Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EVE Online: MMORPG.com Re-Review
Dana
Member Posts: 2,415
Every year, we're trying to re-review every major MMORPG. These things change and one review for all simply wont do. Today, we tackle what is sure to be the most controversial of the reviews: EVE Online. For years, it has led our rating meter and swept last year's Reader's Choice Awards. Here is our latest review.
;) It is time once again for an intrepid explorer to jump inside a goo-filled sphere and take a fresh look at the world of EVE Online. Its a step not taken lightly though, as the life of a pod pilot is filled with danger, challenge and hopefully a wallet full of ISK. There are no promises of wealth and power, but with determination and skill you can make your mark on the galaxy, wether or not that mark is a kill stamp on a pirates hull or not is up to you.
Since the last review quite a bit has been added to the EVE universe in the form of three major content expansions called Exodus, Cold War and Red Moon Rising. Exodus added tons of new ships, modules and skills, but also added the capability for groups of Corporations to form Alliances to control their territory and defend it from others with Starbases. These allowed for entirely new level of galactic conquest and many great player empires had risen and fallen in the two years since. |
You can read our full review here.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
Comments
---------------------------------------------
I live to fight, and fight to live.
I
have to ask, how , as a new player,how were you able to compete or even survive in
a 0.0 area?
As all the skills are time based (real world time) im not seeing how you were
able to compete or achieve the skills necessary to do so.
Were you given an account? or are you a long time player?
If you are a long time player, i would have to call "sham" on your
review... Reviews should only be done by someone with out a vested interest in
the game its self. in this case.. the interest in this case is that you have
been playing for quite some time, and im sure that you have some loyalty built
up for the game...so the review is slanted.
The rest of your review i agree with.Also, im not sure how you can rate PvP so high in a game that you basically Pay
to become more powerful. The real world time based skill system means you
abilities and power increase the longer you have an account, as opposed to the
achievement model of most other games ( you do something you get better, skill
or level based games, how ever long it takes you).
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
Originally posted by daemonbarber A note about the sun - there is an option in the graphics menu to stop it from shining through everything. It's there for the lower end machines - and I thought it defaulted to on, but if it bothers you just swap it. The sun will be blocked by any solid object in space, and only partially dimmed in appropriate cases.
It might also be the fact they had an unsupported video card
Until you cancel your subscription, you are only helping to continue the cycle of mediocrity.
most of the review is great, but i have to agree, when you begin, it is hard to pvp effectively agains older player because skills are real time based.
About petition (cortumer) support, you stated it to be 9 of 10, well i have to disagree to that. I filed a petition cause i had lost my main mission ship (over 1 bil isk lost) when the game crashed. that was on the 18th of june and they finaly replied to me 2 days ago (8/12/2006), that is 8 weeks delay. I dont seem to be the only one to have had that problem.
Good support is within a few hours, acceptable 24 hours. 8 weeks is very bad at the best, i would rate that part of your review to be about 1 or 2.
When you first begin, yes. But it's a misconception that you can never match someone who's played longer than you. This isn't a level-based game. Just because someone has 10 million more skillpoints than you, it doesn't mean they're invincible to your attacks. A person's abilities is dictated by what ship and modules they're currently using. Skills only add small percentages and allow you to use more modules but they are not uber-powerful style buffs.
Its not that hard to survive in 0.0. In fact, its usually easier to survive out there than it is to hang onto your clone in many 0.4 systems. You just need to hold no illusions about the fact that sooner or later you will die. And it will probably hurt.
And then you need to dust yourself off and go and do it again.
For an example of surviving in lowsec space (and enjoying yourself whilst doing it) see http://00experiment.blogspot.com - for some of the most entertaining game fiction to ever come from the game.
Look at the banner advertisement, and you'll see exactly why this entire review process needs to be handled seriously. EVE spends no time listing its ratings and reviews on its banner. Such reviews and endorsements of quality have become more and more important to attracting interested gamers and revenue. Therefore, it is important that these be done seriously, and accurately, or the entire review process is a sham, and by extention, the MMORPG.com staff is a sham.
I'm sorry if this sounds harsh Dana, but we need someone that speaks for us, the gamers and the fans. We depend on the fan community to give us the truth, not spin. So when a game becomes the highest rated game, we need some confidence that your ratings are taken seriously, since there is a lot of money riding on it.
I have reason to suspect that this "re-review" process does more harm than good, and my reasons come from the above changes in the individual category ratings. There seems to be a lack of provenance with respect to the previous review, and I think its a bit confusing to understand who is telling us the truth. Was Reed Hubbard's assessment too low? If so, then MMORPG.com was untruthful to the gaming public until today. Is Dan Fortier's assessment better than Mr. Hubbard's? Its better for EVE and CCP, but is it better for us, the fans and the gaming public?
