Eurogamer re-reviews SWTOR

[LordArtemis]

In that case you started playing around February, and are definitely not part of the majority of players which picked up a 6-month subscription at launch, as those ran out around June-July.

 

I don't think it's unrealistic tbf, as unlike a big portion of the nay-sayers in this community, I do not believe in BioWare being able to perform miracles to turn certain game elements around. Do I agree on everything BioWare has done thus far? Most definitely not, although that primarily stems out of the fact that prior to launch I pretty much had everybody disagreeing on just about any suggestion I made, seeking features such as:

 

- Group finder tools for bg's, dungeons and raids.

- Cross-server.

- Full fletched achievement system.

- Full fletched open world PvP a la DAoC and in some sense WAR.

- Less emphasis on story as it'd be a one-time thing which MMO players would simply skip by in the long haul anyway.

- World bosses and dynamic events.

- Balanced number of long + short raids, high complexity on HM and NMM.

- Multiplayer pod racing to beat downtime rather than the current space missions.

- Addon support.

 

Did BioWare give me all of this? No, definitely not. But to be fair, did I expect them to give me those things considering as to how many players opposed to those features? Not really.

 

Have they started changing post-launch as the community changed? Yes, yes they have. And as such, I'm seeing development put into the game. Do I expect it to be done by tomorrow? Definitely not, by late 2013 they'll probably still be busy fixing pre-launch things which wouldn't have been there if they wouldn't have listened to the community so much.

 

Thing is, they did listen to feedback. Which was mainly an overload of KOTOR fans seeking their storyline, and a refugee group from SWG essentially going through each suggestion to see if it included something which was prior done in WoW just to post a "WoW is that way." remark.

 

The few MMO fans who tried to point out that no matter what you do with storylines, in order to fill up a timespan as seen in MMO's it'll always boil down to the traditional "hunter, gatherer, escort" scenario, were repeatedly shot down with the argument that this is BioWare, this is going to be different, this is.... etc.

 

BioWare listened, to the majority, and as such they listened to the wrong crowd in my eyes.

 

 

What in my opinion didn't help them in the long run is that many of those seeking the KOTOR 3 experience quickly left, partially due to subs, partially due to traditional MMO elements being more generic than what they were used to and finally most probably as they started to realize that stretching a 12 hour class story line over 120 hours with typical MMO quests perhaps wasn't all that good anyway, no matter how much they tried to claim before otherwise.

 

As for the portion of pre-launch SWG players, a lot were quickly turned down by this not being a sandbox game. Which honestly I still don't understand how that ever came as a surprise to some.

 

As said, we do not know which expectations they had in terms of subs. All we know is that most of their expectations were modest. My bets are a 1.5 million figure would probably come close as to what most of them were aiming for. I highly doubt they truly set out with the idea, let's make a 10 million subs game.

 

Sub losses being normal is hardly what I'd call fantasy, but rather history repeating itself. There hasn't been a single MMO since 2008 which hasn't nose-dived in terms of subscriber figures during the first 6 months post launch, already starting at the first month as that's when the first subs start running out. Personally, I don't think the subscriber figures of the first 6 months are even of interest anymore, we're probably better of starting to judge future MMO's based on their performance after the first 6 months to see where it heads.

 

Employment losses is also just history repeating itself, EA has been doing this for years.

 

Certainly logical points raised. I think we are just going to disagree on most of these contentions. I was here prelaunch as well and have VERY different memories of the ordeal than you do. I don't know if you remember Raven Night, but he pretty much summed up what the community wanted pre launch and also predicted almost everything that has happened up to now.

 

I just wish he was here now. He refuses to return to the game, even for free unfortunately.

 

At any rate, I think that its unnecessary for me to argue against your contentions, and if I continue to do so it would become counterproductive. Your certainly entitled to your viewpoint and I certainly do not corner the market on what makes sense.

 

I think we will just agree to disagree on this issue.

[thamightyboro]

All it says is that Richard Corbett is jaded and tired of MMO's no more no less just look at all his recent articles.

[RLWalker]

I find it very unusual for someone to praise the story telling in World of Warcraft and Guild Wars 2 over SWTOR. I actually felt kind of embarrassed to be listening to some of the dialogue in GW2 - it is just so cheesy. As for WoW, after playing it for a long time and recently unsubscribing I was given a 1 week trial. I created a completely new character on the opposite faction with no prior experience of quests, lore, etc. It was bad. So bad I found myself day-dreaming and struggling to keep my eyes open within 5 minutes. Mechanically GW2 has the best leveling structure (shared loot, shared objectives, dynamic events) but to say it excels in story telling is a stretch.

