24 replies to this topic

[warp103]

http://gamingbolt.co...r-online-review

lol damn 2nd review of the day that rates MWO Meh.

[Jin Ma]

seems like they were waitingfor that launch event. and the launch event failed to impress

Edited by Jin Ma, 27 September 2013 - 07:41 AM.

[Fajther]

The reviewer doesn't sound like he has played the game in a while.

[Pauly]

Rated a 6/Fair. Thats actually better than average.

However, I'd rather have it 'Meh' right now in its lifecycle than a total disaster and insult to Battletech. Some of you might think that as the case, but take a breather, count to 10 and take a look again...It's not bad. It just isn't great, yet.

PGI wants your money and they want this to be successful so they'll keep working at it. They earned that 6, you bet the devs are high-fiving each other when they see reviews that are higher than 1 or 2. It's slowly getting better and when it gets reviewed again in a year it will be better...PGI WANTS YOUR MONEY!...it has to get better.

[warp103]

Pauly, on 27 September 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

Rated a 6/Fair. Thats actually better than average.

However, I'd rather have it 'Meh' right now in its lifecycle than a total disaster and insult to Battletech. Some of you might think that as the case, but take a breather, count to 10 and take a look again...It's not bad. It just isn't great, yet.

PGI wants your money and they want this to be successful so they'll keep working at it. They earned that 6, you bet the devs are high-fiving each other when they see reviews that are higher than 1 or 2. It's slowly getting better and when it gets reviewed again in a year it will be better...PGI WANTS YOUR MONEY!...it has to get better.

I took a breather and counted to 1 year. Know what I got ? The same thing from a year ago but a bit worst. IE ghost heat and 3pv, communication issue etc etc. Check out the other one I posted in the news section a few mins ago sense a pattern.

Oh and if they are high 5ing a 6 {which is a F} then we really have problems.

Edited by warp103, 27 September 2013 - 08:03 AM.

[Cycleboy]

The gameplay doesn't suck. Visuals are decent. Some hiccups with connection/registration... not horrible. The problem comes in that they picked up a very, very, very, very HOT IP. It's like when D&D games aren't great. You've taken a cherished IP and not lived up to the potential. Anything but solid gold chucks flying out of its rear-end while pouring you the greatest beer ever while cleaning your "pipe" is just not going to cut it. The IP deserves the best, those are big shoes to fill, and if the "40 guys" they have working on it aren't enough, they may need to leverage some investor cash from IGP to polish this up.

Game ~6? Sure. Bad? No. Living up to the potential of the BT universe? No. Can "40 guys" do it? Don't know. Am I getting sick of answering my own questions? Yes.

[Jestun]

Pauly, on 27 September 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

Rated a 6/Fair. Thats actually better than average.

However, I'd rather have it 'Meh' right now in its lifecycle than a total disaster and insult to Battletech. Some of you might think that as the case, but take a breather, count to 10 and take a look again...It's not bad. It just isn't great, yet.

PGI wants your money and they want this to be successful so they'll keep working at it. They earned that 6, you bet the devs are high-fiving each other when they see reviews that are higher than 1 or 2. It's slowly getting better and when it gets reviewed again in a year it will be better...PGI WANTS YOUR MONEY!...it has to get better.

6 is higher than the middle of a 1-10 scale.

But it's not higher than the average game review.

Take the 3 critic reviews on MetaCritic: http://www.metacriti.../critic-reviews

By clicking on the name of the reviewer you can access their page and it tells you the average game review they give out.

All 3 have a higher average than the score they gave MWO.


Have a read through this if you want to learn more about the 4 point scale: http://tvtropes.org/.../FourPointScale

[DeadlyNerd]

Gotta love how "the bad" lists not being able to reconnect.

PGI was promising that feature months ago, and then they went silent.

[jper4]

well considering no UI2.0 and no CW getting a 6/10 with what little there is in the game atm to me isn't a sign of the end of MWO. if it stays that way after CW is added then there's a problem.