I am sorry if my comments here are unwanted, but I want to know whose side MMORPG.com is on? Are they in bed with the providers, or are they on the side of the fans and the players? This entire "re-review" thing for EVE leaves me in doubt, because unlike SWG, EVE is essentially the same game as it was in 2004. So if it is the same game, there is no reason to alter the official review and score from Mr. Hubbard. Unless of course, it got you in trouble with your sponsors that EVE wasn't ranked higher than Ryzom and Guild Wars. In which case, there is no reason to think these reviews are based in any truth whatsoever.
So my questions to the accuracy of this "re-review" for EVE, and by extention, the entire MMORPG.com review process, based on the data in the chart, are as follows:
1) Roleplaying has picked up from 6 in 2004, to 7 in 2006. What is the difference between EVE as a roleplaying game in 2004, as opposed to today in 2006, other than everyone playing Caldari, and a game community that will shoot you unless you break your immersion and consent to TS/Vent?
2) Fun has picked up from 7 in 2004, to 8 in 2006. What has made this game more fun in 2006, than it was in 2004?
3) Performance/Lag has jumped from 7 in 2004, to a perfect score (10/10) today. I seriously wonder how Mr. Fortier could have come to this conclusion, seeing as how the game is nororious for lagging/freezing/locking (especially in the large fleet battles), and has quirky bugs of unknown origin (ships disappearing, black screens upon undocking). It is a constant theme that even the casual observer will notice as widespread, as evidenced in the EVE forums. Ironically, how many non-captured portraits have you seen there with the (!) designation? Some of them have been waiting for months to get their picture properly displayed. Can the reviewer honestly say that the game runs better than, say, City of Heroes? Or Everquest II? Perfection is just that...perfect. Not "better than average," or "acceptable given the size of CCP."
4) Customer Service is unchanged from a 9/10 (above average). Do you know that every petition for the last few months received the same response, with the following statement:
Unfortunately, we here at EVE Customer Support are at this point totally overrun with petitions. We cannot keep up, and must therefore unfortunately send everyone this response, where we ask if you are still having problems or if your case is solved at this point. If your problem is still valid, then we apologise and ask you to reply to this and we'll try and help you as quickly as we are able. If not, then please ignore this completely, and the petition will close on its own. Furthermore, even if your issue is still valid, we would like to ask you if you feel it is important enough to pursue, or if it is minor enough to ignore in order for us to be able to give better (and quicker) service to those with real game-stopping issues. We really do apologise for this request, but at this point we have no other option. We hope that you are continuing having fun playing EVE.
To me, its honest enough, but this is no indication of good CS. Not only that, but there is no rulebook. Even simple questions need to be researched and asked on the forums (and if you think the flaming and disrespect is bad here, you should see the trolls on the EVE forum). Customer support isn't bad, but I question the score of 9 out of 10, especially given the recent breakdown in CS.
I really want to believe that this cite can be trusted to give us accurate information, and quality reviews. However, reviews have become serious to the companies that want our money, and the fans who want to spend their entertainment dollars wisely. Given all the horror stories of Mourning, D&L, and SWG, we consumers cannot trust the providers, and depend on you all for the truth.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
well, even though i know how impressive it is to have 26k players at the same time on the same server, i wouldnt rate perf/lag with a 10.
there are many times when you feel lag, even though you are not on the most populated servers. i would give it a 8 at most.
on the other hand, the open skill system, FFA pvp everywhere, player runned economics and politics, the only one universal server and the option to conquer complete regions and claim sovereignity for your alliance makes this game the best to roleplay IMHO, so i would give it a 10 on that section.
for music, well it is beautiful. i love it. i would give it a 10. but it f*cks performance a lot, so its a 2 or 3. on average, i would give music/sound a 6 or 7.
about value... well, there is a 14 days free trial, creating a regular account costs 20 euros only (instead of 50 like most games) and best of all, every expansion comes free. and yes, they are expansions, not patches like someone said. so i would rate value a 9 at least. hey, and the forums come for free with the account
anyhow, i have always found a little bit lacking your categories. i would like to have at least another one that took into account gameplay, depth and player ingame possibilities.
for example, i would give EVE a 6 at most on fun, but a 10 on gameplay options and general depth. on the ohter hand i would give City of Heroes a 9 on fun, but a 3 on gameplay.
so how do you guys rate the complexity and possibilities of games? is it included on one of the already existing categories you rate?
ps: as someone already said, there is an option to make ships and planets cover the sun.
ps2: Beatnik, dont be such an ass*ole, everybody knows that the game has changed A LOT since 2004.
