Home › Game Forums › WildStar
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
WildStar Review in Progress: So Far, They've Done It. Score 9/10
All Time Favorites: EQ1, WoW, EvE, GW1
Playing Now: WoW, ESO, GW2
Comments
Reviews that are disingenuous are not worth a whole bunch.
"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
Fine, we'll compromise. I'll get my way & you'll find a way to be okay with that.
I played Wildstar in the Beta to level 12 and discovered I was tired of quest-hub leveling, so I passed on purchasing the game. So I'm no Wildstar fanboy.
But I'd like to point out that most of those who have responded to this article have a grading scale for games that is quite different from the industry standard. The review posted in this thread and MMORPG's review of Wildstar, though on the higher end, still fall within the range of the vast majority of reviews of Wildstar, which has a metascore of 81 from 28 critical reviews so far and also a relatively high user score of 7.8.
It's okay to be tired of themepark MMO's. But it is disingenuous to create your own standard of judging MMO's that is different from the industry norm and then to knock reviewers for using the standard measurement.
Game reviews are like grades in school. You don't have to have "near perfect" intelligence to get an A, you just have to be smarter than most others. To get a 90 is like getting an A in school - it doesn't imply near perfection, it implies that it is among the best of its kind of game. So far most reviewers have agreed that Wildstar is well above average as an MMO.
Yeah...
Reads more like a "how I spent my Summer vacation" report, than a review. They also use the all too common "fanboy-like" tactic of never issuing a criticism without either presenting it in a dismissive manner, or immediately following it up with something that makes it "not a big deal". Big red flag there.
Also, his statements about why XIV 1.0 received so much hate for its problems while WS doesn't was just so off-mark, I wonder if he even followed XIV 1.0, or is just gleaning what people have said on the web. FFXIV 1.0's problems went far beyond just being "bugs". The game's design, infrastructure, engine... all of it was bad.
Beyond that, to put it simply: Carbine is not SquareEnix. Wildstar is not Final Fantasy. One is a large, established company with a decades long, highly popular franchise. The other is a brand-new studio with their first title. I'd think none of that would require an explanation. But I guess I'd be wrong.
It's also convenient how he never talks about how relatively *little* hate, and how much praise FFXIV 2.0 received. Hmmm.. I wonder why?
He made some really "huh?" worthy remarks, to me.
This bit jumped out at me:
"The first time I thought “Man, this game really has a chance” Was when they introduced me, at level 14, to my house"
Really? 14 levels of content, that he spoke overwhelmingly positive about, and the first time felt that was when he saw his house? Hmmm...
There's also this bit:
"We’ve seen derivatives of this style of combat before in games like TERA and Guild Wars 2."
This may be a bit nit-picky, and it could well just be odd sentence structure, but does that read to anyone else like he's calling TERA and GW2's combat derivative of WS's? That sentence just struck me as odd when I read it.
Anyway... as for the score, it seems to me that, at least with how things tend to work around here, that if he only got to level 20, then he didn't experience enough of the game to form an opinion and hence his remarks on it don't matter. Fans come out of the woodwork, declaring that, when someone gives a negative review based on limited gameplay. Wonder if those same people would hold the same standard to someone praising it?
Hmmm...
First 10 levels, loved it. Next few levels, started to get annoyed. 30+ the game just got flat out annoying. Didn t even finish the free month, it really is that annoying with it s over the top wannabe humor, telegraphs became a joke, no skill just red f n cones everywhere, the questing was abysmal, the pvp was even worse, and finally the dungeons were not even fun in the least. Review
5/10.
I'm of the same line of thought. No game released in the past 5 years + Has even been remotely close to a 9/10 at launch. Maybe even ever. The only game I can think of that would deserve a 9/10 is maybe DAoC.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
News just in regarding the internet: -
Any incompetent fool can set up a site and post their opinions; they can even type numbers next to them.
Also, Breaking news story: Boiling water is hot enough to hurt you! You'll have our full 20 minute report at 11.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
Haven't read the review but this game is in no way shape or form a 9/10. It could be a 9/10 eventually, perhaps, but as of right now I think it is grand max an 8/10 (it is also fully possible that the score could go down eventually, all depends on what Carbine chooses to do from now on). This is coming from someone who enjoys the game and is subbing to it at least medium term.
I would give it a high 7, like a 7.8 or so out of 10. But then I am of the opinion that that is a really good score and that some of the scores I have seen on some of the games listed here are way too high, like for GW2. I would rate that one as only a 7.5. The only decently scored game I have seen on the list here on mmorpg and that I agree with is that of EVE's out of the games I have played. The user score for W* is about right on how I feel about the game too.
Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.
Imho its the exact opposite. I would give an 6/10 for the leveling process and 9/10 for the end game
All Time Favorites: EQ1, WoW, EvE, GW1
Playing Now: WoW, ESO, GW2
Wildstar is a very well built game. Solid coding (some bugs of course), interesting combat and somewhat interesting dungeon/raid content (however pretty much made to be exclusive to "hardcore" players).
Where Wildstar is failing miserably is the following:
1. Quests are so boring and tedious that it's pretty much a race to 50 if you don't want to be bored to death
2. If you expect to run dungeons successfully for decent gear be ready to spend hours learning and unless you are highly skilled (and your team is as well) forget any endgame content.
3. The developers elitist attitudes will be the end of the game. A good "raiding" game requires a solid economy and base of non-raiding players to sustain it. If you are forced to raid for hours and hours a night to progress you don't have time for other things, like gathering materials for food/potions or similar activities. These activities are where the casual playerbase comes in, stocking the AH with the items you need to raid. With the lack of a compelling game outside of the "hardcore!" raiding (and the rediculous barrier to entry to get into raiding via the attunement process) there won't be many casuals left come another month or so.
Carbine obviously haven't learned from the past or the smart decisions made by companies like Blizzard to create "normal" difficulty content at the end game. Many of us remember the days of Naxxramus in WoW where due to the lack of accessible content many players left. Many of the WoW dev team were fired over the fact that only 2% of the population ever made it to Naxx and it looks like Carbine is making the same mistake here and they will not have the padding of multiple millions of subscribers to fall back on.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
You are too modest. 12/10 I say. Not for that horribad game, just because you can!
2. Or just learn then content like we used to play games. Asside from this, their is content for every skill level - and get this - content to gravitate towards as you get better and get better gear. That's a deck ton better than the embarrassment and disappointment of having a game continually nerfed to match the least skilled.
3. casual, I love the idea of difficult content I can build up skill in, if I want a game to stroke my gear fetish I will play wow or d3.
4. You picked the single raiding instance in wow that had 2% access. So what, At the same time people were having immense fun battling in AQ40 and I don't remember any whining about it back then. It's actually ok and fun to have a goal to aim for.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
And BINGO was his name! Agree100%
Please stop telling people what they can or cannot complain about. If the content people find is generic they have every right to call it out as being so. A game's worth is made by the whole of what it offers, not just what people like to cherry pick out and prop up.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
So all the bad reviews I've read for this game and that game over the years are explained by? They didn't pay up?