1251 replies to this topic

[Morbid Jester]

Toydolls, on 19 September 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

I have no clue what world you live in but 5.3 is not average it's actually really low
the games current score would actually put it on the sixth page of worst scores ever with the current 5.3 score being translated into 53%
http://www.gameranki...l?page=5&sort=1

In my world, given a possible range from 0 to 10 for rating points where 0 is "bad" and 10 is "good" a 5,3 means that, taking into account all ratings for MWO on Metacritic, users rate the game as better than the average - which would sit around -wait for it - 5.
I'm not interested in comparing MWO to other games but instead I want to see where the "community" stands.

[Toydolls]

Morbid Jester, on 20 September 2013 - 01:11 AM, said:

In my world, given a possible range from 0 to 10 for rating points where 0 is "bad" and 10 is "good" a 5,3 means that, taking into account all ratings for MWO on Metacritic, users rate the game as better than the average - which would sit around -wait for it - 5.
I'm not interested in comparing MWO to other games but instead I want to see where the "community" stands.

Well in the gaming world normally anything less then 7-7.5 you stay away from and don't waste your money

[Elizander]

Toydolls, on 20 September 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

Well in the gaming world normally anything less then 7-7.5 you stay away from and don't waste your money

What's there to buy?

[armyof1]

Elizander, on 20 September 2013 - 03:20 AM, said:

What's there to buy?

Come on, those 4 mechbays won't last you long at all. Wait, since the CBill nerf I guess they would last quite a bit longer. Too bad new players like my nephew realized what a silly grind it became to master anything and quit instead.

[Morbid Jester]

Toydolls, on 20 September 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

Well in the gaming world normally anything less then 7-7.5 you stay away from and don't waste your money

Still not my point. Like I said above: I do not need to compare MWO to other games in the gaming world to gauge MWO user opinions on MWO by metacritic metrics. It helps, but is not necessary.

Besides: MWO is F2P last I checked - the only invest I did initially was paying for my internet connection while downloading and then playing the game. It was only after playing for free way past the "cadet bonus" stage that I actually spent money on MWO. Why? I wanted a Mech that played rock music clips on kills......

For a Founder like you are, this is something else entirely.: You put money into a concept/idea, banking on it to become reality.There is a risk attached to that: You had no way of knowing beforehand if a ) the devs can put out anything at all and b ) what they put out is all you expected it to be. I can see your frustration if the current state is not what you imagined the game to be.

All things considered, we're bickering over semantics, I guess

Anyway, I would rate MWO in ist current state a solid "7" given a 0-10 scale based on my playing experinece. There is room for improvement, but I enjoy.
How would you rate it? I'd be interested in hearing it from a founder...

Edited by Morbid Jester, 20 September 2013 - 03:49 AM.

[Elizander]

armyof1, on 20 September 2013 - 03:32 AM, said:

Come on, those 4 mechbays won't last you long at all. Wait, since the CBill nerf I guess they would last quite a bit longer. Too bad new players like my nephew realized what a silly grind it became to master anything and quit instead.

Well, the general point is to get people to try the game and since it's F2P, the metacritic score isn't as big a deal as with a paid game.

With regards to the mechbays, I've given several suggestions in the past for free users to get more bays but no go yet. Maybe they can give out some free bays with the tutorial completion and achievement system (if we get one).

[MustrumRidcully]

There are also many F2P games, why spend time on something that has bad reviews if there are F2P games with good reviews?

Since my nice life as a university student ended and I actually have a job, I value my time even more. Often more than money, actually. And I don't even have a wife or kids that would desire and deserve my attention.

[Aerokii]

Badconduct, on 19 September 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

1. It's not a very good game. It's "team death match" on repeat.

2. That accounts for 10 to 20 of the 756 votes, most of which are very negative.

5.0 is a bad review. A 7 average I could see being learning curve related, but I have played a lot of 'Mechwarrior before.

X3 has a VERY big learning curve, MUCh bigger than this game, and it has a better rating: http://www.metacriti...e/pc/x3-reunion

I was looking forward to this game. But honestly; it's a bit of a scam and pretty repetitive and boring. The quality of the multiplayer is equal to the free team death match that came with Mechwarrior 4. Spawn a few times, kill, be killed, ok, done.

