Couldn't disagree more with the OP. Especialky with questing. It is done great for an MMO...so much better than most new MMOs for sure. Try Wildstar for instance... now that is mindless boring questing. Akso the graphics are gorgeous on my rig...no tweeks needed...
I will say this... I do NOT agree with how MMORPG.com uses a grading system that seems to be 1 - 10 but in reality all scores are at least 5 and above at a bare minimum. Hogwash I say and because of it I consider their scoring system FUBAR. A system such as this is designed to do one thing.... to kiss the Devs rearends and get Players to believe a deception. It's a Used Car Salesman dirty sales tactic and nothing more.
Sorry if my opinion offends but that how I see it. To be fair most of American Business is plagued with this kind of nonsense deceptive crap and I'm about as tired of it as I can get. If I could hop on a starship and get away from this greedmonger culture we have now (which is everywhere on Earth now) I would be the first in line to go... but that is even more of a unattainable fantasy then expecting Reviewers to go back to using a grading system that is truly 1 - 10.
The OP seems to be using a system that is truly 1 - 10, and for that I applaud them. Well Done.
To me that means a score of 4.5 is just below middle ground or average. I don't play ESO so I won't comment on the score other than to say It is not necessarily a bad thing to have a score of 4.5 on a 1-10 because the MMO is new and the Devs have room for improvement. I encourage the Devs to keep at it because they do have faithful customers (even I see that) and Elder Scrolls is an IP worthy of a great MMO.
It's based on education grading systems. Not sure what's so hard to figure out about that.
Not hard to figure out- Just stupid and decepticve.
I think we understand now they are usig a stupid and deceptive system.
IF its the grading system (which it is) why not just attach a letter grade (i.e. A, B+, C-, etc...) why give us a 10 point sytem where 6 of the points are never really used? Go to a letter grade or a 4-5 star system as its logical unlike grading MMORPGs like a test.
The OP made a lot of good points in his review, but there is one thing he said that I really disagree with.
And that is this whole idea that a game's combat can't be complex because you can only use a few abilities at one time. The OP made the argument a few times that ESO's combat wasn't complex because you only have 5 abilities on your bar.
I highly, highly disagree with this general idea.
I have played games where you basically only have 4 abilities, but the combat is EXTREMELY complex (DOTA2). And I have played games where you have TONS of abilities on your bar, but the combat is so simple that it can be literally macro'd to ONE button (Rift).
Complexity of combat has nothing to do with the amount of stuff you can do at one time...it is a much deeper subject. In fact, I think that sometimes having fewer abilities makes combat MORE complex because you have to find ways to use the few abilities you have in creative and effective ways to meet lots of different challenges.
I agree with this review except maybe crafting, which is more like an 8 if you compare it to other MMO's.
Every reviewer doesn't have to rate based on the US school system. He's assuming 5 is average, 10 is stellar. To say the game is slightly below average is not a stretch by any imagination, except for maybe a few rabid fanboi's.
I haven't played this game so I'm not biased, but I lost any credibility in your "review" when you said a MMORPG was more about online social interaction than the story present in a game. You do know what an RPG is, right? I understand the social aspect of things is important, but I wouldn't touch a MMORPG if it didn't have an engaging story, and that's a big reason why I can count the amount of MMORPGs I've played in the last 10 years on one hand.
RPG is totally about social interaction. You get a group of guys together around a table with some dice and a very loose story in a fleshed out world, and you let them create the story by acting it out (role-playing). All of my best gaming stories and experiences exist outside of the linear plot/s provided by the development team or GM's. It's about the "what if we..." that makes a good game.
While I'm here, I think many of the responses to this post are too caught-up in the number. What the OP wrote mostly reflects my experience in ESO.
The OP made a lot of good points in his review, but there is one thing he said that I really disagree with.
And that is this whole idea that a game's combat can't be complex because you can only use a few abilities at one time. The OP made the argument a few times that ESO's combat wasn't complex because you only have 5 abilities on your bar.
I highly, highly disagree with this general idea.
I have played games where you basically only have 4 abilities, but the combat is EXTREMELY complex (DOTA2). And I have played games where you have TONS of abilities on your bar, but the combat is so simple that it can be literally macro'd to ONE button (Rift).
Complexity of combat has nothing to do with the amount of stuff you can do at one time...it is a much deeper subject. In fact, I think that sometimes having fewer abilities makes combat MORE complex because you have to find ways to use the few abilities you have in creative and effective ways to meet lots of different challenges.
Correct, I suspect the OP never actually made it to any of the challenging PvE or invested much time trying to get better at PvP. I found the resource based combat significantly more compelling than usual mmo cooldown based combat.
Could not disagree more. For me the game is a solid 7.5 . It loses points because I wish it was more of an open world and some of the craft lines imo need some work. I have no issue grouping whether for quests or dungeons. Do I need people to quests no but running around in a group and getting to know the other players is good.