My last paragraph, because it got cut off.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Thank you for your comments.
The bottom line is that the two reviews are
not meant to be comparative. It wont be "they earned +1 this year". We simply
send different people to review it on its own merits at the time of the writing.
Sometimes not much will change, sometimes many things will change, but
regardless, the change is in the eye of the writer. A review is a subjective
thing and NO ONE is going to agree 100%.
Honestly, I have to trust the reviewer in most cases. I am one person and there is no way I can know as much about each game as the people on these boards who play them. That is why we have writers who play the different games. Honestly, I've only played EVE briefly and it really wasn't my style.
My role is to simply try to make sure the writer is not writing it through a rose colored glasses or bitterness. Usually, the truth is somewhere in the middle. SWG isn't nearly as bad as a lot of posters would have you believe, but it isn't as good as the die-hard fans would say either. Honestly, if both sides are mad at us when we're done reviewing something, we're probably pretty close to the truth
Dan reviewed this on his own. I
am not sure if he read the original review or not, but it was not required
reading.
As for the rest of your post, really, save the conspiracy
theories. As hard as this is to believe, advertising really has no impact on us.
Craig handles it entirely separately in Hawaii (I'm on the east coast of Canada). The only way I even know who
advertises with us is by reading the site. I have no more concept than you do of
who buys how much, for how long, etc... much less getting requests based on a two
year old review. We intentionally cut those two ends of this business off from
each other.
You are correct when you say not a lot has changed in this game (at least compared to some other titles), but you say that from the perspective of a player. To someone who has
never played EVE or has not played in a couple years, this game could be as
different as SWG is from its review. That is why we want to look at as many
games as often as possible so they have the latest information we can provide.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
The interface is the same, the gameplay is the same, and the backstory is the same. It has had things added to it, but it wasn't a wholesale redefinition of the entire gameplay like SWG was.
Basically, its still the same EVE that anybody who played EVE in 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 would understand and be able to play. Its not like SWG which redefined the entire way you play the game, and turning your rulebook into a coaster.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Then what is the reason any of us should believe MMORPG.com when MMORPG.com rates a game higher than another one? I'm sorry for harping on these points, but I am bringing this up because I want this cite to be trustworthy, and true to its mission of being a place for the fans to get good information, from people they trust. Things like this erode the trust Dana, which is why journalists in print don't do it.
If anything, web journalists like you and MMORPG.com need to be extra careful when dealing with things like reviews, and news. Unlike print media, you can change things on a whim, and because you can change things on a whim, you have to make sure that you do not change something unless absolutely warranted, and not frivolously. Otherwise, people can't trust MMORPG.com to mean what they say, and say what they mean. Changing things too often, for strange reasons like "Dan thought it would be cool," creates accusations of bias, and conspiracy. Why should we trust MMORPG.com, when it changes its official stance for silly reasons?
I, like you, and everyone else here cannot play all the games to give an accurate assessment of each one. That is why I, like you, depend on your writers to accurately ascertain each title. I do not buy this argument that the reviews from a media site like yours are "subjective things," outside of the scope of good journalism. They are attempting to be objective things, or at least more objective than reviews from those who do not follow good journalistic and media practice.
While MMORPG.com may be under the assumption that the reviews are not to be compared against eachother, there can only be one official MMORPG.com ranking, and the game companies and the fans do compare them against eachother. The game developers boast about rankings and ratings in their advertisements to consumers and they use them to attract investors. If you do not believe me, look at the EVE banner add, and see how they are used.
So when there is a change in the ratings, whether positive or negative, its going to have effects whether MMORPG.com intends them or not. Banner adverisements will be altered. Investors will be wooed or shunned. Consumers will make choices.
There are two reasons something should be "re-reviewed." The first reason is if MMORPG.com made a mistake in the first review, and wants to give the correct review. So unless MMORPG.com has been lying to us about EVE for two years, this new official review does not fall into this category. The second reason is if the old review and ranking corresponds to a game that de facto does not exist, like the case of SWG. EVE is essentially the same concept and game today as it was in the last review, so a new review is not warranted.
You say also that the new reviewer is not required to read the old review, and write the review in light of the old review. This is a mistake for a number of reasons, most importantly in terms of this fansite's objectivity, and the integrity of the rating. If the ratings change whenever someone on your staff feels like they should change, then how can we ever trust that the ratings are as they say they are? Yesterday EVE was an 8.3. Today its an 8.4. Yesterday Ryzom was an 8.3. Today it is an 8.2. What will these games be tomorrow, or the next day, and how to we trust that the ratings are what they say they are if they change whenever someone subits new scores to the content editor?