Just something to consider- MWO has more positive reviews than X3 has reviews at all. Of course, it also has more negative reviews than X3's total review count too.

And beyond that, as far as "most of which are very negative", there are currently more positive reviews than there are negative. For purpose of this discussion I'm not including the mixed reviews in either category, since you said "very negative."

As stated earlier though, I think the 0's and 10's are both unrealistic and unfair. I'm not taking any real stance one way or another to say one side is right or wrong, but it's fun to look at and play around with the numbers.

[Draconis March]

Livewyr, on 17 September 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

petty forum-ers are going to throw in vindictive low-ball scores where even good effects are just "ok" or "despite"s...

Yes, because visual effects are all that matter in a game.

Edited by Draconis March, 20 September 2013 - 05:51 AM.

[Sasha Volkova]

Metacritic is a site controlled by the amout of {Noble MechWarriors} or haters of a product that happens to know about it - in other words not really consistent when it comes to quality reviews :b
Still I am sure it will prove interesting to see what sort of QQ and tears will run down the pages on that site from now on.

Edit: Oh my gawd - I did not realize that the word F@nBoyz would turn into {Noble MechWarriors}
I LOVE IT! xD

Edited by 0okami, 20 September 2013 - 05:23 AM.

[Elizander]

MustrumRidcully, on 20 September 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

There are also many F2P games, why spend time on something that has bad reviews if there are F2P games with good reviews?

Since my nice life as a university student ended and I actually have a job, I value my time even more. Often more than money, actually. And I don't even have a wife or kids that would desire and deserve my attention.

People can check out any F2P title even just out of the slightest curiosity because there is no barrier to entry.

People with very limited time like you and me are outliers in the statistic sheets compared to the casual masses with lots of free time on their hands. All it takes to replace us and our money are 3-5 casuals who buy a champion mech each or some Trial by Fire sale mechs. Well, some people here are definitely worth 10-100 minnows.

I know that Metacritic is a big thing to people in the US/EU/AU etc, but where I live, most gamers don't know what it is and they play games that aren't even rated on Metacritic. I am sure that a lot of less developed places in the world are the same and they have access to this game as well.

[Toydolls]

Ok then also how about this Don't Waste Your TIME happy now?

Edited by Toydolls, 20 September 2013 - 06:33 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Elizander, on 20 September 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

People can check out any F2P title even just out of the slightest curiosity because there is no barrier to entry.

People with very limited time like you and me are outliers in the statistic sheets compared to the casual masses with lots of free time on their hands.

I am not convinced this is true. The people that have the money to be relevant for gaming are often the ones with full time jobs.

[Toydolls]

Morbid Jester, on 20 September 2013 - 03:45 AM, said:

Still not my point. Like I said above: I do not need to compare MWO to other games in the gaming world to gauge MWO user opinions on MWO by metacritic metrics. It helps, but is not necessary.

Besides: MWO is F2P last I checked - the only invest I did initially was paying for my internet connection while downloading and then playing the game. It was only after playing for free way past the "cadet bonus" stage that I actually spent money on MWO. Why? I wanted a Mech that played rock music clips on kills......

For a Founder like you are, this is something else entirely.: You put money into a concept/idea, banking on it to become reality.There is a risk attached to that: You had no way of knowing beforehand if a ) the devs can put out anything at all and b ) what they put out is all you expected it to be. I can see your frustration if the current state is not what you imagined the game to be.

All things considered, we're bickering over semantics, I guess

Anyway, I would rate MWO in ist current state a solid "7" given a 0-10 scale based on my playing experinece. There is room for improvement, but I enjoy.
How would you rate it? I'd be interested in hearing it from a founder...

You don't want hear my rating I haven't played a single game in more than 6 months, but if I had to I would give it a 3 or a 3.5
I take a look on youtube once in awhile, and read up realize it's not worth my waste of time. The main problem I see here is many people here have said this is the only game they play as in they wouldn't play video games normally but for this they will. These people also have no clue what a good review score is all of these people saying 5 is good just wow seriously wow,

Edited by Toydolls, 20 September 2013 - 06:37 AM.

[Elizander]

MustrumRidcully, on 20 September 2013 - 06:32 AM, said:

I am not convinced this is true. The people that have the money to be relevant for gaming are often the ones with full time jobs.

