Originally posted by BetaBlocka Another review from a mainstream, well respected website rolls in with a poor review...
Let me guess...Toms Hardware cannot be counted as a credible review source amirite?
It's just hard to take a review seriously when people are obviously angry at the game, they might be letting their emotions cloud their judgement. Proper reviews should be done neutrally, not pick a side and bash bash or close your eyes and say it's butterflies.
A classic, text-book fan response to someone criticizing "their game".
The reviewer went into the game with a neutral perspective. There's no other way they could have gone in, having never played the game before. They may have anticipated a certain kind of experience... but they couldn't have reacted either way until they actually played it themselves. And their reaction could have gone either way.
Their experiences influenced their "feelings" towards it, which was quite clearly frustration at its myriad issues, and boredom at its design. They're quite detailed and specific about what bothered them about the game. It's probably one of the more detailed reviews I've seen.
Incidentally, the issues they point out echo many that have been stated elsewhere, by others - players and reviewers alike. But I suppose they were all "letting emotions cloud their judgment" too, right? After all, that's the only way someone can possibly be critical of "your game", right?
Would you be talking about "emotions clouding judgment" if the review had come back positive? I'm gonna totally not go out on a limb here and say 'no, you wouldn't have'.
Enough already with the excuses and dismissals. ESO has not done as well as some of you would like to think it would. As newly launched MMORPGs go, it's mediocre by many standards - which have been discussed and illustrated at length by now.
It's not the wildly successful and unanimously revered release you were hoping it would be. They made a lot of mistakes, they had a sloppy, bug-ridden launch... and people are talking about it. Deal with it.
Originally posted by Moar61 Regardless if his points and critiques are true his emotions get in the way making it a pretty useless review.
Only if you're seeking a convenient way to ignore or disqualify a review you disagree with.
Any port in a storm, though, right?
If his points and critiques are true (which, in many cases, they are... demonstrably), then they're quite useful regardless of his "emotions". For example, his statements on the heavily copied-and-pasted dungeons hold true regardless of his emotional state over that fact. To say "well, we can't trust his statements on the dungeons, because he seems angry" is about as intellectually dishonest as you can get.
And if not, then the opinions of those who are expressing overt joy and happiness over the game shouldn't be trusted, either. There's been some pretty heavy emoting going on by a number of ESO's fans. I guess we have to dismiss all their remarks on how amazing it is. Because "emotions". Right?
Originally posted by bcbully People complaining about a game launching with 30 unique dungeons and 100 variations...
So, we're calling a hole in the ground thats comprised of corridor, room, corridor, room a "dungeon" now?
Fine, then I guess you could say that WoW launched with over 100 dungeons then too.
This is the part that I just have a hard time coming to grips with. This kind of version of "open world dungeons" Granted, I've never play WoW...I came up through years of EQ...then Vangaurd, etc.
Do players really even consider these Open World Dungeons?
To me an open world dungeon provides hours of solo and group content with many different difficulties depending on where you decide to head to. The should be many different named mobs....demi-bosses...and at least one bad-ass boss that essentially takes a raid to take down. A proper dungeon takes many crawls before you get to know the different areas, traps, bosses, secret passages, loot drops, camps, etc. Examples would be upper/lower Guk.....Old Seb.....Dragon Necropolis....Temple of Veeshan....Skyshrine
I was pretty excited to hear that ESO was going to have open world dungeons.
In the end a pretty big let down... it seems there's a definition of open world dungeon that I wasn't familiar with.
WOW, 104 total dungeons? Spread across 3 factions. And people bashed me for saying this game didn't have the depth of Skyrim's exploration and their density of "Point's of Interest". I bet there's close to 104 dungeons in one corner of Skyrim's map.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by Gravarg Just wondering why all you bashers aren't in your game of choice right now?
For the same reason that people who enjoy the game constantly feel the need to defend it.
This is a discussion forum about this game. People coming from the outside and telling players that it's crap is not the same thing as those players responding to being deliberately provoked. It would be symmetric if ESO players felt the need to go to discussion forums about other games and tell those people that what they're enjoying is garbage.
I wonder what Silentpc.com and storagereview.com will have to say with their reviews?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Originally posted by BetaBlocka Another review from a mainstream, well respected website rolls in with a poor review...
Let me guess...Toms Hardware cannot be counted as a credible review source amirite?
