141 replies to this topic

[MustrumRidcully]

So, does IGP have the money to pay of IGN for a good review?
They probably get bonus points for sharing letters.

I mean, isn't MW:O worth 70+ %?

[Fut]

Country Gravy, on 11 September 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

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".

You could say the same thing about virtually every review for every product.

[Johnny Z]

Its simple, a review site gains credibility and popularity based on consistently giving reviews that the reader agrees with or disagrees with.

I like space fiction therefore I will try Mechwarrior no matter the review.

For instance Mass Effect 3 deserved a 10/10 and is an example a well built game to say the least, that was then ruined by the bosses who put that terrible ending in.

Edited by Johnny Z, 12 September 2013 - 05:59 AM.

[Kraven Kor]

haruko, on 11 September 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

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.

PGI I WOULD PAY CASH MONEY FOR SOMETHING, ANYTHING LIKE WHAT THIS GUY HAS POSTED.

Well, so long as there is a PUG queue that is either 1PV only, or where the 3PV drones can be shot down, affected by ECM, and are limited and number and thus actually make sense in context / immersion.

Hey, a man can dream, no?

[Alois Hammer]

Johnny Z, on 12 September 2013 - 04:22 AM, said:

They should make the 3pv at ankle height to show the size of the mechs and allow to view the custom paint and such.

But that would actually make it useful for new players trying to learn the bizarre subtleties of torso twist. You know, the reason IGP/PGI used to shove default 3PV up our [REDACTED].

[Earl White]

Fut, on 12 September 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:

You could say the same thing about virtually every review for every product.

Nope, certain reviewers gloss over flaws, ignore or don't mention key parts of games, they also put too much emphasis on how much they enjoy the game rather than the reasons why it's enjoyable within the genre. IGN is notorious for this, but it has gotten a little better in recent years, other review sites offer more honest criticism but it's hard to get a clear picture from any one review, usually have too look at good and bad reviews.

[CeeKay Boques]

Any time a reviewer puts in that the game is a brick wall of learning curve, or don't understand that the big shiny green PLAY button means you can press it to play, I have to question their intelligence to begin with.

[D1al T0ne]

I honestly don't care who is reviewing a game, I'll take a look at it. I'm way more apt to give credence to a well thought out and written actual player review than any of the big rubber stamp magazines. I mean, ffs, PC Gamer gave SW:TOR GLOWING huge endorsing reviews and half their magazine was dedicated to how amazing the game was when it released. I still have the copy on my Kindle somewhere, yet it was utter trash bin {Scrap}.

Really the only reviewer that I consistently trust to be fair and honest with a game, and I trust the majority of his reviews, are Angry Joe's reviews on Youtube. He doesn't kiss any posteriors and tells it how it is.

Alois Hammer, on 12 September 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

But that would actually make it useful for new players trying to learn the bizarre subtleties of torso twist. You know, the reason IGP/PGI used to shove default 3PV up our [REDACTED].

Ahhh, good ole Hammers Slammers. I used to have a ball killing you guys in Providence back in '07.

Tammahawk especially... boy would he rage and rage about dying to my Vagabond in his Ravens. Black Watch Legionnaires.. best time I ever had in EVE.

[ShadowSpirit]

I usually go with metacritic user reviews. The fiasco that was Diablo III taught me you can never trust a publisher with a review. $$$ too easily influences the rating.

[Corvus Antaka]

Ok the reviewer is obviously fairly stupid. "Can't even tell the game is loaded?" can this guy not see the launch or play buttons?

Wierd on the graphics and effects too. Personally outside the very weak air/arty strikes I think the graphics are great, and since PGI can tweak up in the coming years with cryengine this seems like a funny "concern" to me.

Most interesting though is that he doesn't actually seem to discuss the gameplay. I guess this new generation cares more for graphics & a giant "play" button than how a game actually plays.

The game has it's faults, and as a newcomer it can very hard to appreciate the game.

But every match I play that has only 2-4 mechs at the end is a thriller either way. weapons balance is solid.

Why did PGI open beta so fast? why release without ui 2.0 and yet so close?

who knows? who cares.

MWO is either about to be buried, or it is as PGI states "doing fine" financially, and once again all the drama and doom saying is just more rhetoric from disgruntled people who claim to be "Fans" but seem to be excited to see the game die judging from some of the comments in this thread.

[Jestun]

Excited that their opinion is shared by press rather than a few people "on an island" in the hopes PGI will finally take notice before it's too late is not wanting the game to fail.

Critisism is not hatred.

[Joseph Mallan]

Quote

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)."

You are stomping around in a 2 story building... Scale is interesting when you are looking out out upstairs window! Just sayin'.

[Roland]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 13 September 2013 - 02:48 AM, said:

Wierd on the graphics and effects too. Personally outside the very weak air/arty strikes I think the graphics are great, and since PGI can tweak up in the coming years with cryengine this seems like a funny "concern" to me.

Have you not actually played any other modern games?

MWO's graphical fidelity has actually DECREASED since closed beta, because they had to knock it down due to performance issues.

