1251 replies to this topic

[Johnny Z]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 25 September 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

I'm curious about something.

How much time have you logged? How many mechs killed or matches fought?

The reason I ask is because for me a 3 game is one I wouldn't ever play.

So it makes me wonder how many people scored this game a sub-4 and yet still seem to keep playing.

Agreed, any score below a 5 for this game is considered invalid anyway by definition. So wont be counted in any totals that matter to anyone.

By definition a score of 5 means it is playable, below 5 means its has no appeal and things like the launcher and controls are buggy. Again anything below a 5 means it is broken, which Mechwarrior is not.

A score of 7 means the game is stable and has appeal.

10 means the game has broken ground in mechanics and appeal.

[Corvus Antaka]

Protection, on 25 September 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

As many people have stated, they are here for the IP. If this was the same game without the Mechwarrior license, it would have already died and failed.

It's not so much that we keep coming back for the gameplay. It's that they are the ones with the IP, and this is sadly the only way to get a reliable Battletech/Mechwarrior fix.

It's basically a hostage situation.

So you are saying PGI is blackmailing you into buying content because they have a monopoloy on the btech IP and the game is WORSE than all other titles?

There are still mech4 leagues out there. And mech3 can be leagued.

comical stuff.

[RedThirteen]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 September 2013 - 12:00 AM, said:

There are still mech4 leagues out there. And mech3 can be leagued.

Where? And there's nothing for us Australians, the backwater nation we are. Heck, look at battlefield 3; it's been out for barely two years, and the only thing you'll find are two servers of operation metro.
While Protection may be guilty of over-exaggeration, his point is no less pertinent - actually it isn't. There's always Mechwarrior Tactics.

[fil5000]

Johnny Z, on 25 September 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:

Agreed, any score below a 5 for this game is considered invalid anyway by definition. So wont be counted in any totals that matter to anyone.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. A five on your scale might mean "game is playable", but I wouldn't expect a game to get above a zero if it wasn't actually playable.

[Jestun]

Johnny Z, on 25 September 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:

Agreed, any score below a 5 for this game is considered invalid anyway by definition. So wont be counted in any totals that matter to anyone.

By definition a score of 5 means it is playable, below 5 means its has no appeal and things like the launcher and controls are buggy. Again anything below a 5 means it is broken, which Mechwarrior is not.

A score of 7 means the game is stable and has appeal.

10 means the game has broken ground in mechanics and appeal.

If all a game has to do to get a 5 is physically load and run, what does that say about the press reviews giving MWO 6-7? That it's only just better than able to run? I'd stick to a 10 point scale if I were trying to defend MWO.

[Kyynele]

Jestun, on 26 September 2013 - 01:44 AM, said:

If all a game has to do to get a 5 is physically load and run, what does that say about the press reviews giving MWO 6-7? That it's only just better than able to run? I'd stick to a 10 point scale if I were trying to defend MWO.

Selective reading huh?

Johnny Z, on 25 September 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:

A score of 7 means the game is stable and has appeal.

There are 3 press reviews at the moment in metacritic, that average 6.83. Which is of course even better if you think scores like 3.0 would actually be valid.

[Johnny Z]

Kyynele, on 26 September 2013 - 02:08 AM, said:

Selective reading huh?



There are 3 press reviews at the moment in metacritic, that average 6.83. Which is of course even better if you think scores like 3.0 would actually be valid.

Thats the way the scoring works, I didnt give it a score.

The only valid scores possible are between 6 and 10 end of story.

The fact there is so many accounts proves some appeal no matter what.

The game is stable no matter what. (saying otherwise isnt true)

I would myself almost have to give it a score depending on how long I have played.

First month an easy 8 or 9. After first month even without cw and ui 2.0 missing cant go lower than a 7 from me.

Personally i think if the sim gets much better and cw and ui2.0 and some other things are added it may hit a 10 in the long run.

10 meaning the sim is bar none the best out there(leading the industry in game mechanics, which might be why so much effort has been put into bobble heads btw ) and the game play depth and Mechwarrior universe has among the most appealing games produced. Sharing company with only Mass Effect getting a 10 that i know of. This is a long way off of course, but this is best case scenario.

Btw this is simplified reply, didnt mention dx 11 or graphics or a ton of other stuff.

Edited by Johnny Z, 26 September 2013 - 03:39 AM.

[Jack Gallows]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 25 September 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

I'm curious about something.

How much time have you logged? How many mechs killed or matches fought?

The reason I ask is because for me a 3 game is one I wouldn't ever play.

So it makes me wonder how many people scored this game a sub-4 and yet still seem to keep playing.

I've been here since the first day closed beta began. I have played more matches then I care to think about and the desire to play waned severely as time went on.

