I'd rate it about 5/10 myself. The gameplay is stale and bland, its been done too much, usual boring quest hub to quest hub crap, a supposedly action oriented combat system (that really isin't). Weird char designs (too small torso/head compared to the rest but this is a personal thing moreso than a issue with the gameplay). Game that seems to be all about "ohhh this girl has big knockers and we'll make sure you get a facefull of them anytime there is a cutscene/image with one!" All in all the game was a major letdown, I got bored of it a bit into it, it just wasn't intersting to play for me at all, I almost fell asleep once and I was wide awake before I started playing, 30 mins later I was so bored I was falling asleep sitting up.
I'd probally have liked blade and soul more if the char designs didn't look so weird, and if it came out before tera did in english.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Tough score for the 5th most played game in Korea. But everyone does have different tastes...
It's not the 5th most played game in Korea though, are you by chance confusing internet gaming cafe listings for Korean national charts?
If you are then those gaming cafe listings are not even all gaming cafes, they are very selective and give no real numbers about how many cafes make up the charts. Also different charts also give different numbers.
Those charts are as stupid as Xfire or Steam to judge the popularity of an mmo, from what I remember MMO internet bang cafes make up around 15% of the Koeran MMO market.
They give a small slice of mmo gamers, they are in a placement that is easily abused by big comapnies like NCsoft giving them money and by their nature they favor games that are shallow.
Heyo! I wrote this review, so I'm happy to chat about the game with people if they want to have an honest discussion.
Bill's got the right of it, I had no say in those older games scores. But I do think that its worth understanding that games are scored based on the larger context of what they exist in. I won't comment on whether or not I agree with what PCG gave WildStar or SWTOR in terms of scores, but those were also games that launched years ago and didn't feel nearly as tired at the time as Blade and Soul does now (for me).
Another big thing to understand is that, in terms of raw features, both SWTOR and WildStar are vastly "wider" games than Blade and Soul, with robust housing systems, tons of meaningful group content for new players (Blade and Soul has about 6 "traditional" dungeons, and the rest are more like mini-dungeons), and, in the case of each, really distinguishing elements that really set them apart from the pack (SWTOR's amazing story and unique legacy system and WildStar's combat, great housing, and unique personality -- also a dozen or so little tweaks that make playing really enjoyable). Blade and Soul does have great PVP, but I didn't like how it felt chained off until you leveled fully -- it's a philosophy other MMORPGs use ("Just wait, the real game begins at the endgame!") that I'm very tired of and feel is particularly harmful to Blade and Soul because of how the rest of the game feels lacking.
The problem is you gave a severely immature biased review. It is ok to not like a game, but you really came off sounding like a Troll. That isn't anything you can say at this point or there isn't any amount of fans that can dig you out of the hole that your review has put you in. You lost respect from many people who have truly played Blade and Soul.
Not really sure how I sounded like a troll. People obviously seem to be upset that I didn't enjoy Blade and Soul's stylistic approach to characters (and, to be fair, I did say in the review that the art style would be contentious), but there seems to be this idea that I arbitrarily docked the game 20 points just on that fact alone, which is false. Even if the art style wasn't what it is, the game would still be a by-the-books F2P MMORPG in a market absolutely saturated by them. Its best qualities would still be locked away behind a very pointless grind that does a poor job of hiding how shallow it can be, along with its bigger problems.
But at the end of the day, my opinion of Blade and Soul does not need to stand in your way of enjoying it. There was no great injustice done when I wrote that review, just like how you might not enjoy a certain book or movie that someone else does. You can certainly try and blame it on the fact that I didn't "truly" play the game, but I did and I found it very mediocre, which the score reflects.
Anyway, you sound like you're really enjoying the game which is great! Reviews aren't meant to paint those who enjoy things that the reviewer doesn't as people with poor tastes or any of the things I get the sense that a lot of people feel. They are meant to be an assessment of the game through the lens of the person playing it. Just because I found its design to be tedious and boring doesn't mean that you're wrong for feeling differently. That's the beauty of any form of media, each person can have a different interpretation of it! Even reading these comments you can see that opinions on the game seem to differ greatly, so why you feel that my review has dug me into a hole I don't understand.
Hope that helps clear some things up!
Hey dude, you may already be aware of this, but in case you aren't...
We are not a very happy community, and the people bashing your review are just doing something that happens a lot around here. A large part of our community will flame and troll every game but their own, because their game is perfect and everyone needs to play it.
It was cool of you to come and explain why you wrote that, but it is a waste of time trying to reason with people that hate your review. For those people that are making BnS their main game right now, anything below an 85% would have ticked them off. They aren't interested in the truth about flaws in their game, they are interested in promoting it, getting more players, and making sure it stays around for a long time.