It's just hard to take a review seriously when people are obviously angry at the game, they might be letting their emotions cloud their judgement. Proper reviews should be done neutrally, not pick a side and bash bash or close your eyes and say it's butterflies.
A classic, text-book fan response to someone criticizing "their game".
The reviewer went into the game with a neutral perspective. There's no other way they could have gone in, having never played the game before. They may have anticipated a certain kind of experience... but they couldn't have reacted either way until they actually played it themselves. And their reaction could have gone either way.
Their experiences influenced their "feelings" towards it, which was quite clearly frustration at its myriad issues, and boredom at its design. They're quite detailed and specific about what bothered them about the game. It's probably one of the more detailed reviews I've seen.
Incidentally, the issues they point out echo many that have been stated elsewhere, by others - players and reviewers alike. But I suppose they were all "letting emotions cloud their judgment" too, right? After all, that's the only way someone can possibly be critical of "your game", right?
Would you be talking about "emotions clouding judgment" if the review had come back positive? I'm gonna totally not go out on a limb here and say 'no, you wouldn't have'.
Enough already with the excuses and dismissals. ESO has not done as well as some of you would like to think it would. As newly launched MMORPGs go, it's mediocre by many standards - which have been discussed and illustrated at length by now.
It's not the wildly successful and unanimously revered release you were hoping it would be. They made a lot of mistakes, they had a sloppy, bug-ridden launch... and people are talking about it. Deal with it.
Sigh... I would have said the same thing, again, I'm not saying he has no credit, but it's harder to take him seriously, not impossible, I still think IGNreview of 7.8 is far too light on the game's real issues.
He says that quests that the starting area is "achingly dull", thats very informative and completely dependent on personal opinion, a review should be neutral so you could actually inform the players of whats a fact first and then you throw in your personal experience if it's relevant.
A review is supposed to inform players on what to expect, if you say that quests revolve around more talking to other people rather than variety of objectives and you might spend more time talking than fighting, that would be a neutral review, if you say quests "I found myself strained not to skip the voiceover dialogue, mashing the first option repeatedly just to get to the next leg in the quest line" or "the bland step-and-fetch-it quests that never, ever end and seem to have no meaning beyond dragging your character along a linear theme park-style ride from point A to point B" that's your personal opinion and you could simply dismiss this statement because not everyone will have the same opinion. I can't remembet which site, but one site gave a 5/10 review that I actually agreed because it tackled the issues the game have and not just what the reviewer liked about the game. Theres a whole world of differences between "issues with the game" and "things I didn't like".
Do players really even consider these Open World Dungeons?
Apparently ESO fans do. /shrug
An open world dungeon is nothing more than a non-instanced dungeon. They can be big or small, unique or cookie-cutter, good or shitty, but if it ain't instanced it's an open world dungeon by definition.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Do players really even consider these Open World Dungeons?
Apparently ESO fans do. /shrug
An open world dungeon is nothing more than a non-instanced dungeon. They can be big or small, unique or cookie-cutter, good or shitty, but if it ain't instanced it's an open world dungeon by definition.
Correct, but as someone stated earlier, WoW has hundreads of these then. Skyrim, thousands. I see them as , open world caves.
WoWs has a lot of holes in the groud that anyone can go into but they do not call them dungeons. Those are called caves. Dungeons have an old fantasy game and book idea that conjures up images of passages,stone hewn rooms with complicated paths that get you lost and you die horribly in them.
Still seem to be a lot of people confused by the whole dungeon thing.
1. Each zone as a traditional, instanced dungeon. Your party(tank/healer/dps) and no one else.
2. Each zone has a large public dungeon. They are all different. Usually have story driven quest, 6-8 mob trash packs, minibosses, and an end boss.
3. Each zone has several delves(this is what people focusing on the copy/paste "public dungeons" are talking about). They are pretty much the equivalent to all those pointless little draugh/dwemer/bandit caves in Skyrim. You run through and kill everything and there is a "boss" at the end. If you spend 15-20 hours doing an entire zone these little things(unless you're really bad at your class) will take about 30 minutes of that time total.
Delves are so little of the total content they could remove them and it wouldn't make a noticeable different.
Most of the game takes place in the open world in quest specific areas that are not the same as the little copy/paste delves. This is where you're going through forts, dungeons, sewers, villages, ruins, temples, caves, Oblivion, etc.
Do players really even consider these Open World Dungeons?