PGI will not benefit from burying their head in the sand and pretending that their game looks good, when in fact it really doesn't by comparison to other current titles. Because simply saying it does doesn't make it so.

[rdmx]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 13 September 2013 - 02:48 AM, said:

Ok the reviewer is obviously fairly stupid. Can't even tell the game is loaded? can this guy not see the launch or play buttons?

Are you having a laugh? The interface is terrible. The mechlab button turns from grey to white text. The launch button (which is easily missed) turns from orange to green. That's the extent of the feedback you get.

When I started playing this game in closed beta, I didn't even know about the damn mechlab button.

Quote

Wierd on the graphics and effects too. Personally outside the very weak air/arty strikes I think the graphics are great, and since PGI can tweak up in the coming years with cryengine this seems like a funny "concern" to me.

Do you play PC games outside of MWO? MWO's graphics are drab.

Quote

Most interesting though is that he doesn't actually seem to discuss the gameplay. I guess this new generation cares more for graphics & a giant play button than how a game actually plays.

I avoided posting the full review, merely the key points I gained from the review. The gameplay is of course talked about, but it's nothing you wouldn't already know.

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.

Quote

All the drama and doom saying is just more rhetoric from disgruntled people who claim to be 'Fans' but seem to be excited to see the game die judging from some of the comments in this thread.

Don't shoot the messenger. I don't think people have grasped that this is an outside press piece.

Quote

You are stomping around in a 2 story building... Scale is interesting when you are looking out out upstairs window! Just sayin'.

We'll pretend the giganto shrubs, rocks don't exist then~

Edited by rdmx, 13 September 2013 - 06:52 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

Roland, on 13 September 2013 - 05:33 AM, said:

Have you not actually played any other modern games?

MWO's graphical fidelity has actually DECREASED since closed beta, because they had to knock it down due to performance issues.

PGI will not benefit from burying their head in the sand and pretending that their game looks good, when in fact it really doesn't by comparison to other current titles. Because simply saying it does doesn't make it so.

It's interesting because for a F2P title MWO does have incredible graphics, or did at the time.

Personally I think graphics are over-rated, todays graphics are all in the same region for fidelity. I've played Crysis 3, it's a little nicer. Rome Total war 2, meh, maybe.

The only thing we are really laking is more fluff on levels, like trees & just filler stuff. But really it's no big deal.

The expectation would be that in the future graphics will again come up as new cryengine tweaks are added. I just don't see that getting another 10-20% better graphics would be a priority like CW and ui 2.0 for now.

[Johnny Z]

You can bet that with the dx 11 coming that the graphics will be looked at and at least tuned a bit. I have never seen a problem with the graphics so far myself and I take graphics as serious as anyone.

I remember my first game like yesterday and i was very impressed at the time. But as with everyone from beta after a while the balance testing and so on makes me impatient for a full game.

So I try not to be to upset that MW is coming out of beta without every feature that is in the works complete, and happy it is a stable and presentable state. And that they can actually focus on adding new features rather than fine tuning and stability and so on.

[Roland]

Quote

It's interesting because for a F2P title MWO does have incredible graphics, or did at the time.

No, it really doesn't. I think you need to get a bit more up to speed with where modern computer graphics have come.
(pro-tip: You aren't going to get modern graphics using the DirectX 9.0c API from literally a decade ago)

Quote

Personally I think graphics are over-rated, todays graphics are all in the same region for fidelity. I've played Crysis 3, it's a little nicer. Rome Total war 2, meh, maybe.

It's ok for you to say that you don't value graphical fidelity, but this just means that perhaps you aren't the best person to evaluate graphical fidelity...because, quite frankly, what you're saying here is nonsense.

No dude, all graphics are not in the same region for fidelity.... And MWO is not presenting a cutting edge view of what the current limit is in terms of graphical fidelity. Not even close.

You are seriously coming off as someone who has literally not seen a modern game in years.

[Syllogy]

According to Meta Critic, no publishers have submitted reviews for MWO yet.

Link

Here is PC PowerPlay's Profile for further confirmation.

Edited by Syllogy, 13 September 2013 - 08:06 AM.

[Alois Hammer]

D1al T0ne, on 12 September 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

Ahhh, good ole Hammers Slammers. I used to have a ball killing you guys in Providence back in '07.

Tammahawk especially... boy would he rage and rage about dying to my Vagabond in his Ravens. Black Watch Legionnaires.. best time I ever had in EVE.

"You guys?" Let's get something clear here, the name came from a book and I've no [REDACTED] idea what you're blathering on about...but if bragging about defeating random people years ago strokes your little e-peen I'll just ignore your lunatic ravings.

[rdmx]

Syllogy, on 13 September 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

According to Meta Critic, no publishers have submitted reviews for MWO yet.

Link

Here is PC PowerPlay's Profile for further confirmation.

Now that you mention it, Metacritic used to have 2 reviews up for MWO (including PCPowerPlay), but they got removed.

Here's a wayback machine link. http://web.archive.o...hwarrior-online