1251 replies to this topic

[Dr B00t]

i used to watch the War Z forums for the same reason i'm watching this

i never even played that game but the slo-mo train-wreck is hard to turn away from

[Franchi]

To those getting mad over scores under 5, consider.

You are a new player, you download MWO with no previous Mechwarrior or table top experience.

You drop in a trial mech not the champion mechs they rushed out for launch to cover how bad trials are. You overheat and get killed. You drop again, this time you watch your heat gauge, you get trounced by kitted out customs. You pick a different trial mech and get trounced by customs, you do this for every trial mech.

You stick around for your cadet bonus and buy your very own mech, launch and get trounced, are you going to stick around for the 30-50 games you will need to play to buy the XL engine, double heatsinks endo steel and weapons to make the mech you jut bought effective? Did you have any fun having your head handed to you by experienced players in custom mechs?

What rating does it deserve?

[Shakespeare]

Sybreed, on 17 September 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

in those cases, I always pick my own camp

In all seriousness, it's a bit of a logic problem - the people who ARE enjoying the game, or expect it to get better, are probably sitting in the 4-6 range... but then you've got people gleefully dumping '0's onto it. So, do you fight fire with fire? Or does your honest review barely move the needle, like voting for R. Nader?

I chose the former. Maybe not the most appropriate approach, but if I may channel my inner 5-year-old for just a second longer: They started it!

Edited by Shakespeare, 17 September 2013 - 02:58 PM.

[RG Notch]

S3dition, on 17 September 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

Laughing at the "reviews".

"I got banned for being a *********. Score: 0"

"No bugs have ever been fixed since closed beta. Score: 0"

"My life revolves around this game, and my life is terrible. Must be game's fault. Score: 0"

"Cash grab, pay to win game. Score: 0"

Yet another reason why nobody cares about metacritic.

Somebody cares or the white knights wouldn't be peeing in their pants and posting 10s to "counteract" the trolls. I hate to break it to people, but most folks looking for a quick review won't read your rants or defenses. They look at the score. Currently under 5. For the casual gamer, that's a no go.
And no pro reviews yet, and other than the people who got paid at PC Gamer (who else would list this game as a top 25 shooter of all time?) I can't see them being better than 6s with big caveats to wait for CW and UI 2.0. You think a lot of people are going to remember to come back in a few months?
PGI has flubbed it trying to get new casual folks so they had better start mending bridges with the forum "hard cores" or this won't end well.
Talk down metacritic all you want, it has some value and a game getting below 5 isn't going to be drawing in crowds.

[Jestun]

Shakespeare, on 17 September 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

In all seriousness, it's a bit of a logic problem - the people who ARE enjoying the game, or expect it to give better, a probably sitting in the 4-6 range... but then you've got people gleefully dumping '0's onto it. So, do you fight fire with fire? Or does your honest review barely move the needle, like voting for R. Nader?

I chose the former. Maybe not the most appropriate approach, but if I may channel my inner 5-year-old for just a second longer: They started it!

Why be part of the solution when you can be part of the problem instead!

I like the way you think...

[Oderint dum Metuant]

KhanHeir, on 17 September 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

http://www.vingle.ne...sts/165091?vins

Either that or no one buys PC gaming mags any more.

ever heard of the paper news crash of 2001? When 9/11 happened people needed their news upfront, especially if their lives might be tied to it.

Beaten by Rollercoaster Tycoon.

Wounding.

[KhanHeir]

DV McKenna, on 17 September 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

Beaten by Rollercoaster Tycoon.

Wounding.

FTL beat a billion dollar battlefield game by EA.

We're in the dark age of video games, market crash has been over due for a while.

[Dr B00t]

i have found the answer to all of our bickering...for both sides

http://mwomercs.com/...41#entry2759741

good for a smile

[Shakespeare]

Jestun, on 17 September 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

Why be part of the solution when you can be part of the problem instead!

I like the way you think...

There's a reason plenty of sites do a binary vote system - on the internet, everything is polarizing. I should just stand back and watch people try and scare people away from a game I like, and want to succeed - which, as a multiplayer game, could use new players?

ugh...

Ok, fine. *scribbles out "9"* In a perfect world, we could trust an external review site to cull obvious trolling (as in, the 0's + "game is broken", not the 1's,2's.) from both ends of the scale. I guess I'll just have to be content with trying not to further the madness. And it is madness!

[Tor6]

I'd say the chickens are coming home to roost, but it's more like Angry Birds.

[Dr B00t]

Shakespeare, on 17 September 2013 - 03:08 PM, said:

There's a reason plenty of sites do a binary vote system - on the internet, everything is polarizing. I should just stand back and watch people try and scare people away from a game I like, and want to succeed - which, as a multiplayer game, could use new players?

ugh...

Ok, fine. *scribbles out "9"* In a perfect world, we could trust an external review site to cull obvious trolling (as in, the 0's + "game is broken", not the 1's,2's.) from both ends of the scale. I guess I'll just have to be content with trying not to further the madness. And it is madness!

you should have stopped when you said you were acting like a 5-year old...you were actually ahead

[Gallowglas]

I gave it a 7/10. The core gameplay is fun. I'm still playing the game over a year later and still having fun doing it. That definitely says something, particularly when the same can't be said about a huge number of very successful games I've installed over the years.