Apparently ESO fans do. /shrug
An open world dungeon is nothing more than a non-instanced dungeon. They can be big or small, unique or cookie-cutter, good or shitty, but if it ain't instanced it's an open world dungeon by definition.
Correct, but as someone stated earlier, WoW has hundreads of these then. Skyrim, thousands. I see them as , open world caves.
WOW has a few. Rift has a couple, GW2 has some. But Skyrim? ... you do know that you're there all alone so the whole game is instanced just for you, right?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Do players really even consider these Open World Dungeons?
Apparently ESO fans do. /shrug
An open world dungeon is nothing more than a non-instanced dungeon. They can be big or small, unique or cookie-cutter, good or shitty, but if it ain't instanced it's an open world dungeon by definition.
But they are instanced. You zone into and out of them. Sure it's not your personal instance, but it is instanced. Instead of capping the player count to one, they have it set to who knows what. I doubt if 100 people all zoned into of these caves at the same time that you would see all 100 of them in the same cave instance.
Do players really even consider these Open World Dungeons?
Apparently ESO fans do. /shrug
An open world dungeon is nothing more than a non-instanced dungeon. They can be big or small, unique or cookie-cutter, good or shitty, but if it ain't instanced it's an open world dungeon by definition.
But they are instanced. You zone into and out of them. Sure it's not your personal instance, but it is instanced. Instead of capping the player count to one, they have it set to who knows what. I doubt if 100 people all zoned into of these caves that you would see all 100 of them in the same cave instance.
Sure... if you want to get technical Cyroddil is instanced and in all MMOs with servers, each server is a separate instance... does that make all MMOs 100% instanced?
Technically yes but people without OCD about terminology all know what is meant by an instanced dungeon or raid vs. a non-instanced one... semantic arguments about this are just silly.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
This review struck me the type given to bad movies where ripping on how bad the movie is the only enjoyment a reviewer gets out of it.
The copy pasta aspects are just one small part of how he takes issue with the game. He doesn't bash them much on the bugs, but the design choices. Generic fantasy attached to a generic MMO.
Originally posted by Gravarg To put it in perspective, you complain about a game that launches with ~30 unique dungeon lay outs...You do realize that is actually alot. WoW only had 14 dungeons at launch...if you want to compare things, and not be mindless bash-addicts. People make me laugh. The game isn't going F2P. If it's not your cup of tea, you better look elsewhere. Just wondering why all you bashers aren't in your game of choice right now? Perhaps it's because you are not an MMO player, but a transplant from the RTS or FPS world. MMOs play and have different goals than RTS and FPS games. If all you're going to do is hate on every game that is ever launched, then you sir are a troll.
Go back and add up every single one of these in Vanilla WoW and add them to your count before you make such statements.
You can even count only the ones that have named mobs and/or had quest objectives in them.
Do players really even consider these Open World Dungeons?
Apparently ESO fans do. /shrug
An open world dungeon is nothing more than a non-instanced dungeon. They can be big or small, unique or cookie-cutter, good or shitty, but if it ain't instanced it's an open world dungeon by definition.
But they are instanced. You zone into and out of them. Sure it's not your personal instance, but it is instanced. Instead of capping the player count to one, they have it set to who knows what. I doubt if 100 people all zoned into of these caves that you would see all 100 of them in the same cave instance.
Sure... if you want to get technical Cyroddil is instanced and in all MMOs with servers, each server is a separate instance... does that make all MMOs 100% instanced?
Technically yes but people without OCD about terminology all know what is meant by an instanced dungeon or raid vs. a non-instanced one... semantic arguments about this are just silly.
Yes, all MMOs are instanced (look up object oriented programming) but that is not the topic here. It is on ESO solo dungeons and you wanted to "correct" me by giving me your definition of what an Open World Dungeon is. So I told you the ESO solo dungeons are instanced and that makes the argument "silly"? It's about as semantic as the dungeons being labeled as "solo" on the game map. You to want accuse someone of being silly? I would start with the ZOS devs first.
Originally posted by Gravarg Just wondering why all you bashers aren't in your game of choice right now?
For the same reason that people who enjoy the game constantly feel the need to defend it.
The point I was making was it seems all you trolls just sit here in the forums bashing every MMO. Looking through people's posting history, the majority of people on this site only bash everything and never right anything positive about anything. If you focus on the bad in anything, you'll never see the good in anything.
I think I'm one of the few people that ever post at least one positive thing in every game forum I've ever posted in. Eve is a good example. I absolutely hate the menu-fest it is, but I don't think it's a bad game, and I don't spend 40 hours a week in it's forums bashing it. Some people need to get a life lol.