I meant that if your interests are not that strongly inclined to the IP or the theme and you have very little time to the point that you can only play one game puts you on the edge of the sheets or at least in the 'lucky to have you' category.

If you are very interested in the IP then of course we are the target market. No company can please everybody though and if PGI feel that the grindsqueeze should be at this level then they will have to accept the loss of those who do not have the time to enjoy the game due to grind required even with Premium. The other effect of it is it might get more people to purchase Hero mechs and premium time to make up for the loss of those who do not have enough time on their hands. This pushes us to the edge because their focus would be on people who have more free time than us.

Still, in most cases it is better go for the easy fish with a large net than spending 10 hours fishing for that crafty old bass that never falls for your hook and bait.

[armyof1]

Elizander, on 20 September 2013 - 04:20 AM, said:

Well, the general point is to get people to try the game and since it's F2P, the metacritic score isn't as big a deal as with a paid game.

With regards to the mechbays, I've given several suggestions in the past for free users to get more bays but no go yet. Maybe they can give out some free bays with the tutorial completion and achievement system (if we get one).

I don't know how often you read game reviews, but a score around 5/10 will not make people interested in a game, whether F2P or for $50. It's a really bad score for a game as anything worthwhile is usually 7/10 and up. Sure if there was only 2-3 F2P games out there, but nowadays when they number in the thousands you need to do way better than score smack in the middle.

I've played since Jan 2013 and at least I can't recall a single thing since then that originally cost MC have been changed to be available for CBills. I seriously doubt mechbays will be an exception.

Edited by armyof1, 20 September 2013 - 07:44 AM.

[Farix]

TLBFestus, on 19 September 2013 - 02:14 PM, said:

Don't you find it odd though that splitting the queues is a big issue?

Looking at that closely, what does that mean?

It means that PGI didn't think that 3PV was significent enough to create two seperate queues. In fact, 3PV players are actually at a significant disadvantage when in combat against a 1PV player do to slower torso twist speed, arm lock, and "jumping" redicle. As Bryan Eckman said in NGNG Podcast #88, "we are spliting the queues for this?"

That being said, many of those who opposed 3PV also arguging against seperate queues. Well, they got half of what they wanted.

[MustrumRidcully]

Farix, on 20 September 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

It means that PGI didn't think that 3PV was significent enough to create two seperate queues. In fact, 3PV players are actually at a significant disadvantage when in combat against a 1PV player do to slower torso twist speed, arm lock, and "jumping" redicle. As Bryan Eckman said in NGNG Podcast #88, "we are spliting the queues for this?"

The trick to min/maxing is: Minimize your drawbacks, maximize your advantages. If you're trying to shoot at an enemy, if you're defending against enemy fire - use 1PV. If you're trying to see what is around a corner or obstacle - don't go there in 1PV, send your indestructible camera drone first.

[armyof1]

Farix, on 20 September 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

It means that PGI didn't think that 3PV was significent enough to create two seperate queues. In fact, 3PV players are actually at a significant disadvantage when in combat against a 1PV player do to slower torso twist speed, arm lock, and "jumping" redicle. As Bryan Eckman said in NGNG Podcast #88, "we are spliting the queues for this?"

That being said, many of those who opposed 3PV also arguging against seperate queues. Well, they got half of what they wanted.

It's just the total newbies that don't know better who try and fight entirely in 3PV and it's not what the regular players complain about at all. It's the ability to quickly switch between 1PV to 3PV to peek around and over all kinds of obstacles you'd never be able to look around in 1PV. Let's at least get that part straight first.

And nowhere did we get half of what we wanted. To be forced to organize a full 12-mans to get rid of 3PV is just a sorry excuse of a change since PGI know very few matches are played there compared to the regular queue. It's just the devs once again being stubborn about added features that are not popular or even outright despised. They just hate to undo anything they've changed no matter how much critique they receive, trying to move ahead even when they hit a wall when common sense dictates you should back up and move around obstacles.

[ShadowSpirit]

I gave the game a 3. If they implement UI 2.0 it will move up to 5. If they implement ANY TYPE of clan/faction (even if it's just merc groups) then the score will go up to 6. To get to higher than that they have to fix the hit boxes, weapons balance, and server rewind.