I gave it a 3 and I no longer play. I'm on the forums so people will know why I gave it a 3 and to continue to enjoy the art sub forums. I still come here off the chance there's a Battletech discussion, I couldn't care less what sale of the week is going on nor what special new update convolutes the game.

Personally, I'd rather see the Mechwarrior IP in someone elses hands as I don't feel confidant or believe that PGI will deliver on a worth-while project. Though, if you're curious I guess you could keep assuming anyone on the forums giving their opinions on a low scoring game still plays it and thereby invalidates their reviews/opinions. Sweeping generalizations, huzzah!

Johnny Z, on 26 September 2013 - 03:17 AM, said:

The only valid scores possible are between 6 and 10 end of story.

The fact there is so many accounts proves some appeal no matter what.

First one is your opinion, and as we can see isn't valid as there are scores outside that range. I'd learn to deal with it as their opinion of this game is as valid as yours.

As for the second, well, a whole ton of people enjoy Battletech/Mechwarrior so I'd throw that into your equation before you use it as a statistic. A lot of people means a passionate user base because they care about the IP more then the game itself. Had MW:O gone better you probably wouldn't have seen as many reviews on a whole but they'd have mostly been positive instead of being split as they are. Taking something someone cares about then mucking it up (in my opinion,) is the fastest way to get people to actually get active and voice their concerns and issues.

Anyone who doesn't like the metacritic scores should learn to deal with it. I don't care if it gets 10 more positive reviews from actual critics and it's score jumps as that's what they say it is and I understand that's what they believe, they have a right to that. What THEY say it is doesn't matter to me as I've formed my own opinion after playing and experiencing the game for the last year, and that's all that matters in the end.

Edited by Jack Gallows, 26 September 2013 - 03:47 AM.

[Jestun]

Writing off people's opinion every time it doesn't match yours makes you look foolish.

Personally I disagree with the ratings outside of 3-6, but I won't claim they are invalid (except 0 or 10, clearly MWO deserves neither of these as no matter what you may think of it it didn't melt my PC and it's certainly not the perfect game).

If you are going to write off the extreme reviews then do so for both ends of the scale or your bias is clear.

[Johnny Z]

Jestun, on 26 September 2013 - 03:43 AM, said:

Writing off people's opinion every time it doesn't match yours makes you look foolish.

Personally I disagree with the ratings outside of 3-6, but I won't claim they are invalid (except 0 or 10, clearly MWO deserves neither of these as no matter what you may think of it it didn't melt my PC and it's certainly not the perfect game).

If you are going to write off the extreme reviews then do so for both ends of the scale or your bias is clear.

I was commenting on the reviews from places like IGN and other game reviewers from the start. Also someone could argue that Mechwarrior Online currently has the best simulation out now and that the game play is so awsome it deserves a 10. I think honestly my first game in mw I would have given it a 9 i was so impressed, but then reviewing isnt my job like the serious game reviewers.

A score of 0 or 1, like you say would mean it would be unlikely to even start, and that if it did, you wouldnt want it to.

[Jack Gallows]

Johnny Z, on 26 September 2013 - 03:57 AM, said:

A score of 0 or 1, like you say would mean it would be unlikely to even start, and that if it did, you wouldnt want it to.

That depends on how you choose to rate the game. The game could run like a dream but a low score is still valid because they don't have to base numbers purely off if the game actually works or not. Or, you could start with a 10 and start knocking off points for every issue you have.

So, while I'd agree a 0 probably isn't exactly accurate, I'm not writing them off either. If someone feels it deserves a 0 because of a myriad of reasons then that's what they believe. Some 0s and some 10s are going to be just to spite someone else giving an opposite score, but that's life.

[Riptor]

PythonCPT, on 24 September 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

I've never seen twerk used as a noun in that way. Where are you from and what exactly does that mean when used in that context? Like he's a provocative dancer whom favors gyrations of the lower body?... but as insult?

Im using words like that out of context because a) they sound funny

b ) the usual plethora of internet name calling is in desperate need for some variety

and c) to see how long it takes till someone notices them.

So i guess.. congrats for noticing?

Quote

[color=#959595]That depends on how you choose to rate the game. The game could run like a dream but a low score is still valid because they don't have to base numbers purely off if the game actually works or not. Or, you could start with a 10 and start knocking off points for every issue you have.[/color]

[color=#959595]So, while I'd agree a 0 probably isn't exactly accurate, I'm not writing them off either. If someone feels it deserves a 0 because of a myriad of reasons then that's what they believe. Some 0s and some 10s are going to be just to spite someone else giving an opposite score, but that's life. [/color]

Hrm.. cant agree with that... MWO is many things but not a 0

You know what a 0 is thought?



Sometimes im surprised by the balls some developers have when it comes to release complete ***** for games and expect to get paid for it.

