maps.... Yes, noob island had them too.
Side quests... many to find in out of the way places even in noob island. Once in the second zone, there are a shit-ton of those.
So...is that enough "boring" slow shit in the first 10 levels for you?
Actually, to many players, all of the highlighted activities are of no interest and they prefer to focus on more combat related PVE or PVP activities.
Cooking. Really? I've never done cooking in any MMORPG, ever, and only tolerate crafting if it is the most economically efficient way to earn gold, otherwise I leave it to others so enjoy.
Chests, yeah, I can see the benefits of lockpicking.... if i was a thief, as a mage i would expect to blast them off with spells, or as a warrior break them off with my axe. (early single player RPG's were designed like this)
Treasure maps.... no clue what they are or why i want them, to find chests I suppose, so I'd probably like that one.
Side quests - OK, I'm big on those too, in fact, I'll usually do them to the point that I'm over-leveled for the next zone, because at the end of the day I prefer being overpowered to being challenged. (not a lot of free time in my life for redos)
Personally, I'd probably enjoy the early levels, I always enjoy the journey far more than the end game of most any title, but I find I'm more patient than most and more tolerant of activities that others consider to be a grind. (except cooking.....not going there)
Seriously though, time to get down off the mountain, no need to vigorously defend this title from the detractors, unless of course you are just doing it for fun, if so, have at it then.
I do it for fun and balance I have no interest in "converting" anyone...matter of fact the whole idea of trying to convert people has always been a huge turn-off for me.
I do admit that I tend to be a bit compulsive about correcting things that are just plain wrong wherever I see them... that's my brand of OCD
And I agree with you... I've always liked the idea of bashing frigging chests and locked doors to bits lol.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
So now we're in the age of "tabloid game reviews", where the content is optional but the controversy is always maximised...
Yup, it's clickbait.
Journalism has turned into trolling for page views.
It is a sad sad trend, few years ago only Kotaku would intentionally press sensationalized article for "clickbait"
Now majority of the youtubers and even major media outlet are doing it, what sadden me the most is massively, ever since GW2 the quality of their site has been deteriorating big time.
Can one review his beta weekend experience: very much so.
Can one review and judge a game that is no where near finalised, let alone released: absolutely not.
Either way, I think there is way too much fuss going on with the TESO (so called) reviews.. (or any game for that matter)
People who like it should play it, regardless of wether or not someone else tells them not to. The best way to decide ones preferences is through first hand experience, as it is with everything in life.
STOOPID When someone does something so utterly moronic that it kills your brain cells at the very thought of it.
They gave them what they gave them. The press also didn't have a "beta weekend" in the sense that beta testers had it, they had press access which was even extended.
It's easy to blame the press saying "they should have done their jobs" etc. But you tell me: if a critic's first impression of a game is bad, isn't it his job to tell you exactly that his first impression was bad?
I heard none of the previews claiming that they saw everything about the game, even the most negative one I saw (the Rock Paper Shotgun one) was very clear on that.
A fair point, first impression is indeed very important, there's a reason why people love GW2 so much , the opening sequences were epic .
BUT what most reviewers did to TESO was like reviewing Oblivion after escaping the prison, as a "PROFESSIONAL" gaming journalist, shouldn't their coverage includes every aspects of the game? i mean majority of them did not even mention how crafting works, or how different factions beginning zone differs from each other.
They gave them what they gave them. The press also didn't have a "beta weekend" in the sense that beta testers had it, they had press access which was even extended.
It's easy to blame the press saying "they should have done their jobs" etc. But you tell me: if a critic's first impression of a game is bad, isn't it his job to tell you exactly that his first impression was bad?
I heard none of the previews claiming that they saw everything about the game, even the most negative one I saw (the Rock Paper Shotgun one) was very clear on that.
You may have missed the point of the OP. He wasn't focusing on good reviews or bad reviews at all, but whether the amount of time allotted was long enough to really form a fully shaped opinion on the game with which to report.
It's clear from your post that you believe any amount of time is enough to type up an article, whether positive or negative. A first impression is a first impression, after all, and I agree with you on that. I'd say they had enough time to give a decent snapshot previewing the game, but not nearly enough time for a full review.
That was indeed my point. But the point was also that none I saw pretended to write "a full review" like you said.
They ARE reporting about a first impression aka a preview, not a "fully formed opinion". And all the previews I read or saw mentioned that.
So I think the OP's point is moot, obviously yes they did not see everything or even most of what is in the game, but neither did they try to tell people they did.