Comments
^This
And ESO is the best MMORPG I have played in a long time.
www.90and9.net
www.prophecymma.com
Fine, then I guess you could say that WoW launched with over 100 dungeons then too.
A classic, text-book fan response to someone criticizing "their game".
The reviewer went into the game with a neutral perspective. There's no other way they could have gone in, having never played the game before. They may have anticipated a certain kind of experience... but they couldn't have reacted either way until they actually played it themselves. And their reaction could have gone either way.
Their experiences influenced their "feelings" towards it, which was quite clearly frustration at its myriad issues, and boredom at its design. They're quite detailed and specific about what bothered them about the game. It's probably one of the more detailed reviews I've seen.
Incidentally, the issues they point out echo many that have been stated elsewhere, by others - players and reviewers alike. But I suppose they were all "letting emotions cloud their judgment" too, right? After all, that's the only way someone can possibly be critical of "your game", right?
Would you be talking about "emotions clouding judgment" if the review had come back positive? I'm gonna totally not go out on a limb here and say 'no, you wouldn't have'.
Enough already with the excuses and dismissals. ESO has not done as well as some of you would like to think it would. As newly launched MMORPGs go, it's mediocre by many standards - which have been discussed and illustrated at length by now.
It's not the wildly successful and unanimously revered release you were hoping it would be. They made a lot of mistakes, they had a sloppy, bug-ridden launch... and people are talking about it. Deal with it.
Only if you're seeking a convenient way to ignore or disqualify a review you disagree with.
Any port in a storm, though, right?
If his points and critiques are true (which, in many cases, they are... demonstrably), then they're quite useful regardless of his "emotions". For example, his statements on the heavily copied-and-pasted dungeons hold true regardless of his emotional state over that fact. To say "well, we can't trust his statements on the dungeons, because he seems angry" is about as intellectually dishonest as you can get.
And if not, then the opinions of those who are expressing overt joy and happiness over the game shouldn't be trusted, either. There's been some pretty heavy emoting going on by a number of ESO's fans. I guess we have to dismiss all their remarks on how amazing it is. Because "emotions". Right?
This is the part that I just have a hard time coming to grips with. This kind of version of "open world dungeons" Granted, I've never play WoW...I came up through years of EQ...then Vangaurd, etc.
Do players really even consider these Open World Dungeons?
To me an open world dungeon provides hours of solo and group content with many different difficulties depending on where you decide to head to. The should be many different named mobs....demi-bosses...and at least one bad-ass boss that essentially takes a raid to take down. A proper dungeon takes many crawls before you get to know the different areas, traps, bosses, secret passages, loot drops, camps, etc. Examples would be upper/lower Guk.....Old Seb.....Dragon Necropolis....Temple of Veeshan....Skyshrine
I was pretty excited to hear that ESO was going to have open world dungeons.
In the end a pretty big let down... it seems there's a definition of open world dungeon that I wasn't familiar with.
IMO, ESO has 0 open world dungeons
Palazious <The Vindicators> Darkfall
Palazious r40, rr45 SW War
Palazious 50 Pirate PoTBS
Palazious 35 Sorcerer Vanguard
Palazious 75 wizard EQ
Paladori 50 Champion LOTRO
Poppa Reaver bugged at rank15
WOW, 104 total dungeons? Spread across 3 factions. And people bashed me for saying this game didn't have the depth of Skyrim's exploration and their density of "Point's of Interest". I bet there's close to 104 dungeons in one corner of Skyrim's map.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
This is a discussion forum about this game. People coming from the outside and telling players that it's crap is not the same thing as those players responding to being deliberately provoked. It would be symmetric if ESO players felt the need to go to discussion forums about other games and tell those people that what they're enjoying is garbage.
I was waiting for this review...now I know.
I wonder what Silentpc.com and storagereview.com will have to say with their reviews?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Sigh... I would have said the same thing, again, I'm not saying he has no credit, but it's harder to take him seriously, not impossible, I still think IGNreview of 7.8 is far too light on the game's real issues.
He says that quests that the starting area is "achingly dull", thats very informative and completely dependent on personal opinion, a review should be neutral so you could actually inform the players of whats a fact first and then you throw in your personal experience if it's relevant.
