Strange, all I can assume is that scores like this come from non pvprs.
edit - Just read it. Yep pve guy here. "you can't limit a group search to your own campaign is a drag" lmao. All you do is type LFG you have a group of 20+ in a couple minutes if not instant.
Keep in mind that ESO only caters to one type of PvP (DAoC RvR), they don't do open world PvP (as in a mixed faction flag system), battleground PvP (larger teams), or arena PvP (smaller teams). I'm not saying this is good or bad, just that not all PvP players are going to find ESO appealing.
Can we stop with this nonsense please? ESO is nothing like DAoC. It has no competitive group vs group, very weak PvP progression, the combat is completely different, the CC system is completely different, no viable PvP soloing of any kind, no RvR dungeon etc. It's much closer to WoW Wintergrasp or GW2 WvW.
Suprisingly the "Elder Scrolls" in the title of this game is hurting the "professional" reviews a lot.
A lot of the reviewers are stumbling on the predjudice that this game is a sequel to Skyrim.
THIS GAME HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SINGLE PLAYER SERIES.
However I do think that 6/10 is quite accurate because of the design flaws, bugs, non-existing endgame and the soft-content gate on veteran ranks accompanied by lack of communication from ZOS.
But in all honestly giving static reviews on evolving online games is a big nono.
The game would have been a ton better if they actually. It's like Bethesda didn't even bother lending out their core writers to Zenimax to make the main story line and quests a little more interesting.
I loved the main story line in Oblivion. I loved the main story line in Skyrim and a lot of fantastic quest lines like the Companions.
I miss all that in ESO. The main story line so far and most of the questlines feel just very generic run of the mill.
There are a few decent ones, but they are far and few between.
I would say that review is pretty accurate . I'm enjoying the game though so far . I'm not finding it any more buggy that many of the other mmo launches I have seen but the thing I can't over look is the poor design choices .
The public dungeons are horrible there are far too many people in them and what would have been fun and engaging if they have been limited to 5-10 people are just awful . Lots of public dungeons have bots camping the bosses for loot . You can view the problem for yourself here at 23.00 . I have heard people doing it are getting instant bans now though but its things like this show just how sloppy they have been in the design . It really should have been identified and fixed in the beta stage .
Also bots are camping the vampire and werewolf respawn points and killing them instantly so no one can get bitten unless they pay a scammer . I have seen gold sellers advertising bites for real money .
There is enough I enjoy to keep me subscribed for a second month so i get to level 50 . After that its a matter of whether they resolve the problems with the bots ,scammers and sort out the public dungeons .
At the moment I'm on the fence whether or not its worth a monthly subscription long term. I think I would be better disposed to it and its flaws if Zenimax wasn't so greedy by doing things like locking off imperials to the delux edition and releasing with a cash shop. Its so obvious they have placed the price of a horse quite highly so people go an buy one from the in game store .
I suspect it would do much better in the long term if it was buy to play and charged for DLCs . I would far prefer that to a free to play model .
Never knew hand holding was a requirement in a game. I think Zenimax is starting to find this out with all these reviewers.
You really gotta explain to me how expecting to group with your friends without the game mechanics refusing to allow it IN AN MMO, equals hand holding now.
It never seizes to amaze me how posters from any side of a discussion can twist and turn the significance of inflammatory terms to their own needs, seriously.
Anyway, I thought the review was actually a very balanced one, more so than the others I saw. Touching on both positives and negatives.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
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
I think mmorpg.com's little by little review is the best and most balanced , Bill Murphy at least hasn't jumped on the lets all hate on ESO for more views wave of hysteria.
I know the game isn't perfect but it does not deserve the shitstorm of hate for more views and ad clicks its getting.
Besides grouping bugs where I agree with the review, the reviewer sounds to me like someone who had a predefined expection how an elsder scrolls MMO should have been.
If you play with this predefined expection you will probably not like the game. If you just take the game as what it is is, it is a good game beside the bugs which will get fixed sometime. Not great of course, could have been better.
And arguments like repeated voice overs or bad combat animations are not really important to me. I rarely listen to voice overs as I already have read the text by then and I started my MMO career with EQ combat animations. Nuff said.
P.S. Are the combat animations really that bad ? I honestly never recognized it.
I know the game isn't perfect but it does not deserve the shitstorm of hate for more views and ad clicks its getting.
Don't you think that charging premium price for a product mediocre at best deserves this kind of negative publicity that ESO is getting?