And if Zenimax hadn't wanted to let the press report their first impressions, well then they shouldn't have allowed them access to a limited amount of content and time. They did however, because game companies need that media attention as much as the gaming press needs the companies.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
So now we're in the age of "tabloid game reviews", where the content is optional but the controversy is always maximised...
Yup, it's clickbait.
Journalism has turned into trolling for page views.
It is a sad sad trend, few years ago only Kotaku would intentionally press sensationalized article for "clickbait"
Now majority of the youtubers and even major media outlet are doing it, what sadden me the most is massively, ever since GW2 the quality of their site has been deteriorating big time.
but it works. People eat this shit up like they do reality TV.
If someone reviews a game and lists off it's features and gives it an avg score, they may as well have not bothered.
They gave them what they gave them. The press also didn't have a "beta weekend" in the sense that beta testers had it, they had press access which was even extended.
It's easy to blame the press saying "they should have done their jobs" etc. But you tell me: if a critic's first impression of a game is bad, isn't it his job to tell you exactly that his first impression was bad?
I heard none of the previews claiming that they saw everything about the game, even the most negative one I saw (the Rock Paper Shotgun one) was very clear on that.
You may have missed the point of the OP. He wasn't focusing on good reviews or bad reviews at all, but whether the amount of time allotted was long enough to really form a fully shaped opinion on the game with which to report.
It's clear from your post that you believe any amount of time is enough to type up an article, whether positive or negative. A first impression is a first impression, after all, and I agree with you on that. I'd say they had enough time to give a decent snapshot previewing the game, but not nearly enough time for a full review.
That was indeed my point. But the point was also that none I saw pretended to write "a full review" like you said.
They ARE reporting about a first impression aka a preview, not a "fully formed opinion". And all the previews I read or saw mentioned that.
So I think the OP's point is moot, obviously yes they did not see everything or even most of what is in the game, but neither did they try to tell people they did.
And if Zenimax hadn't wanted to let the press report their first impressions, well then they shouldn't have allowed them access to a limited amount of content and time. They did however, because game companies need that media attention as much as the gaming press needs the companies.
You do know that preview has nothing to do with amount of content involved.
You never expect movie critic to watch first two scenes of movie and make a preview!
The difference between preview and full review is the depth of analysis. Preview and full review of same author are not independent. Preview is a plan for review. One cannot undermine other.
So, your interpretation seems to be not correct, sorry.
Another thing. Preview or full review are not author’s opinions. Preview or full review are informative statements about reviewed subjects. To make even preview without fully formed opinion – example of bad professional ethics, and negligence. If someone would make a review undermining his preview, it would endanger his credibility.
To review an entire MMO? Don't make me laugh, of course its not.
But it is enough to take small sections, show some details and do some good analysis. Any reviewer silly enough to passing judgement on core aspects of the MMO at this point is a complete hack.
But a reviewer that say takes 5 minutes to show you the progression of skill unlocks he went through for a particular class and weapon combo and how it affects his gameplay and enjoyment (or lack thereof) of the game is entirely possible and quite useful. Unfortunately only a very small minority of reviewers do such a responsible approach.
In the ShoddyCast Review he mentions how the combat is rather boring when he has one ability. Sound familiar? Yeah every MMO does this and its fucking stupid. I don't feel like I earned something when I finally get 3 abilities. I feel like you were fucking with me for no good reason. I feel like I earned something when you present me with a hard monster and I manage to defeat through a clever use of the 5 skills I have. He then goes on to explain that once he had gotten a decent foundation of abilities the gameplay really became much more engaging. Then does some analysis about why he thinks ranged combat falls short. As an aside I think he is correct about the ranged combat, but I don't think the TESO devs have any particularly good options, the alternate winds up with a LOT of problems in an MMORPG. He also gives you his subjective opinion that while he has a positive opinion of the final product it took considerably longer than he expected to go from crap to cool and that this is probably a real detriment.
This is a perfectly fine thing and its quite useful. It is constrained but it is important. And most importantly he doesn't overreach. He is careful to say he can't state opinions about group content. He does not present himself as an expert on builds. He just gives a decent rundown of the overall way you initially progress. He doesn't even rave about how great combat was. He just gives you enough information to realize that after a couple hours of punishment there may be something with enough meat on the bone to be interesting. A responsible reader should be able to understand that it will be up to them to discover they like the taste of the meat.
You do know that preview has nothing to do with amount of content involved.
You never expect movie critic to watch first two scenes of movie and make a preview!
The difference between preview and full review is the depth of analysis. Preview and full review of same author are not independent. Preview is a plan for review. One cannot undermine other.
So, your interpretation seems to be not correct, sorry.