 

The comment about low population in leveling zones is pretty much applicable to every MMO after a few months. I played GW2 about 1 month after launch and many zones were almost completely empty - mainly mid-level zones where I must have chosen the least popular option. I never saw anyone in WoW during the trial.

 

I like the FTP system a lot better in SWTOR than any other MMO I've seen. Sure LOTRO allows people to collect turbine points in game, but this is really a technicality. I wouldn't say having to kill 1 trillion wolves followed by 1 trillions orcs followed by 1 trillion bandits is a pleasurable experience. In fact, with the cartel items and unlocks being unbound it means that FTP players can most likely do more for free than any other MMO. If you do enjoy the game and play regularly it's rewarding to subscribe. I don't think that's a bad thing.

 

Hopefully the recent pace of content releases can be sustained and with a bit more care to make sure there are no major bugs.

[GrandMike]

In that case you started playing around February, and are definitely not part of the majority of players which picked up a 6-month subscription at launch, as those ran out around June-July.

 

Ahahahahahahahhahaha, now you know when people started playing better than themsleves ahahahahhahahah

 

EA must start weeding out bad employees lol they do damage the game. We all know they wont, they like "yes men".

 

Everything you have said and will say is pure fiction (or fairy tale if you prefer).

[DuckKing]

Lifeless boxed in static worlds with no day/night cycles. No freedom in space. SWTOR.

[noodlehaus]

you folks ought to know by now that any site or publication that gives a negative review of swtor are bad companies and have questionable credibility... at least according to the people in this forum.

[Drebs]

There definitely isn't the one thing I'd personally be happy to pay for - a way to experience the class stories without all the padding. The closest thing is a 25% XP boost lasting three hours, which barely even warrants this sentence.

 

This. Again and again. I'd pay to experience the stories but I'm just not willing to grind anymore to do it.

[GrandMike]

This. Again and again. I'd pay to experience the stories but I'm just not willing to grind anymore to do it.

 

Unfortunately youd be very dissapointed in how short those are. Thats why they made you grind crap like forever.

Edited November 27, 2012 by GrandMike

[LordRahlik]

I can only say that i love SWToR. It's the best MMO game on the market according to me.

Does it have flaws - yes.

But I still love it.

 

Even if you talk it down a 4 is just ridiculous, eurogamer - your just talking trash.

[Styxx]

This. Again and again. I'd pay to experience the stories but I'm just not willing to grind anymore to do it.

 

5 quests per planet plus the "bonus" after each chapter. Not the 200 hours they claimed. But we all know now that the figure includes the padding too.

[Eillack]

you folks ought to know by now that any site or publication that gives a negative review of swtor are bad companies and have questionable credibility... at least according to the people in this forum.

 

You didn't read the re-review a little bit even did you?

 

There is pointing out bad parts and flaws for MMOs..then there is flat out attacking and trolling. Which Eurogamer is known for.

 

TOR has a nice amount of flaws, but I have the time to wait for them to get ironed out of fixed completely; in general I find much more pros than cons in TOR, hence why I'm here to stay.

[anstalt]

Even if you talk it down a 4 is just ridiculous, eurogamer - your just talking trash.

 

Why is a 4 ridiculous?

 

SW:TOR has 2 unique selling points: voice acting and the Star Wars setting.

 

Every single other part of this game is done better by other MMOs, and the voice acting and star wars setting are done far better in single player RPGs. So, its understandable that the game only gets a "4" rating. Mechanics are poor, endgame is poor, pvp is poor, storyline is poor, crafting is poor, fluff is poor, roleplaying tools are poor......

 

Basically, if you don't like Star Wars and your friends aren't playing TOR then you have no reason to stay as there are plenty of better MMOs out there. Its the only reason I'm still here: for the Star Wars and for my friends.

[Eillack]

Why is a 4 ridiculous?

 

SW:TOR has 2 unique selling points: voice acting and the Star Wars setting.