Originally posted by karat76 Could not disagree more. For me the game is a solid 7.5 . It loses points because I wish it was more of an open world and some of the craft lines imo need some work. I have no issue grouping whether for quests or dungeons. Do I need people to quests no but running around in a group and getting to know the other players is good.
So you consider it just average (7.5- being 75% or a C)?
The OP agreed (I think) that its merely an average game (using a different scale) and I agree with him . Hell, I even agree with your score if you are rating the game as average.
EDIT- OR does this further illustrate the problem about a stupid 10 point rating that is not using 10 points and is based on a grading system but not actually giving a letter grade?
Originally posted by karat76 C+ or B- seems like a fair grade to me. Lately maybe even a B+ just for the enjoyment of watching GMs smite bots.
KK_ Thanks for clarifying.
I would mostly agree- I am in the C camp (for some of the reasons the OP pointed out and for others as well-)
I may disagree with some of the Ops reasoning (which I do...) but I still think it falls around a C... Which is sad imho. With the IP I expected alot more.
I must be psychic, I knew there was a reason I would not play but until now did not know why. No hang on it the fact that I have to pay a sub that turned me off playing!
Not hard to figure out- Just stupid and decepticve.
I think we understand now they are usig a stupid and deceptive system.
IF its the grading system (which it is) why not just attach a letter grade (i.e. A, B+, C-, etc...) why give us a 10 point sytem where 6 of the points are never really used? Go to a letter grade or a 4-5 star system as its logical unlike grading MMORPGs like a test.
Why is it "stupid and deceptive?" I really don't get this line of complaining. Did you complain to your school teachers about it? The accusation of deception is pretty laughable as well, considering it's kind of an industry standard.
The OP made a lot of good points in his review, but there is one thing he said that I really disagree with.
And that is this whole idea that a game's combat can't be complex because you can only use a few abilities at one time. The OP made the argument a few times that ESO's combat wasn't complex because you only have 5 abilities on your bar.
I highly, highly disagree with this general idea.
I have played games where you basically only have 4 abilities, but the combat is EXTREMELY complex (DOTA2). And I have played games where you have TONS of abilities on your bar, but the combat is so simple that it can be literally macro'd to ONE button (Rift).
Complexity of combat has nothing to do with the amount of stuff you can do at one time...it is a much deeper subject. In fact, I think that sometimes having fewer abilities makes combat MORE complex because you have to find ways to use the few abilities you have in creative and effective ways to meet lots of different challenges.
Give this man a sticker
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
I would have gone a little higher than the op gave it (maybe a 5.5 or 6). I k ow have a VR4 sorc, and I feel the op was pretty spot on with his pro and con list.
Far and away PvP has been very disappointing for me. Such a huge zone, but things pretty much go the way the OP said.
Originally posted by Horusra 4.5 is about the same score I give EQ2. It is all in personal taste.
I would agree (perhaps even a bit lower on Eq2) if the review were being done today.
Considering EQ2 is nearly 10 years old though- The score wouldnt nearly be that low at or near release . Part of the process is in comparing like technology to like technology. Pac Man and Donkey Kong are uber simplistic games that if released today would be scoring average to below average as an Ipod game- They would never become a household word. However, Pac man Fever hit very hard in the early 1980s and you could buy Pac-Man shoes, T-Shirts, Disco Albums watch Cartoons based on the I.P. (and I.P. of a blocky yellow guy eating blocky pellets and being chased by block ghosts-lol)
-In other words..The times and the tech need be considered. Comparing ESOP to Ultima Online , Everquest or Everquest 2 (even WOW) is silly as a decade has passed since any of those were first released. Obviously anything today should look better and not be plagued by the same mistakes we had 10-20 years ago.
I could easily look up an old car review for a high end car in 1960 and laugh at how my little toyota has far better features, far better safety and better mileage. I could easily laugh at the old car review and say "I will give it a 1/10 ...Not even a CD player lolollolol)...
-But that would be silly.
EDIT_ Try thinking of this in reverse fashion. If you were able to time travel to the early 1980s and released 'Big Rigs over the road racing' or 'Superman 64' (the two worst games I can think of off the top of my head- Nearly unplayable) they would sweep the Nation and be hailed as the best games ever made.
If ESO released in 2002 it would be 10/10 and take the world by storm....
-Its 2014 and this is an average game at best with an above average IP. Will ESO be around in 10 years or even talked about as Eq2 is (it stood the test of time) will you be logging in ESO in 2024? I highly doubt it.
Just like my Toyota will never be a 'classic' like that 65 Mustang is. ESO will never be a classic at all and is destined to be forgotten far sooner than EQ2 has held onto its place as a viable game. 10 years is a long time (nearly 1/4 of my life) and this proves EQ2 had something- Some staying power that I promise ESO never had. This was a cash grab for a very loved I.P, not a game made with any staying power.