Another thing. Preview or full review are not author’s opinions. Preview or full review are informative statements about reviewed subjects. To make even preview without fully formed opinion – example of bad professional ethics, and negligence. If someone would make a review undermining his preview, it would endanger his credibility.
Do you even know how much time it takes in this game to get to level 10? Games journalism is not comparable to writing a recension for a film that can be watched in an hour and a half or so. You are comparing apples and oranges.
Besides, even in films there are sometimes "previews" of a sort, where critics do not see the entire finished product, but parts of it.
This: "Preview or full review are not author’s opinions. Preview or full review are informative statements about reviewed subjects." Is wrong.
Reviews (& previews) are very much the authors opinion about something. A review is written by giving certain factual information then building an opinion around it, while giving enough arguments as to the why you think so.
And I'll let you in on an amazing secret: people can change their opinion when going from a first impression to a full look. Wowed you didn't it?
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Of course it's not enough time to review...thank god no one actually did.It is however enough time to give ones first impressions of your personal experience with the game,which is what most of the press did.The only people using the word review for what the press did this week are angry fanbois with an axe to grind.The rest of us realize what it was.
You have to take into consideration most of these press guys aren't just playing one game and I understand it there was plenty of other things they've had to preview this week,it has been a big week for preview events and preview builds for a few big games and a lot of lesser known ones.They didn't have time to play TESO 24/7 for the beta period like a lot of consumers did.
They gave them what they gave them. The press also didn't have a "beta weekend" in the sense that beta testers had it, they had press access which was even extended.
It's easy to blame the press saying "they should have done their jobs" etc. But you tell me: if a critic's first impression of a game is bad, isn't it his job to tell you exactly that his first impression was bad?
I heard none of the previews claiming that they saw everything about the game, even the most negative one I saw (the Rock Paper Shotgun one) was very clear on that.
A fair point, first impression is indeed very important, there's a reason why people love GW2 so much , the opening sequences were epic .
BUT what most reviewers did to TESO was like reviewing Oblivion after escaping the prison, as a "PROFESSIONAL" gaming journalist, shouldn't their coverage includes every aspects of the game? i mean majority of them did not even mention how crafting works, or how different factions beginning zone differs from each other.
To be honest they probably got over excited and since beta is so short (I'm sure they have lives) they probably missed a lot they could be reviewing for us in the rush to get plenty of time in PVP.
Best way is always just play it yourself reviews before release are just hype or bashing and after release can be just as bad. Nowadays you tend to get free trials, I remember when if you wanted to see if you might like a mmo it equaled buy it and play the free month. I remember CoH stuck it out for awhile before offering a trial.
CoH had a trial pre-launch c. March 2004.
Not everyone has the time to try every game that comes on the market. And you are suggesting that people try ESO for many hours - because if they dislike it early they haven't got the hang of it?
Nor is it a free month. A sub based game is like joining a gym or a "traditional" golf course. You don't buy the game in the same way you don't buy the gym or the golf course. Your $60 is your membership fee for which they throw in your first green fees.
So for a lot of people reviews play a key role. In all walks of life. If you decide to buy a new car you don't go along buying one after another until you find one you like surely. Same concept. Cost is just a matter of what you can afford.
Comments
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Had the reviews been positive, not a single fanboi here would question the objectivity of the reviewers.
And, to be fair, wiseversa for us haters.
You may have missed the point of the OP. He wasn't focusing on good reviews or bad reviews at all, but whether the amount of time allotted was long enough to really form a fully shaped opinion on the game with which to report.
It's clear from your post that you believe any amount of time is enough to type up an article, whether positive or negative. A first impression is a first impression, after all, and I agree with you on that. I'd say they had enough time to give a decent snapshot previewing the game, but not nearly enough time for a full review.
I'm far from being a fanboi but I still think that most reviews were shite. There were several critical reviews which I liked as well btw.
Eurogamers review wasn't positive but was detailed and you could see that he tried playing the way the devs meant it to be played but still weren't convinced. As I said, it's all about credibility:you can have any opinion but if you base it on errors it won't be really credible
I don't mind critical reviews at all until they are based on facts. They are still opinions though and people like different things. Most reviewers hyped up GW2 but I did not like that game at all. For me ESO will be a good passtime for a while but I can live with the knowledge that many don't like this game. What I don't like are the reviews made by overgrown teeners like Angry Joe and emos sitting in forums 24/7.
^ You're awesome
Regardless how succesfull ESO is going to be, I think that the whole leading up to release has been handled wrong. Starting preorders and a beta while the NDA is still in place. Players are not allowed to discuss the beta because of that and press only part of it. And then on top of that they added an exlusive in the pre order that could be very important for some players (free faction choice).