No actually I don't , the game is much better ( though not perfect by any means ) than these reviewers are making out , I have been playing since launch and find the game rather good ,I have not personally had any of the problems they are so keen to point out, and I don't really care what anyone says but these so called famous youtubers with their little armies of 12 year old subscribers are doing it for more views , not so sure about other review sites , though IGN 's review was the fairest. I may be feeling a little cynical at the moment , but there also seems quite a lot of evidence that this is the case.
And as I said Bill Murphy has been the most balanced and fair of them all so far.
And as I said Bill Murphy has been the most balanced and fair of them all so far.
You have got to be kidding...
In the face of all other review sites' scores and criticisms, what stands out is that MMORPG.com's review was bought and paid for... like all of their reviews. Bill and company should be professionally embarrassed at how they helped bilk players out of their money by promoting the game with false rhetoric. Staff at MMORPG.com ought to work for the Obama administration.
This is why this site has no credibility anymore. It used to, but that was years ago.
Money corrupts. This is the last place I'd ever go for a formal, fair, and unbiased review. On the plus side, however, the forums aren't over-moderated and players can call a turd a turd.
The game does not deserve a sub. That is the bottom line. All of the problems it has would be acceptable in a B2P or F2P title. You can't charge a box price + sub for something that does not feel finished.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
Originally posted by CowboyHat The game does not deserve a sub. That is the bottom line. All of the problems it has would be acceptable in a B2P or F2P title. You can't charge a box price + sub for something that does not feel finished.
I think people would still be calling them out on the state of the game if it was F2P or B2P, though i do agree that in its present state the game is not worth a sub, whether it will be worth one in the future really depends on how well they fix things, and whether any improvements are made to the PvE side of the game, especially all these grouping issues, one thing for sure though, if the game went F2P then the current problems with bots etc, would only get worse.
Funny thing, I enjoy playing ESO, yet I couldn't really find fault with most of his points. I guess the question for the player isn't whether the designs are good or bad, but whether you like the more solo nature of the game, vs the challenges for grouping.
I find it's the usual case of being only average at everything. I mean, they have a lot of great stories that I solo, but then there's all these other people around me, visiting the same Npc's, killing the same bosses, If it's solo oriented, let me kill the targets solo, heck, I frequently get credit running up on a fight and not actually even attacking, but just by being there.
Grouping does have it's problems as he said, I don't do it, but several friends and their wives have hilarious conversations on voice chat when one of them picks a different story option than the other and they find each other unable to continue forward together in the story line.
I can't say he's wrong by giving it a 6, I was thinking more like 6.5 but can't really call it a great game.
I haven't done any PVP to speak of, might be the redeeming part of it, but I'll eventually get around to it.
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
There have been a spectrum of reviews fpr this game, and yet somehow it's always the most negative ones that deserve to be promoted here in general discussion. Every single time the recent post list is not dominated by something negative one of the usual crowd seems to be motivated to come in and add a little more doom and gloom. Go to metacritic, look at the list of reviews, and notice that it's only the most hostile that get "promoted" here. And, more to the point, isn't there in theory a separate reviews sub-forum?
If it's not reviews in magazines it's youtube ones (hostile, naturally). Or some other cause of the day - gloating over bugs, or inventing problems with the payment model.
I'd suggest that the relevant people get another hobby.
Same broken record. People who want to level with their friends who hate the game... Do people need their hand held this much on a solo MMORPG? In most mmo's you only need groups when in dungeons and end game raiding, I don't see why ESO should be so different...
Never knew hand holding was a requirement in a game. I think Zenimax is starting to find this out with all these reviewers.
Notice how this review hates it for not being a solo ES game, and yet hates it again that its not a group MMO. haha, double standard reviews, I love it! Then goes on to say how ES games of the past are just as crappy as ESO when it should be you creating your own story... (if that wasn't a "I want only sandbox" type statement Idk what is) He rates this game 6/10 because he wanted a sandbox and not an Elder Scrolls game. Sad really.
Then he talks about how he doesn't like the stamina and health bars without cooldowns. He would rather have skill cooldowns. Which ultimately is not Elder Scrolls at all.
Do you think the Gamespot ESO review is out of touch with what an ES game is about, after watching their oblivion review? You decide.
lol...
