141 replies to this topic

[rdmx]

Since it's clear that UI 2.0 and Community Warfare will not be in by launch, I would consider this review reasonably indicative of the game's current state.

This is a magazine print review, so I will not scan/copy the article verbatim. I will post some choice quotes.

Taken from the August 2013 issue of PCPowerPlay Australia. They review Hawken in the same issue and give it 7/10. The reviewers cites having played Earthsiege 2 and MechWarrior 2.

Quote

"Both MechWarrior Online and Hawken are in beta test stages...it would be fair to say that both seem to have some way to go before they could be considered technically complete... However the tipping point is the inclusion of real-money purchases."

"If a developer is confident enough in its product that it will take your money, it's our job tell you if they deserve it."

"For first timers... Mechwarrior Online presents a solid wall of complexity. It's only with time that holes can be poked in it's crumbling mortar, rays of understanding shining through."

"The patcher loads an obtuse launcher page filled with a kaleidoscope of bad design. Colour and text are splayed everywhere, so it's not immediately clear that the game itself has loaded."

"the key bindings screen presents a bewildering array of things any given mech can do, and the player's hope of remembering them is proportional to the amount of game time they are willing to spend learning. Arguably, as a light simulation, this is as it should be."

"There is definitely a team focus, rather than an individual free for all."

"While the slower pace of the game may suit some, for me it felt a little sluggish to be something enuinely exciting or overly enjoyable."

"Thankfully, it doesn't feel as paying players have an overbearing edge."

"For a game proudly built on the power of CryEngine 3, it also leaves something to be desired in its visual fidelity. Textures from the landscape to the mech pilot are muddy, weapons fire and damage effects lack punch, and while the cockpit and other mechs look okay, it's disappointing."

"There's also the problem of scale. Trees, landscapes, buildings all appear small. ... In order to give the sense of the mech's size, the developers have effectively minaturised the surroundings.

Playing in this environment feels more like you're a regular size human stumbling through an architect's concept model for a new city business park, national park, or industrial complex (depending on the map)."

"It is a fundamental failure to the sensation of piloting a giant robotic machine of war and destruction."

"It requires a hefty time investment to learn, to customise mechs and pilots simply to get the most out of it. This is not to say it's bad... it's just an acquired taste." 6/10

EDIT: Addendum-

PC PowerPlay said:

There's so much to learn and so much to take into account: tonnage, speed, firepower, armour, heat-efficiency, weapon load out, modules, upgrades, light, medium, heavy, assault class mechs. How do you know which is the right tradeoff to make? What suits your playstyle best? ...team focus...promotes a cautious and tactical approach...managing weapons fire and heat output forces caution, lest your mech overheat and stall on the battlefield.

Edited by rdmx, 17 September 2013 - 10:13 AM.

[Strayed]

Choice quotes are alright and all, but it's still best always to have the full article.

[rdmx]

I understand that, but scanning magazines does not exactly fall on the correct side of legal.

[Toong]

Why are you bolding everything negative the reviewer has to say, while leaving everything positive unbolded?

[warp103]

6 of 10. Tt does not matter what is bold or not. 6 of 10 tells the story loud and clear. This is the tip of the iceberg that sunk the Titanic. lol

here is the page so you know it is not a made up number.
http://www.gameranki...play/index.html

[Riptor]

6 out of 10 is above average.

Personaly i would have given the game itselfe a 5 out of 10 because right now it offers simply not enough game but i can see the 6 out of 10.

If you leave all the development mess ups and politics out.. the game really is just average. The reason its held in high regard by so many is because there is no better comparable product for this genre on the market.

And no... hawken is in no way comparable.

[infinite xaer0]

the two reviews that are up now seem really critical of the gfx... but the comments are rather petty and subjective, especially without polycount and texture resolution numbers to compare with other similar games... The comments about object scaling are also really subjective, and overblown. I haven't heard anyone who actually plays this game complain that the scaling is a "failure to the sensation of piloting a giant robotic machine of war and destruction".

[TLBFestus]

I rarely buy a game with less than 8/10 unless it's a niche game that I have a special attachment to.

6/10 isn't exactly a number that will cause hordes of new players to rush in and check it out IMHO.

[Tezcatli]

As a fan of mechs I give it a 7.5/10. As a gamer. It really is a 6/10. At least until UI 2.0 and CW are implemented. Along with more game modes. Then it might rate up 1 or 2 points higher in my book.

[TexAce]

The scale thing is something that could break MWO's neck.
I always complained about it but nobody touches that topic because they know they cant go back on that.

infinite xaer0, on 11 September 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

the two reviews that are up now seem really critical of the gfx... but the comments are rather petty and subjective, especially without polycount and texture resolution numbers to compare with other similar games... The comments about object scaling are also really subjective, and overblown. I haven't heard anyone who actually plays this game complain that the scaling is a "failure to the sensation of piloting a giant robotic machine of war and destruction".

trust me there are people who rightfully complain about it

[rdmx]

Toong, on 11 September 2013 - 01:28 PM, said:

Why are you bolding everything negative the reviewer has to say, while leaving everything positive unbolded?

Because it is criticism from an outside source, from someone who is not necessarily invested in the game, or has nostalgia goggles. Think of it as a sign of things to come.

infinite xaer0, on 11 September 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

the two reviews that are up now seem really critical of the gfx... but the comments are rather petty and subjective, especially without polycount and texture resolution numbers to compare with other similar games... The comments about object scaling are also really subjective, and overblown. I haven't heard anyone who actually plays this game complain that the scaling is a "failure to the sensation of piloting a giant robotic machine of war and destruction".