Atm people are bashing the press for being so stupid as only previewing the first few lvls. But what do they expect? Zenimax doesn't allow otherwise. So if the impression of those first levels is mediocre at best, then it just means that Zenimax is handling PR in the wrong way.
I think the doubts about ESO, well at least about how they handle this half assed NDA crap, is justified. Now it is Zenimax's job to prove at release that the doubts are unfounded. It is not the customer's job to just give a company the benefit of the doubt. The company is supposed to convince the customer. So if anyone at this point is not convinced , for whatever personal reason, they are simply right.
Actually, to many players, all of the highlighted activities are of no interest and they prefer to focus on more combat related PVE or PVP activities.
Cooking. Really? I've never done cooking in any MMORPG, ever, and only tolerate crafting if it is the most economically efficient way to earn gold, otherwise I leave it to others so enjoy.
Chests, yeah, I can see the benefits of lockpicking.... if i was a thief, as a mage i would expect to blast them off with spells, or as a warrior break them off with my axe. (early single player RPG's were designed like this)
Treasure maps.... no clue what they are or why i want them, to find chests I suppose, so I'd probably like that one.
Side quests - OK, I'm big on those too, in fact, I'll usually do them to the point that I'm over-leveled for the next zone, because at the end of the day I prefer being overpowered to being challenged. (not a lot of free time in my life for redos)
Personally, I'd probably enjoy the early levels, I always enjoy the journey far more than the end game of most any title, but I find I'm more patient than most and more tolerant of activities that others consider to be a grind. (except cooking.....not going there)
Seriously though, time to get down off the mountain, no need to vigorously defend this title from the detractors, unless of course you are just doing it for fun, if so, have at it then.
"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
The problem with DAOC, is even at it's height it didn't have many people, just emphatic players. What I'm getting at is so many recent games are trying to recreate DAOC... but then you look at the #'s is was total niche. Perhaps they are over-thinking how awesome the masses will think it is. Then DAOC was the master of multiple-accounts, is this able to do that? If not, well that is a big part not like DAOC.
Beta weekend is enough to review if you state you are basing your review on the beta. If we can't figure that out on our end, it's our problem.
i think its so refreshing to get a game once again that i havent played to death in an "open beta".
i dont need to know every endgame detail in advance. on the contrary, teso already did surprise me in many ways as i didnt know anything before playing the weekends.
it was not nearly on my radar. after the second hour in Cyrodiil i preordered the imperial edition and cant wait for it to start. thats much better than chewing on every detail years before the game is out.
If you want a living world, there will always be new things. End game means just that the End of the Game. This is the issue I have with most posters on this forum. They want a living world but they want end game to infinitely grind on. A living world will have new stories and new things to do.
You can speculate on end game content, just by how Bethesda has done in this game (first few levels) and what they have done in other games they produced. It is not that hard to infer. The game mechanics are awesome? From what I saw, they are mediocre at best and pretty simple.
I think you are raising some interesting points. But my problem with this is that in the past other companies hid higher lvl areas behind a NDA (almost) untill release. Just to show that those areas were barely (or not at all) finished.
So I prefer a lifted NDA with full press access. Also, if I could play a game to death in just the beta, then it wouldn't be a long term game for me anyway. I would never buy it then. So that would be a good thing for me to know before release. I have always list of games to play. Companies like Zenimax make chosing which game I play next a lot simpler.
I do it for fun and balance
I have no interest in "converting" anyone...matter of fact the whole idea of trying to convert people has always been a huge turn-off for me.
I do admit that I tend to be a bit compulsive about correcting things that are just plain wrong wherever I see them... that's my brand of OCD
And I agree with you... I've always liked the idea of bashing frigging chests and locked doors to bits lol.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
It is a sad sad trend, few years ago only Kotaku would intentionally press sensationalized article for "clickbait"
Now majority of the youtubers and even major media outlet are doing it, what sadden me the most is massively, ever since GW2 the quality of their site has been deteriorating big time.
Can one review his beta weekend experience: very much so.
Can one review and judge a game that is no where near finalised, let alone released: absolutely not.
Either way, I think there is way too much fuss going on with the TESO (so called) reviews.. (or any game for that matter)
People who like it should play it, regardless of wether or not someone else tells them not to. The best way to decide ones preferences is through first hand experience, as it is with everything in life.
STOOPID
When someone does something so utterly moronic that it kills your brain cells at the very thought of it.