[Sandpit]

Tanar, on 27 September 2013 - 02:42 PM, said:

well considering no UI2.0 and no CW getting a 6/10 with what little there is in the game atm to me isn't a sign of the end of MWO. if it stays that way after CW is added then there's a problem.

If cw were in (even a broken half assed rendition at this point) I really believe it would have much better scores in general. One of the reasons for the big backlash on things like ghost heat and 3pv are because the revs basically said these are important features we know you want and need regardless of you telling is otherwise so we will prioritize these over cw and lobbies and voip and well you get the point

[Corvus Antaka]

second review today that rates gameplay as super fun. 1 dropped it to a score of 6 for frequent crashes", another gave it 6 for "lack of CW"

a 6 with "****** gameplay" would be a lot worse.

all in all 2 decent reviews. to bad they can't push those scores a little higher, but oh well.

[Sandpit]

It's a decent game with no content. If you're a casual gamer that isn't a diehard stompy much lover then this game isn't going to appeal to you any more than any other shooter at the moment. I firmly believe cw has the potential to change that but you can't rate and review a game based on things that might get implemented on the future

[Heffay]

Sandpit, on 27 September 2013 - 04:30 PM, said:

It's a decent game with no content. If you're a casual gamer that isn't a diehard stompy much lover then this game isn't going to appeal to you any more than any other shooter at the moment.

Not sure about that. I'm not a tank fanatic, but WoT held my interest for a good long time. There is a lot about this game that appeals to me on a gameplay level, and it's not just being a battletech fan.

[Sandpit]

Heffay, on 27 September 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

[/size]

Not sure about that. I'm not a tank fanatic, but WoT held my interest for a good long time. There is a lot about this game that appeals to me on a gameplay level, and it's not just being a battletech fan.

My point is there's nothing that separates it from every other fps out there aside from mechanics of piloting a mech. Looking at the fps market you can pick any game you want and drop into a game and run around shooting bad guys. Every one of them. The thing that they most often have are competitive leagues that allow units to play even if for nothing more than digital trophies and bragging rights. Look at what is coming down the pipe on 6 months (provided they actually meet a deadline this time) you have bf4, cod ghost warriors, assassins creed, batman arkham origins, next gen consoles. If you want to compete with that and garner a share of the casual player market as well as getting online clans interested (where the big money will actually come from honestly) then you better give them something to play for and something they feel allows them to compete against others for some sort of reward (even if it's just pretend planet ownership) or that's when this game will truly begin it's death knell

[StandingCow]

Fair score for a fair game.

[General Taskeen]

Remember these reviews:

MW:4 Vengeance

"While the AI has a few problems, and there is an occasional rough spot, the finished product is one of the most complete and compelling games we've played, and easily the best MechWarrior game in the series."

Ah, those were the days. Definitely enjoyed MW3/4 myself.

[Pauly]

General Taskeen, on 27 September 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

Remember these reviews:

MW:4 Vengeance

"While the AI has a few problems, and there is an occasional rough spot, the finished product is one of the most complete and compelling games we've played, and easily the best MechWarrior game in the series."

Ah, those were the days. Definitely enjoyed MW3/4 myself.

I feel ya and I wish the same. However we have to consider that this is a completely different model using the same IP. It's a completely online universe with no single player mode. The stories in MW4 were freaking awesome (That's why I am looking forward to Star Citizen) and really made the game for me. It was immersive and didn't get old as you went through it. This game is immersive in the FPS sense, but it really does lack the little details that give games character and make the player feel emotionally committed.

I mean does anyone else feel like their just a robot and not a pilot like I do?

Anyways I will stick to it. Fair review for a fair game. I believe things will improve and I truly believe that. It's even good to see people trashing on this forum because that means that have as much hope as I do. If they didn't this thread would've been a ghost town and that really would have been sad.

[Rascally Jack]

Here is Gamingbolt's review of MWONLINE.

http://gamingbolt.co...r-online-review

[Sybreed]

this has already been posted

[Appogee]

There seem to be boatloads of reviewers landing on the island.