I can't rate the developers as part of a game review. If it was fair to do so, my rating would probably be a 4 or 5. I give them props for obviously loving the franchise and for the core gameplay, but they have issues, both with project/time management and with communication.

What does legitimately lower my score is the lack of real communication and continued delay of core game features, most particularly CW. Furthermore, while 3PV hasn't impacted my gameplay significantly, it's pretty indefensible how its release was handled.

All things considered, I thought 7/10 was pretty representative of how I feel about the game as a whole.

[MischiefSC]

Here's the thing.

It's called 'opportunity cost'. When you make a mistake in a business the cost isn't just immediate but can be reflected in lost sales or development opportunities that you'll now never have. 3PV was the catalyst of that for MWO. It was foolish and stubbornly handled and the resolution of it an opportunity just thrown away. For all the other balance issues that particular event has probably cost MWO 2 or 3 points on Metacritic. if it'd been handled better or even just put off they'd be at around a 7 right now. Anyone disagree?

Now it just is what it is. At this point it'll bleed out into Metacritic and in the comments on major review sites and it'll cost MWO business. Ironically it'll be more likely to drive off the 'casual' demographic the otherwise gimped 3PV was intended to appease. Hardcore or dedicated players will be drawn to the franchise regardless of reviews yet they're more likely to be turned away by casual gamer appeasing game aspects.

The next big problem is going to be team play vs solo/casual play. Given the new direction of the game how do you all expect that to go? PGI has already burned through most of the big team guilds that would be interested in MWO which are the social networks that would draw in players who would never bother to check Metacritic or other review sites because a friend referred them. Having expended that resource of players the next logical step is to move more towards the casual solo players.

It's unfortunate. I realize I'm not the target demographic for this game; PGi has no interest in my money or my business and that's alright. It's free to play and X:Rebirth doesn't come out until November. The reality is though that The 'it's still Beta' excuse is gone and there is no reason not to expect the promised features like CW won't get pushed back or will show up so anemic that even some of the current diehards will turn away. Without positive reviews to draw in new customers that puts the game in a tough position.

Better customer service/community management and communication would have fixed all of this but now, well, it's probably too late. All the horrible drama and rage that bubbled up with the 3PV fiasco was allowed to just sit and become the new 'normal'. The next outrage (I expect it to be a borderline insulting mockery of the promised 'community warfare') will bump that level up again.

It's unfortunate but at this point it is what it is.

[Vanguard319]

Shumabot, on 17 September 2013 - 02:34 PM, said:

A 5 is a pretty abysmal score.

on a scale of 1 to 10, that is average, It doesn't change the fact that most of the people posting are not giving honest reviews. Most of what I've read amounts to "PGI lied, therefore the game is automatically failed". There is no commentary on what they did right, or what needs improvement, only that they suck. That's not a review, that's petty nerd rage.

Edited by Vanguard319, 17 September 2013 - 03:25 PM.

[Psikez]

Wildly different reviews and nobody finds anybody elses review helpful because the reviewers are reviewing the reviews.

[Jestun]

To the people saying that you cannot rate the deveopers as part of the review - PGI has made it very clear that they consider launch to be "just another day" and that development is ongoing.

The performance and actions of the dev team plays a key part in how the game is now and how it will progress after the review is posted.

Edited by Jestun, 17 September 2013 - 03:25 PM.

[RG Notch]

Jestun, on 17 September 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

To the people saying that you cannot rate the deveopers as part of the review - PGI has made it very clear that they consider launch to be "just another day" and that development is ongoing.

The performance and actions of the dev team plays a key part in how the game is now and how it will progress after the review is posted.

Exactly, this is a F2P game, why would you waste you time and money investing in the long run in a F2P with unreliable developers. It's not like a boxed game that you might get a patch or some DLC for. You are relying on them to continue to provide a solid game that grows and not to just grab your money and bolt. The dev team is a vital part of what you are getting in a F2P. If you can't trust them to make deadlines, communicate or make fixes properly and timely you are in for a bad F2P experience. So rating the team is perfectly valid.

[Alois Hammer]

Jestun, on 17 September 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

To the people saying that you cannot rate the deveopers as part of the review - PGI has made it very clear that they consider launch to be "just another day" and that development is ongoing.

The performance and actions of the dev team plays a key part in how the game is now and how it will progress after the review is posted.

Finally, someone who gets it.

"You can't hold the devs responsible, review the game, not them."

Er...given the nature of always-in-development F2P games, a significant part of the experience is always being affected by the actions of...that's right: The Developers! As such, not only is considering the developers' actions and communication "valid," it's almost a necessity. When their obstinate refusal to do anything but what they and their imaginary friends think should be done with the game is likely to change the game itself, that's - wait for it - part of the experience of playing that game.

[Top Secret Fifth Account Shhh]

DV McKenna, on 17 September 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

Beaten by Rollercoaster Tycoon.

Wounding.

Dude don't ******* talk **** about RCT. I been playing original RCT a LOT since summer to counteract MWO burnout, that **** is ******* lord. That games a total classic!

Edited by Top Secret Fifth Account Shhh, 17 September 2013 - 03:36 PM.

[Jestun]

I'm killing some time reporting every 10 vote which admits within the review text that it's a false score (e.g. http://www.metacritic.com/user/Criid).

And before someone calls me biased, if anyone can find a 0 review that says "really this game is a 6" or something similar I will happily report those too.