 

Every single other part of this game is done better by other MMOs, and the voice acting and star wars setting are done far better in single player RPGs. So, its understandable that the game only gets a "4" rating. Mechanics are poor, endgame is poor, pvp is poor, storyline is poor, crafting is poor, fluff is poor, roleplaying tools are poor......

 

Basically, if you don't like Star Wars and your friends aren't playing TOR then you have no reason to stay as there are plenty of better MMOs out there. Its the only reason I'm still here: for the Star Wars and for my friends.

 

You are here then why?

 

Because it sounds like you feel like 98% of this game it utter crap and decided to stay and the forums and stand on your box and tell everyone.

[Temad]

There is an easy way to gauge whether this article is closer to reality or closer to trash.

 

The facts.

 

Since the last review what has happened?

 

Has the game increased subscribers? Has the subscriber base stayed about the same? Has it lost subscribers? Has it bled out subscribers?

 

Has the game become financially viable in its release model?

 

Has the game seen a growth in developers working on it?

 

Has the game seen an increase in customer service and interaction or a decrease? (Forums, news releases etc)

 

Has the game improved its quality of content released from a QA perspective? Has it stayed the same or decreased?

 

Has the parent/owning company gotten solidly behind the game in support of it promising a bright future or has it resigned it to try and make every last buck possible before sending it off the hospice for a slow, painful death (like STO)?

 

 

You can very easily answer these questions and understand that ignoring the first article and focusing on this latest Eurogamer the facts show 4/10 is a well deserved score today.

 

The facts of what has happened to SWTOR show it is a train wreck of a game. A group of people like it, they seem to be trying to convince themselves all over this thread with their sycophant like defense . I don't doubt there are people who are happy with the barely mediocre game SWTOR has turned out to be...bully for you.

 

Facts say many more people, people that used to pay cash to Bioware...disagree.

 

Fake Edit: Oh and for those that keep asking why people who think this game is a 4/10 are still playing...here is some help...we came back to give SWTOR one last shot...for most of us it took just a few days to see it is still a train wreck and we have 20+ days to ride out. So you are going to hear from us as we rightfully pin the blame on Bioware for all to see including people thinking about making the mistake and coming back or starting at all.

[Andryah]

I could care less what Eurogamer has to say, positive or negative.

 

People who base their MMO play and enjoyment on the basis of what any internet site says are being led around by the site rather then their own choices. I get that some live this way, but I see no evidence that it is anything other then a small minority of players.

 

For the most part, MMO haters just use internet reviews to support their own negative views about a game. Yeah, som MMO lovers do as well. So, back to my point.... think for yourselves, don't be spoon fed by internet web sites opinions as they are largely irrelevant. If you have opinions one way or the other, stand up and be counted for your opinion not for echoing some internet web site.

Edited November 27, 2012 by Andryah

[LordArtemis]

I don't think 4/10 is ridiculous any more than I think 8/10 or 9/10 is ridiculous. It is opinion. And frankly arguments can be made to support both scores. It all depends on what you like and what you don't like.

 

I find things I agree with in almost every review I have seen, critical and supportive. The game has some strong faults and incredible pros as well. I have listed pros and cons and will not do it again, but I will say that the highs and lows evened out to an overall 6/10 in my book.

 

What I do find ridiculous is when supporters or detractors try to invalidate each other's opinions, especially when it's players. I guess disagreeing isnt enough.

[Andryah]

I don't think 4/10 is ridiculous any more than I think 8/10 or 9/10 is ridiculous. It is opinion. And frankly arguments can be made to support both scores. It all depends on what you like and what you don't like.

 

Numerical scoring on the internet is largely a waste as it is completely subjective. It's pointless, IMO.

 

As you said, it's someones opinion and why some people think a strangers opinion is more important then their own personal opinion based on experience boggles the mind.

[LordArtemis]

Numerical scoring on the internet is largely a waste as it is completely subjective. It's pointless, IMO.

 

As you said, it's someones opinion and why some people think a strangers opinion is more important then their own personal opinion based on experience boggles the mind.

 

I agree completely Andryah. As time passes I find reviews less and less relevant overall for more than just games. With some things I don't have a choice but to do research and look at what people are saying, but in this case you can try the game for free...

 

There is really no excuse IMO for allowing someone else to give you your opinion instead of just forming your own.

[Fornix]

Numerical scoring on the internet is largely a waste as it is completely subjective. It's pointless, IMO.

 

As you said, it's someones opinion and why some people think a strangers opinion is more important then their own personal opinion based on experience boggles the mind.