Some good points made, I agree with most and disagree with a few but would ultimately give a 4/10 for the scoring system the reviewer used. ESO I would give a 7.5 from what I have played at the moment with the chance to go a point higher when it matures a bit more.
You know what's funny though? You said you are not biased and you also don't mind playing "themepark MMOs". On a few occasions you say that ESO is better at this criteria than most themeparks and boom you give eso 2/10 yet it's better than most themeparks?
Anyways you're scores are too low in my opinion and I love how you downplay any good characteristics the game might have.
This feels like reading a review from a fandroid or an ifan! They are usually this biased.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
You know what's funny though? You said you are not biased and you also don't mind playing "themepark MMOs". On a few occasions you say that ESO is better at this criteria than most themeparks and boom you give eso 2/10 yet it's better than most themeparks?
Anyways you're scores are too low in my opinion and I love how you downplay any good characteristics the game might have.
This feels like reading a review from a fandroid or an ifan! They are usually this biased.
"fandroid or an ifan"
To me, when I read that, it invalidated every thing you said. Not sure why.
Originally posted by LazyDazed For all of the educated people in this thread that keep repeating 5 is average, yes, in some arithmetic 5 is average, not in regards to game reviews. I am guessing these are the people that scored 50 on their exams and were happy they were average lulz.
My god man- No.
A 50% on a test (aveerage grasp of what was taught) is not passing because it is not the average of what you have to know to pass (which is ABOVE AVERAGE) to pass a test I need to understand an ABOVE AVERAGE amount of information just to be an "average" student. See how that works? An average student is different that the average amount of information being understood. An average student needs a higher amount of information grasped to be "average".
Damn man.
And why be so complex using a grade school method (which makes the scores seem higher) when it would be FAR EASIER to attach a letter grade since that is what you are doing anyhow. Instead of saying 7.5- just say C... That way the entirety of your scale is used.
You are saying"we have a 10 point scale but it starts at 6"- I am saying its logical to start at 1.
And yes, I am educated (tyvm) which is why this stumps me. A letter grade or star system is generally what I see used and what makes sense. Trying to pull a strawman and say I think a 50% on a test is good is silly and shows you do not grasp the basic concept of what I/we am/are saying.
So you feel it makes more sense to set a 7.5 as a baseline average in a 1 out of 10 scoring system for a game review? (not test)- Why not just use a letter grade then (a C) or a star system for ease of understanding.
Comments
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
Not hard to figure out- Just stupid and decepticve.
I think we understand now they are usig a stupid and deceptive system.
IF its the grading system (which it is) why not just attach a letter grade (i.e. A, B+, C-, etc...) why give us a 10 point sytem where 6 of the points are never really used? Go to a letter grade or a 4-5 star system as its logical unlike grading MMORPGs like a test.
The OP made a lot of good points in his review, but there is one thing he said that I really disagree with.
And that is this whole idea that a game's combat can't be complex because you can only use a few abilities at one time. The OP made the argument a few times that ESO's combat wasn't complex because you only have 5 abilities on your bar.
I highly, highly disagree with this general idea.
I have played games where you basically only have 4 abilities, but the combat is EXTREMELY complex (DOTA2). And I have played games where you have TONS of abilities on your bar, but the combat is so simple that it can be literally macro'd to ONE button (Rift).
Complexity of combat has nothing to do with the amount of stuff you can do at one time...it is a much deeper subject. In fact, I think that sometimes having fewer abilities makes combat MORE complex because you have to find ways to use the few abilities you have in creative and effective ways to meet lots of different challenges.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I agree with this review except maybe crafting, which is more like an 8 if you compare it to other MMO's.
Every reviewer doesn't have to rate based on the US school system. He's assuming 5 is average, 10 is stellar. To say the game is slightly below average is not a stretch by any imagination, except for maybe a few rabid fanboi's.
RPG is totally about social interaction. You get a group of guys together around a table with some dice and a very loose story in a fleshed out world, and you let them create the story by acting it out (role-playing). All of my best gaming stories and experiences exist outside of the linear plot/s provided by the development team or GM's. It's about the "what if we..." that makes a good game.
While I'm here, I think many of the responses to this post are too caught-up in the number. What the OP wrote mostly reflects my experience in ESO.
Gaming since 1985; Online gaming since 1995; No End in Sight! My YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8POVoJ8fdOseuJ4U1ZX-oA
Correct, I suspect the OP never actually made it to any of the challenging PvE or invested much time trying to get better at PvP. I found the resource based combat significantly more compelling than usual mmo cooldown based combat.
So you consider it just average (7.5- being 75% or a C)?
The OP agreed (I think) that its merely an average game (using a different scale) and I agree with him . Hell, I even agree with your score if you are rating the game as average.