These guys review PC games for a living. I think it's pretty obvious from a screenshot thing like this that the game isn't exactly a paragon of visual fidelity. You're seriously asking a review to state exact polycount numbers and texture resolution?
http://i5.minus.com/iP7FoIZFAT89t.png

Granted the scale comments are subjective, but he's certainly not the first to notice, and he won't be the last either.

[sebmojo]

I think those points are fair, though I strongly disagree there's no sense of scale - I think that's the game's biggest strength. But the front end and UI are pretty badly flawed, plus the game is buggy and has ropey performance. And while I actually (ssh) don't mind ghost heat as a mechanic for how it makes weapon choices more various, it's incredibly opaque. All that said, it does small group tactics very well indeed and it's satisfying climbing the steep learning curve. It's a niche product.

[Haakon Magnusson]

infinite xaer0, on 11 September 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

the two reviews that are up now seem really critical of the gfx... but the comments are rather petty and subjective, especially without polycount and texture resolution numbers to compare with other similar games... The comments about object scaling are also really subjective, and overblown. I haven't heard anyone who actually plays this game complain that the scaling is a "failure to the sensation of piloting a giant robotic machine of war and destruction".

I've played quite a few games and have felt for a long time that feelking of scale is a problem and we're gonna see many more reviews like this.
Mechs feels big and stompy, but set them on most maps environment does not reinforce the feeling. In few places they work alright, River City for example.. because there is external stuff to compare against (I just love the traffic lights there... immidiate sense of scale)
Luckily this could be fixable, if they were so inclined.

For example in Canyon Network, it is ditches with mech sized paths.. replace mechs with humanoid soldiers and not much changes.
Small details in places which are commonly used, like little strip of paved road gives you a reference to scale, sandy footpath not so much. Quite the opposite. (Sure there are some nice details, like the thrash trucks there.. but you hardly ever come across those)

Edited by Haakon Magnusson, 11 September 2013 - 03:10 PM.

[Country Gravy]

TLBFestus, on 11 September 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

I rarely buy a game with less than 8/10 unless it's a niche game that I have a special attachment to.

6/10 isn't exactly a number that will cause hordes of new players to rush in and check it out IMHO.

You know that game journalism is a joke, right? If you only play the games with high reviews, you only play games that have a high enough budget to grease the palms of game "journalists".

[Rina Fujimoto]

Pffft.

And ******** on the forums made fun of me for constantly bringing up the fact that the maps are all horribly scaled with horribly designed terrain and buildings that make 0 sense, are horrible in scale and design and generally nonsensical.

WHO CAARES, they said.

People who are new to this game and not Gold shills care, because its noticeable; the knee high mech grass, the thousand foot high streetlights, the crappy half assed buildings that make no sense and are seemingly plopped down randomly.

If I wasn't on my laptop I'd post the superior airport design for River City I made in like 10 minutes in MS paint that looks 100% better AND is still compliant within gameplay and balancing issues.

This is supposed to be a mech sim, please design the maps as such, I understand there are gameplay and balance constraints, but for gods sake the ******* maps apparently cost PGI 500k and they're all ******** giant earth bowls with crappy artificial boundaries. It's sad when the MW4 city maps look more like real cities than anything in MWO does.

Don't even get me started on how broken the mech scale is.

For example, look, this is how the pilot fits inside the Commando.



He doesn't even fit, his legs extend outside of the mech, he wouldn't even fit through the hatch on the back of the commandos head that's supposed to lead into the cockpit in the first place.

I can understand why it would be difficult to fix mech scale, I get that, but for gods sake, fix map scale, I know it would be hard to go back and fix the old maps, so make sure you make GOOD new ones.

I swear to god if that new city map really ends up being 3 blocks wide across like I think it's going to be...

[Toong]

rdmx, on 11 September 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:

Because it is criticism from an outside source, from someone who is not necessarily invested in the game, or has nostalgia goggles. Think of it as a sign of things to come.

My point is, the bolding is more telling about you, than things to come. I'm worried you may be focusing on the negative.

Edited by Toong, 11 September 2013 - 03:22 PM.

[Rina Fujimoto]

I mean look at this, in 5 minutes I can fix the unrealistic, immersion breaking River City "air/space port"



Now, using assets already in-game:



I can even fix their new crappy city map





The only hard part about any of this would be gameplay balancing, IF ONLY WE WERE IN BETA AND HAD A LARGE GROUP OF BETA TESTERS OR SOMETHING, OH WELL, JUST KEEP PUTTING OUT HALF ASSED MAPS.

[rdmx]

Toong, on 11 September 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

My point is, the bolding is more telling about you, than things to come. I'm worried you may be focusing on the negative.

It's not my review. 6/10 is not a great score. merely an OK one. I bolded the critical comments as I thought it pertinent to the discussion.

[General Taskeen]

I want to play on Haruko's city map. Looks perfect for an UrbanMech to make ambushes on with lots of alley-ways and inner city roads. The 'official' one, not so much.

[LaserAngel]

I'm just here for the Battletech IP. That's it and with the trickle of content I'll be in Star Citizen before Community Warfare and Clans are out.

Clans 2015