 

That's why transparency is key. Unfortunately very few rating sites show which individual factors make up their score charts and by which means the final score is computed. However, those who do so tend to be a lot more reproducable.

[Temad]

People who base their MMO play and enjoyment on the basis of what any internet site says are being led around by the site rather then their own choices. I get that some live this way, but I see no evidence that it is anything other then a small minority of players.

 

I will ask again, what do the facts say?

 

Would you call losing 2 million subscribers (or 1.8 for arguments sake) a small minority being led around or would you say the subscribers that left wholesale drive the article score?

 

Because the facts say the game is not an 8/10 in anyway other than some personal opinions here on this board.

[GrandMike]

No, it's the way time works. However judging by the continued deteriation of your posts, I'm questioning whether you even made it till first grade in order to learn the months of the year...

 

Ill let you to sweat over this huge mathematical problem that any first grader can solve (well in my country anyways, im not so sure about yours any more rofl)

[Goretzu]

In that case you started playing around February, and are definitely not part of the majority of players which picked up a 6-month subscription at launch, as those ran out around June-July.

 

 

I was in Beta and pre-release, I was a critic of the staggered release system at the time if you were around (and I was proved right).

 

I had a bit of free game time with pre-release, I had 1 month of game box time, I had at least 1 month of "free" time given by Bioware for having a L50 in May, and maybe a few more weeks free stuff for some of their down time, and a 6 month sub.

 

My 2nd 6 month sub only ticked over in august or sept (I forget which).

 

Why would I lie about something like that? It would be pointless.

[Vandicus]

I was in Beta and pre-release, I was a critic of the staggered release system at the time if you were around (and I was proved right).

 

I had a bit of free game time with pre-release, I had 1 month of game box time, I had at least 1 month of "free" time given by Bioware for having a L50 in May, and maybe a few more weeks free stuff for some of their down time, and a 6 month sub.

 

My 2nd 6 month sub only ticked over in august or sept (I forget which).

 

Why would I lie about something like that? It would be pointless.

Wait, what were you right about in regards to the staggered release system if you were a critic of it?

 

Things would've been way worse if they had simply let the whole crowd in at once, because we would've had the typical server crashes of most MMO launches like GW2 did.

[Andryah]

I will ask again, what do the facts say?

 

Would you call losing 2 million subscribers (or 1.8 for arguments sake) a small minority being led around or would you say the subscribers that left wholesale drive the article score?

 

Because the facts say the game is not an 8/10 in anyway other than some personal opinions here on this board.

 

1) All MMOs (and this includes WoW expansion packs now days, which draw short term resubs) lose a majority of subscribers within 6 months. The averate loss from launch to +9 months for modern MMOs is >60%. It's the nature of the marketplace these days. So number of people who buy boxes vs who retain long term subscriptions is pointless in today's MMO market place.

 

2) scores presented without objective measure, are pointless in the internet. There is no objective measure for internet scores of products. It's all passionate opinion.. and people who don't like something are more likely to hammer any product very negatively on any internet scoring system (Amazon.com customer reviews is ample evidence of this if you are an Amazon customer and have spent any time sorting through ratings to separate objective from subjective).

Edited November 27, 2012 by Andryah

[LordArtemis]

I will ask again, what do the facts say?

 

Would you call losing 2 million subscribers (or 1.8 for arguments sake) a small minority being led around or would you say the subscribers that left wholesale drive the article score?

 

Because the facts say the game is not an 8/10 in anyway other than some personal opinions here on this board.

 

If I could interject, there are folks that gave the game glowing reviews, at least shortly after launch. Remember, I'm stating facts, not making a statement as to the validity of those particular reviews.

 

And yes, the majority of the playerbase has left the game. Though Andryah and I disagree on the reasons for the lion share of the loss, the fact is that all games do generally suffer from some level of attrition after launch.

 

Now you could say that the many negative reviews recently stand as a fact that the game does not deserve an 8/10, and I would say that, though that might be arguable in general it is your opinion and you are entitled to it...and I might even agree that people are complaining quite a bit about specific things and that should not be ignored.

 

I do not think bad reviews caused the losses personally...if anything I think it is more likely it discouraged people from giving the game a try.

 

I am perfectly fine with someone saying the game is junk as long as they try it first. That is really the only place where I have pause.