That you would take something like "Hey, you know I'd really love to be able to group up with friends and play, rather than doing so much solo, because it's more fun that way", and twist it into a dismissive, even insulting, strawman - just to defend "your game" against a less than stellar review - only serves in demonstrating your intolerance toward any review that doesn't reflect your own.
It also demonstrates that you can't differentiate between people wanting to play with friends/others, because they find it more enjoyable... and needing to have their hand-held. I wonder just how much you're projecting when you make those remarks. Either way, it's unfortunate that you, demonstrably, don't understand the difference between the two.
Let me guess - you haven't played the game and are just reading from the hate parade cue cards, right? I'm seeing the same handful of posters promoting this review who have been lingering in this forum giving cheap shots for weeks. Look over the OP posting history here, for example, if you want a representative example...
Comments
Can we stop with this nonsense please? ESO is nothing like DAoC. It has no competitive group vs group, very weak PvP progression, the combat is completely different, the CC system is completely different, no viable PvP soloing of any kind, no RvR dungeon etc. It's much closer to WoW Wintergrasp or GW2 WvW.
DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann
The game would have been a ton better if they actually. It's like Bethesda didn't even bother lending out their core writers to Zenimax to make the main story line and quests a little more interesting.
I loved the main story line in Oblivion. I loved the main story line in Skyrim and a lot of fantastic quest lines like the Companions.
I miss all that in ESO. The main story line so far and most of the questlines feel just very generic run of the mill.
There are a few decent ones, but they are far and few between.
I would say that review is pretty accurate . I'm enjoying the game though so far . I'm not finding it any more buggy that many of the other mmo launches I have seen but the thing I can't over look is the poor design choices .
The public dungeons are horrible there are far too many people in them and what would have been fun and engaging if they have been limited to 5-10 people are just awful . Lots of public dungeons have bots camping the bosses for loot . You can view the problem for yourself here at 23.00 . I have heard people doing it are getting instant bans now though but its things like this show just how sloppy they have been in the design . It really should have been identified and fixed in the beta stage .
Also bots are camping the vampire and werewolf respawn points and killing them instantly so no one can get bitten unless they pay a scammer . I have seen gold sellers advertising bites for real money .
There is enough I enjoy to keep me subscribed for a second month so i get to level 50 . After that its a matter of whether they resolve the problems with the bots ,scammers and sort out the public dungeons .
At the moment I'm on the fence whether or not its worth a monthly subscription long term. I think I would be better disposed to it and its flaws if Zenimax wasn't so greedy by doing things like locking off imperials to the delux edition and releasing with a cash shop. Its so obvious they have placed the price of a horse quite highly so people go an buy one from the in game store .
I suspect it would do much better in the long term if it was buy to play and charged for DLCs . I would far prefer that to a free to play model .
You really gotta explain to me how expecting to group with your friends without the game mechanics refusing to allow it IN AN MMO, equals hand holding now.
It never seizes to amaze me how posters from any side of a discussion can twist and turn the significance of inflammatory terms to their own needs, seriously.
Anyway, I thought the review was actually a very balanced one, more so than the others I saw. Touching on both positives and negatives.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
People who own tablets (my pet peeve)
Thanks for the link though
"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
I think mmorpg.com's little by little review is the best and most balanced , Bill Murphy at least hasn't jumped on the lets all hate on ESO for more views wave of hysteria.
I know the game isn't perfect but it does not deserve the shitstorm of hate for more views and ad clicks its getting.
Don't you think that charging premium price for a product mediocre at best deserves this kind of negative publicity that ESO is getting?
Besides grouping bugs where I agree with the review, the reviewer sounds to me like someone who had a predefined expection how an elsder scrolls MMO should have been.
If you play with this predefined expection you will probably not like the game. If you just take the game as what it is is, it is a good game beside the bugs which will get fixed sometime. Not great of course, could have been better.
And arguments like repeated voice overs or bad combat animations are not really important to me. I rarely listen to voice overs as I already have read the text by then and I started my MMO career with EQ combat animations. Nuff said.
P.S. Are the combat animations really that bad ? I honestly never recognized it.
No actually I don't , the game is much better ( though not perfect by any means ) than these reviewers are making out , I have been playing since launch and find the game rather good ,I have not personally had any of the problems they are so keen to point out, and I don't really care what anyone says but these so called famous youtubers with their little armies of 12 year old subscribers are doing it for more views , not so sure about other review sites , though IGN 's review was the fairest. I may be feeling a little cynical at the moment , but there also seems quite a lot of evidence that this is the case.