EDIT- OR does this further illustrate the problem about a stupid 10 point rating that is not using 10 points and is based on a grading system but not actually giving a letter grade?
KK_ Thanks for clarifying.
I would mostly agree- I am in the C camp (for some of the reasons the OP pointed out and for others as well-)
I may disagree with some of the Ops reasoning (which I do...) but I still think it falls around a C... Which is sad imho. With the IP I expected alot more.
Why is it "stupid and deceptive?" I really don't get this line of complaining. Did you complain to your school teachers about it? The accusation of deception is pretty laughable as well, considering it's kind of an industry standard.
You make me like charity
Give this man a sticker
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Yup, I have the write to comment even though I refused to read the post; Just like you have the right to take his side.
Enjoy whatever great game your playing.
Far and away PvP has been very disappointing for me. Such a huge zone, but things pretty much go the way the OP said.
I would agree (perhaps even a bit lower on Eq2) if the review were being done today.
Considering EQ2 is nearly 10 years old though- The score wouldnt nearly be that low at or near release . Part of the process is in comparing like technology to like technology. Pac Man and Donkey Kong are uber simplistic games that if released today would be scoring average to below average as an Ipod game- They would never become a household word. However, Pac man Fever hit very hard in the early 1980s and you could buy Pac-Man shoes, T-Shirts, Disco Albums watch Cartoons based on the I.P. (and I.P. of a blocky yellow guy eating blocky pellets and being chased by block ghosts-lol)
-In other words..The times and the tech need be considered. Comparing ESOP to Ultima Online , Everquest or Everquest 2 (even WOW) is silly as a decade has passed since any of those were first released. Obviously anything today should look better and not be plagued by the same mistakes we had 10-20 years ago.
I could easily look up an old car review for a high end car in 1960 and laugh at how my little toyota has far better features, far better safety and better mileage. I could easily laugh at the old car review and say "I will give it a 1/10 ...Not even a CD player lolollolol)...
-But that would be silly.
EDIT_ Try thinking of this in reverse fashion. If you were able to time travel to the early 1980s and released 'Big Rigs over the road racing' or 'Superman 64' (the two worst games I can think of off the top of my head- Nearly unplayable) they would sweep the Nation and be hailed as the best games ever made.
If ESO released in 2002 it would be 10/10 and take the world by storm....
-Its 2014 and this is an average game at best with an above average IP. Will ESO be around in 10 years or even talked about as Eq2 is (it stood the test of time) will you be logging in ESO in 2024? I highly doubt it.
Just like my Toyota will never be a 'classic' like that 65 Mustang is. ESO will never be a classic at all and is destined to be forgotten far sooner than EQ2 has held onto its place as a viable game. 10 years is a long time (nearly 1/4 of my life) and this proves EQ2 had something- Some staying power that I promise ESO never had. This was a cash grab for a very loved I.P, not a game made with any staying power.
Some good points made, I agree with most and disagree with a few but would ultimately give a 4/10 for the scoring system the reviewer used. ESO I would give a 7.5 from what I have played at the moment with the chance to go a point higher when it matures a bit more.
My opinion for what it is worth.
Good thing you are not super biased.
You know what's funny though? You said you are not biased and you also don't mind playing "themepark MMOs". On a few occasions you say that ESO is better at this criteria than most themeparks and boom you give eso 2/10 yet it's better than most themeparks?
Anyways you're scores are too low in my opinion and I love how you downplay any good characteristics the game might have.
This feels like reading a review from a fandroid or an ifan! They are usually this biased.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
"fandroid or an ifan"
To me, when I read that, it invalidated every thing you said. Not sure why.
SWTOR Referral Link
Free Goodies for new or returning players.
See what it gets you Here
My god man- No.
A 50% on a test (aveerage grasp of what was taught) is not passing because it is not the average of what you have to know to pass (which is ABOVE AVERAGE) to pass a test I need to understand an ABOVE AVERAGE amount of information just to be an "average" student. See how that works? An average student is different that the average amount of information being understood. An average student needs a higher amount of information grasped to be "average".
Damn man.
And why be so complex using a grade school method (which makes the scores seem higher) when it would be FAR EASIER to attach a letter grade since that is what you are doing anyhow. Instead of saying 7.5- just say C... That way the entirety of your scale is used.
You are saying"we have a 10 point scale but it starts at 6"- I am saying its logical to start at 1.
And yes, I am educated (tyvm) which is why this stumps me. A letter grade or star system is generally what I see used and what makes sense. Trying to pull a strawman and say I think a 50% on a test is good is silly and shows you do not grasp the basic concept of what I/we am/are saying.
So you feel it makes more sense to set a 7.5 as a baseline average in a 1 out of 10 scoring system for a game review? (not test)- Why not just use a letter grade then (a C) or a star system for ease of understanding.