When official ratings change on whatever whim your staff feels like, with none of those two compelling reasons I mentioned, and show no continuity from the previous ratings, MMORPG.com cannot help to be accused of bias, and conspiracy. All we know is that for "some reason," MMORPG.com decided that they needed to change their official scores from what they originally were.We do not get this from the hardprint press. We do not get this from movie reviews. We do not, because those reviews and reviewers are mindful of the fact that reviews are serious business, and they want the review to reflect the same seriousness in terms of the process.
I'm not bringing these things up because I don't care. I'm bringing these things up because I want MMORPG.com's rating to mean something.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
I disagree with any ascertion this is the same game now as it was in 2004. Somone may site subtle differences as being insignificant but those differences on the whole make big differences. The people who play the game are not the same people now as they were then either. Differences in players causes feed back on the whole design element. People didn't have wow in 2004 or at least it was new. People have influence on developers and developers have influence on how games unfold and the game is certainly different than it was a few years ago.
Beatnik, I think you are grasping at straws when you try to find conspiracy in the fact there are measurable variances in review scores that are seperated by reviewer and a matter of two years.
We can look at a review of EvE online (or any mmoprg) game and consider it a taste test of the game. Would you be so suspicious of these variant results if they were in soda taste tests almost three years apart?
You should be more suspicious of my neighbour's hat he's making. Its highly reflective and makes a crinkling noise when he turns his head.
Lastly all carebears that want to try this game need to realise that you will be a target sooner or later so u need to learn some pvp also even the devs say this game is becoming more and more about PvP with future expansions, I mean it already is! you can get wardecked by any corp for only 2 mil and alliances always wardeck eachother.
Datcyde
That's great, but what specifically has changed that has made your particular experience better today than it was when you started?
If you could explain fully, and in detail in your experience before, and your experience now, as made possible by the game changes, it will better help us grasp exactly why its better to get into EVE now than at any other point.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Now as for the New player being able to fight in PVP I just happened to be Cussing left and right at 2 new guys who blew me out of my ship (note my character is 1.5 years old). Stupid noobs using tactics... and that is it. Most players can start to provide a serious roll in combat by the end of the first week if not sooner.
For anyone looking at getting EVE I'd give you this question. If you where tossed into 0the middle of a pile of legos would you look for instructions or just start building something. EVE favors the latter It provides no direction for you as a player and the lack of character classes means that it doesn't even provide you that help. EVE has no rulebook part of the fun I have had with the game is prying open all the possibilities in the game.
If your the Person who can set your own goals and enjoy figuring out how to accomplish them then EVE MAY be for you. If your idea of relaxing is to reach a endpoint that someone else has set and show you the path to reach then in my experience EVE probably isn't for you. Be sides that my opinion on EVE is very close to reviewers.
That's great, but what specifically has changed that has made your particular experience better today than it was when you started?
If you could explain fully, and in detail in your experience before, and your experience now, as made possible by the game changes, it will better help us grasp exactly why its better to get into EVE now than at any other point.
Ok, so we all know that u could not enjoy the game , and now u hate it? I don't play eve, I tryed it, But it wasn't my style, However With soo many people saying good things about it, ccp did something right...
And u really think that the game didn't change afeter 3 years?
I have no reason nt to belieave in the review, heck, I might actually give eve another shot...
Didn't say I hated EVE. I'm actually subscribed right now to EVE, and like all games it has good and bad qualities to it.
The hype though from the fans who come here has gotten to the point where someone is going to have to explain it for what it is, and be realistic. You can't get the balanced perspective from those that are trying to enlist buddies in the buddy program so they can get entered in the reward lottery.
I'm also a big proponent of explaining, in detail, what is good about it rather than saying the same old clichè answers that don't really explain much today, and haven't really explained too much to us in three years.
The issue here though is whether or not we can trust this review any better or worse than the previous one, and why it was important at this time to change the official review. Its not something that I have seen often, and it deserves more scrutiny.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
I will never understand the appeal of this game. I don't think the reviewer is giving us anything other than his honest opinion.... but he certainly isn't giving an objective view of the game either. People seem to either love this game or hate it. There isn't a lot of middle ground. The reviewer clearly falls in to the "loves it" category. Where he admits the games shortcomings, it doesn't seem to affect his score in the relevant category. I think a second opinion review would be more helpful if the two showed different opinions of the game. It really shouldn't be hard to find someone who doesn't like this game. I wish I had seen more information from the people who don't like it before I wasted my money on it.
-----Zero Punctuation Eve Online Review-----