And as I said Bill Murphy has been the most balanced and fair of them all so far.
Professional review...that's funny
"I", feel like this about something. Since I am paid to tell you what I think makes it professional!
If you're paid to do something on a regular basis then it makes it a profession and there for you are a professional .
It started. Sooner than expected
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/6302184
Site gives a a not so positive review:
- Fanboys: OMG. Who cares? They gave COD a 9.
- Haters: Pretty accurate review. Just goes to show how crap the game is.
Site gives a glowing review:
- Fanboys: Pretty accurate. Just goes to show how awesome the game is.
- Haters: OMG. Who cares? They gave COD a 9
Sites gives a review:
- Me: Hey look, GS gave their review. Let's see what they have to saw (watches review) OK, cool. Now, to the comments.
You have got to be kidding...
In the face of all other review sites' scores and criticisms, what stands out is that MMORPG.com's review was bought and paid for... like all of their reviews. Bill and company should be professionally embarrassed at how they helped bilk players out of their money by promoting the game with false rhetoric. Staff at MMORPG.com ought to work for the Obama administration.
This is why this site has no credibility anymore. It used to, but that was years ago.
Money corrupts. This is the last place I'd ever go for a formal, fair, and unbiased review. On the plus side, however, the forums aren't over-moderated and players can call a turd a turd.
Well one thing we can all agree on, COD is a 9/10 game. lol
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
I think people would still be calling them out on the state of the game if it was F2P or B2P, though i do agree that in its present state the game is not worth a sub, whether it will be worth one in the future really depends on how well they fix things, and whether any improvements are made to the PvE side of the game, especially all these grouping issues, one thing for sure though, if the game went F2P then the current problems with bots etc, would only get worse.
Funny thing, I enjoy playing ESO, yet I couldn't really find fault with most of his points. I guess the question for the player isn't whether the designs are good or bad, but whether you like the more solo nature of the game, vs the challenges for grouping.
I find it's the usual case of being only average at everything. I mean, they have a lot of great stories that I solo, but then there's all these other people around me, visiting the same Npc's, killing the same bosses, If it's solo oriented, let me kill the targets solo, heck, I frequently get credit running up on a fight and not actually even attacking, but just by being there.
Grouping does have it's problems as he said, I don't do it, but several friends and their wives have hilarious conversations on voice chat when one of them picks a different story option than the other and they find each other unable to continue forward together in the story line.
I can't say he's wrong by giving it a 6, I was thinking more like 6.5 but can't really call it a great game.
I haven't done any PVP to speak of, might be the redeeming part of it, but I'll eventually get around to it.
Too busy questing atm.
"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
Yeesh.
Okay, will be interesting to see what new wave of dismissive remarks, ad-hominems and excuses we get for this round...
There have been a spectrum of reviews fpr this game, and yet somehow it's always the most negative ones that deserve to be promoted here in general discussion. Every single time the recent post list is not dominated by something negative one of the usual crowd seems to be motivated to come in and add a little more doom and gloom. Go to metacritic, look at the list of reviews, and notice that it's only the most hostile that get "promoted" here. And, more to the point, isn't there in theory a separate reviews sub-forum?
If it's not reviews in magazines it's youtube ones (hostile, naturally). Or some other cause of the day - gloating over bugs, or inventing problems with the payment model.
I'd suggest that the relevant people get another hobby.
I agree, I mean beside de name, the lore, the races, the game world, the class.....ESO has nothing to do with the other Elder scroll games.....=P
Sig Creator
You could start by explaining why, in the metacritic list, only the most hostile reviews are worth talking about.
lol...
That you would take something like "Hey, you know I'd really love to be able to group up with friends and play, rather than doing so much solo, because it's more fun that way", and twist it into a dismissive, even insulting, strawman - just to defend "your game" against a less than stellar review - only serves in demonstrating your intolerance toward any review that doesn't reflect your own.
It also demonstrates that you can't differentiate between people wanting to play with friends/others, because they find it more enjoyable... and needing to have their hand-held. I wonder just how much you're projecting when you make those remarks. Either way, it's unfortunate that you, demonstrably, don't understand the difference between the two.
Let me guess - you haven't played the game and are just reading from the hate parade cue cards, right? I'm seeing the same handful of posters promoting this review who have been lingering in this forum giving cheap shots for weeks. Look over the OP posting history here, for example, if you want a representative example...