A review is supposed to inform players on what to expect, if you say that quests revolve around more talking to other people rather than variety of objectives and you might spend more time talking than fighting, that would be a neutral review, if you say quests "I found myself strained not to skip the voiceover dialogue, mashing the first option repeatedly just to get to the next leg in the quest line" or "the bland step-and-fetch-it quests that never, ever end and seem to have no meaning beyond dragging your character along a linear theme park-style ride from point A to point B" that's your personal opinion and you could simply dismiss this statement because not everyone will have the same opinion. I can't remembet which site, but one site gave a 5/10 review that I actually agreed because it tackled the issues the game have and not just what the reviewer liked about the game. Theres a whole world of differences between "issues with the game" and "things I didn't like".
Apparently ESO fans do. /shrug
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
An open world dungeon is nothing more than a non-instanced dungeon. They can be big or small, unique or cookie-cutter, good or shitty, but if it ain't instanced it's an open world dungeon by definition.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Correct, but as someone stated earlier, WoW has hundreads of these then. Skyrim, thousands. I see them as , open world caves.
http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/the-elder-scrolls-online-review/1900-6415741/
Manasong Gamespot gave it a 6 not a 7.9
WoWs has a lot of holes in the groud that anyone can go into but they do not call them dungeons. Those are called caves. Dungeons have an old fantasy game and book idea that conjures up images of passages,stone hewn rooms with complicated paths that get you lost and you die horribly in them.
Still seem to be a lot of people confused by the whole dungeon thing.
1. Each zone as a traditional, instanced dungeon. Your party(tank/healer/dps) and no one else.
2. Each zone has a large public dungeon. They are all different. Usually have story driven quest, 6-8 mob trash packs, minibosses, and an end boss.
3. Each zone has several delves(this is what people focusing on the copy/paste "public dungeons" are talking about). They are pretty much the equivalent to all those pointless little draugh/dwemer/bandit caves in Skyrim. You run through and kill everything and there is a "boss" at the end. If you spend 15-20 hours doing an entire zone these little things(unless you're really bad at your class) will take about 30 minutes of that time total.
Delves are so little of the total content they could remove them and it wouldn't make a noticeable different.
Most of the game takes place in the open world in quest specific areas that are not the same as the little copy/paste delves. This is where you're going through forts, dungeons, sewers, villages, ruins, temples, caves, Oblivion, etc.
WOW has a few. Rift has a couple, GW2 has some. But Skyrim? ... you do know that you're there all alone so the whole game is instanced just for you, right?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
My mistake, need to find which site gave it a 7.9.
Edit: It was IGN who gave it a 7.8, my memory kinda sucks.
But they are instanced. You zone into and out of them. Sure it's not your personal instance, but it is instanced. Instead of capping the player count to one, they have it set to who knows what. I doubt if 100 people all zoned into of these caves at the same time that you would see all 100 of them in the same cave instance.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
Sure... if you want to get technical Cyroddil is instanced and in all MMOs with servers, each server is a separate instance... does that make all MMOs 100% instanced?
Technically yes but people without OCD about terminology all know what is meant by an instanced dungeon or raid vs. a non-instanced one... semantic arguments about this are just silly.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
This review struck me the type given to bad movies where ripping on how bad the movie is the only enjoyment a reviewer gets out of it.
The copy pasta aspects are just one small part of how he takes issue with the game. He doesn't bash them much on the bugs, but the design choices. Generic fantasy attached to a generic MMO.
Go back and add up every single one of these in Vanilla WoW and add them to your count before you make such statements.
You can even count only the ones that have named mobs and/or had quest objectives in them.
Yes, all MMOs are instanced (look up object oriented programming) but that is not the topic here. It is on ESO solo dungeons and you wanted to "correct" me by giving me your definition of what an Open World Dungeon is. So I told you the ESO solo dungeons are instanced and that makes the argument "silly"? It's about as semantic as the dungeons being labeled as "solo" on the game map. You to want accuse someone of being silly? I would start with the ZOS devs first.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
The point I was making was it seems all you trolls just sit here in the forums bashing every MMO. Looking through people's posting history, the majority of people on this site only bash everything and never right anything positive about anything. If you focus on the bad in anything, you'll never see the good in anything.
I think I'm one of the few people that ever post at least one positive thing in every game forum I've ever posted in. Eve is a good example. I absolutely hate the menu-fest it is, but I don't think it's a bad game, and I don't spend 40 hours a week in it's forums bashing it. Some people need to get a life lol.