Quote

[color=#959595]Also someone could argue that Mechwarrior Online currently has the best simulation out now[/color]

To wich i would retord: "No sh*t sherlock! They are the only ones on the market!" XD

No offense meant but it isnt hard to be "best" at something if youre the only one around who does it.. in this case a mech simulation.

Edited by Riptor, 26 September 2013 - 04:15 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Jack Gallows, on 26 September 2013 - 04:01 AM, said:

That depends on how you choose to rate the game. The game could run like a dream but a low score is still valid because they don't have to base numbers purely off if the game actually works or not. Or, you could start with a 10 and start knocking off points for every issue you have.

So, while I'd agree a 0 probably isn't exactly accurate, I'm not writing them off either. If someone feels it deserves a 0 because of a myriad of reasons then that's what they believe. Some 0s and some 10s are going to be just to spite someone else giving an opposite score, but that's life.

Fact is the most loyal of Mechwarrior players might be giving the lowest scores I know. Those that have been playing steady since closed beta must be impatient like mad to see dx11, ui 2.0, CW, etc, more than someone who went to play other games or has taken a break or what not. I have taken a long break, and it is easy to be hyped by launch and everything.

Edited by Johnny Z, 26 September 2013 - 04:16 AM.

[Jack Gallows]

I don't agree it's the best simulator out there, War Thunder is far more enjoyable and better put together, but it's all personal opinion anyway.

Right up until Chris Roberts puts out the Dog Fighting Module for Star Citizen.

Johnny Z, on 26 September 2013 - 04:15 AM, said:

Fact is the most loyal of Mechwarrior players might be giving the lowest scores I know. Those that have been playing steady since closed beta must be impatient like mad to see dx11, ui 2.0, CW, etc, more than someone who went to play other games or has taken a break or what not. I have taken a long break, and it is easy to be hyped by launch and everything.

So anyone who has given the game a low score is impatient, impractical, and has no self control?

Let me get you another blanket to apply to everyone in the community.

Edited by Jack Gallows, 26 September 2013 - 04:21 AM.

[Jestun]

Ah, when talking about professional reviews from someone who relies on developers / publishers providing a copy of the game for them to try as well as things like exlusive interviews then yes, they tend to only use the upper end of the scale.
I was discussing this very topic 6 or 7 pages ago.

Jestun, on 25 September 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

I have no idea if shuma found or made it, but that's moot unless you decide the validity of something by who says it. FYI it's the second image when doing a Google image search for "game review scale".



See here for an interesting read on the subject: http://tvtropes.org/.../FourPointScale

Edited by Jestun, 26 September 2013 - 04:27 AM.

[DeaconW]

Protection, on 25 September 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

As many people have stated, they are here for the IP. If this was the same game without the Mechwarrior license, it would have already died and failed.

It's not so much that we keep coming back for the gameplay. It's that they are the ones with the IP, and this is sadly the only way to get a reliable Battletech/Mechwarrior fix.

It's basically a hostage situation.

This^^. The Counterstrike-with-mechs gameplay can be fun (although the MM and borked things like ghost heat work against that)...but, without a meta-game it gets stale quickly. The other part of it is...I spent stupid money on this game and would like to try and get my money's worth before it goes belly-up! There will probably be a pretty long dry spell without a MW game when that happens...

So it does not require cognitive dissonance to both loath the developer and dislike the state of the game, but still play from time to time. I do find it interesting that a number of those who are hard-line *supporters* of the game in it's current state appear to want the "complainers" to leave or criticize them for playing when, in a F2P game players are content. That means those who want us to leave want the game to have *less* content and potentially die sooner due to lack of players. How's that for cognitive dissonance!

[DeaconW]

Johnny Z, on 26 September 2013 - 04:15 AM, said:

Fact is the most loyal of Mechwarrior players might be giving the lowest scores I know.

I love the MW/BT franchise. I wrote a full review and gave it a zero. Why? As I stated in my review, the game, as it stands, with half the game *missing*, deserves a 3 or 4. The developer however, deserves a -100. Since there is no way to separate that out, I settled on a zero.

Lesson: Don't **** on the franchise many people love, lie to them and disrespect them, and then expect them to laud your product.

[MadPanda]

There's three ways to review the game.

1. Review it as you really feel. Give it a score between 0-4.
2. Suppress your feelings and try to balance out the bad with the good. Give it a score between 5-7.
3. Completely ignore the current state of the game and review it based on it's potential. Give it a score between 8-10.

[Dymlos2003]

MadPanda, on 26 September 2013 - 08:48 AM, said:

There's three ways to review the game.

1. Review it as you really feel. Give it a score between 0-4.
2. Suppress your feelings and try to balance out the bad with the good. Give it a score between 5-7.
3. Completely ignore the current state of the game and review it based on it's potential. Give it a score between 8-10.

The best way to review games is the following. Write about it and no score

[Gamgee]

The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about. ~ Oscar Wilde