A fair point, first impression is indeed very important, there's a reason why people love GW2 so much , the opening sequences were epic .
BUT what most reviewers did to TESO was like reviewing Oblivion after escaping the prison, as a "PROFESSIONAL" gaming journalist, shouldn't their coverage includes every aspects of the game? i mean majority of them did not even mention how crafting works, or how different factions beginning zone differs from each other.
That was indeed my point. But the point was also that none I saw pretended to write "a full review" like you said.
They ARE reporting about a first impression aka a preview, not a "fully formed opinion". And all the previews I read or saw mentioned that.
So I think the OP's point is moot, obviously yes they did not see everything or even most of what is in the game, but neither did they try to tell people they did.
And if Zenimax hadn't wanted to let the press report their first impressions, well then they shouldn't have allowed them access to a limited amount of content and time. They did however, because game companies need that media attention as much as the gaming press needs the companies.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
but it works. People eat this shit up like they do reality TV.
If someone reviews a game and lists off it's features and gives it an avg score, they may as well have not bothered.
You do know that preview has nothing to do with amount of content involved.
You never expect movie critic to watch first two scenes of movie and make a preview!
The difference between preview and full review is the depth of analysis. Preview and full review of same author are not independent. Preview is a plan for review. One cannot undermine other.
So, your interpretation seems to be not correct, sorry.
Another thing. Preview or full review are not author’s opinions. Preview or full review are informative statements about reviewed subjects. To make even preview without fully formed opinion – example of bad professional ethics, and negligence. If someone would make a review undermining his preview, it would endanger his credibility.
To review an entire MMO? Don't make me laugh, of course its not.
But it is enough to take small sections, show some details and do some good analysis. Any reviewer silly enough to passing judgement on core aspects of the MMO at this point is a complete hack.
But a reviewer that say takes 5 minutes to show you the progression of skill unlocks he went through for a particular class and weapon combo and how it affects his gameplay and enjoyment (or lack thereof) of the game is entirely possible and quite useful. Unfortunately only a very small minority of reviewers do such a responsible approach.
In the ShoddyCast Review he mentions how the combat is rather boring when he has one ability. Sound familiar? Yeah every MMO does this and its fucking stupid. I don't feel like I earned something when I finally get 3 abilities. I feel like you were fucking with me for no good reason. I feel like I earned something when you present me with a hard monster and I manage to defeat through a clever use of the 5 skills I have. He then goes on to explain that once he had gotten a decent foundation of abilities the gameplay really became much more engaging. Then does some analysis about why he thinks ranged combat falls short. As an aside I think he is correct about the ranged combat, but I don't think the TESO devs have any particularly good options, the alternate winds up with a LOT of problems in an MMORPG. He also gives you his subjective opinion that while he has a positive opinion of the final product it took considerably longer than he expected to go from crap to cool and that this is probably a real detriment.
This is a perfectly fine thing and its quite useful. It is constrained but it is important. And most importantly he doesn't overreach. He is careful to say he can't state opinions about group content. He does not present himself as an expert on builds. He just gives a decent rundown of the overall way you initially progress. He doesn't even rave about how great combat was. He just gives you enough information to realize that after a couple hours of punishment there may be something with enough meat on the bone to be interesting. A responsible reader should be able to understand that it will be up to them to discover they like the taste of the meat.
Do you even know how much time it takes in this game to get to level 10? Games journalism is not comparable to writing a recension for a film that can be watched in an hour and a half or so. You are comparing apples and oranges.
Besides, even in films there are sometimes "previews" of a sort, where critics do not see the entire finished product, but parts of it.
This: "Preview or full review are not author’s opinions. Preview or full review are informative statements about reviewed subjects." Is wrong.
Reviews (& previews) are very much the authors opinion about something. A review is written by giving certain factual information then building an opinion around it, while giving enough arguments as to the why you think so.
And I'll let you in on an amazing secret: people can change their opinion when going from a first impression to a full look.
Wowed you didn't it?
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Of course it's not enough time to review...thank god no one actually did.It is however enough time to give ones first impressions of your personal experience with the game,which is what most of the press did.The only people using the word review for what the press did this week are angry fanbois with an axe to grind.The rest of us realize what it was.
You have to take into consideration most of these press guys aren't just playing one game and I understand it there was plenty of other things they've had to preview this week,it has been a big week for preview events and preview builds for a few big games and a lot of lesser known ones.They didn't have time to play TESO 24/7 for the beta period like a lot of consumers did.
To be honest they probably got over excited and since beta is so short (I'm sure they have lives) they probably missed a lot they could be reviewing for us in the rush to get plenty of time in PVP.