Edit: It is also worth noting that tough reviews are welcome. We complain a lot about reviews being too high, even on our own site. I remember one of the mods (I think Bill) pointing out that MMORPG.com actually consistently rates below average scores, because users were accusing them of rating games advertised here too highly.
Hey dude, you may already be aware of this, but in case you aren't...
We are not a very happy community, and the people bashing your review are just doing something that happens a lot around here. A large part of our community will flame and troll every game but their own, because their game is perfect and everyone needs to play it.
It was cool of you to come and explain why you wrote that, but it is a waste of time trying to reason with people that hate your review. For those people that are making BnS their main game right now, anything below an 85% would have ticked them off. They aren't interested in the truth about flaws in their game, they are interested in promoting it, getting more players, and making sure it stays around for a long time.
Edit: It is also worth noting that tough reviews are welcome. We complain a lot about reviews being too high, even on our own site. I remember one of the mods (I think Bill) pointing out that MMORPG.com actually consistently rates below average scores, because users were accusing them of rating games advertised here too highly.
Haha yeah, people certainly are passionate about their favorite games. I realize that there's going to be people who are never happy with an explanation. But there are a few here who have been really respectful in sharing their opinion of the game and/or my review of it, so I as a writer here I wanted to take the time to address them and maybe give some more understanding to how reviews are written.
There's a lot of stuff about "objectivity" being thrown around, which is interesting since few, if any, outlets make any statements about their reviews being objective based. So if I can jump in and explain some of that, people might not make the misunderstanding in the future when they read something that isn't in line with their own personal views on a game. We all have our bias, even the people flaming me for having mine. The difference is that I'm making an effort to use my bias to enhance the conversation around a game, not stop it altogether.
The art of criticism doesn't need to be a big secret, but it is a skill that needs to be trained and understood. I'm not saying I'm an amazing critic by any stretch, but I see a lot of people's negative responses also have arguments that weaken the power of criticism as a whole and diminish the conversation surrounding video games too. They are, in a sense, logical fallacies.
For example, a lot of the responses I'm reading are things like "Well, if you don't like boobs, just turn off the physics or don't play a Gon since they're so sexualized."
Criticism is essentially a discussion on the components of a game, and so anything that enables that discussion to happen on a deeper level is a good thing. That's why I don't feel like topics like "boobs" should be off limits, as some people obviously wish.
When your argument in defense of something is that "If you don't like it, don't play it", all you're doing is limiting the conversation around a game, effectively diminishing our ability to engage and examine it. That's not a good thing. Especially because, more often than not, that argument comes from a selfish place. The person saying it usually feels threatened because maybe they enjoy that aspect that is being critiqued, so instead of engaging it honestly they try and stifle the conversation so they don't have to feel judged or, even worse, address why they like that particular aspect. In a wider context, that weakens any form of media as a whole because it's an attempt to never examine the motivations and consequences of a thing. In many cases, people respond that way because they don't want to be honest about where that conversation might lead or what it may or may not imply, so they lash out.
There's certainly nothing wrong with sexuality in games, but there is a lot to be said about how sophisticated the portrayal of that sexuality can be and how it colors our perception of sexuality in the real world. Some games handle it really well, or they create characters that can be attractive and sexual without resorting to shallow tricks. I feel like a lot of the characters in Blade and Soul are one dimensional, so instead of making sexually attractive characters, they simply slapped a giant pair of boobs and a skimpy bikini top on them in an effort to achieve the same result. And it's just not effective at all. Thus I find the portrayal of human sexuality in Blade and Soul to be about as sophisticated as a pair of boobs drawn in the margins of a middle school textbook, and I think game designers can do much better.
Anyway, this conversation is fun and I like talking with people, so I'm down to keep chatting with those who have interesting things to say!
Oh yeah performance is all over the place. Even on a decent gaming rig, stutters and frame dips were common enough to be really annoying.
In Blade and Souls, there is this extra expectation that everything should be fluid and graceful, but the constant hitches really detract from that feeling. Windstriding is another area that I think was really poorly designed (though I didn't get to touch on it in the review) and really detracts from the game. Mount systems have been around forever, so why they decided to scrap convenient faster travel for a system that makes you expend stamina rapidly and regain it painfully slow is really bizarre.
I like the idea of windstriding in theory, but its implementation is just not good. I was constantly getting stuck on level geometry, causing my character to run in place (on things even as minor as a single stair), and the levels are often so flat and spaced out that you rarely get a chance to use the glide effectively. Also, why do monsters pull you out of windstriding when they damage you? Monster populations are so dense on the narrow maps that getting from point A to point B easily can be so frustrating when monsters you don't even have a quest to kill are constantly aggroing you and pulling you into combat, which has a really slow movement speed. Then, when you finally kill the thing, sometimes it takes dozens of seconds before the game recognizes you're out of combat, leaving you to move at a dreadfully slow pace until it does. I suspect it might be glitchy too, as I've had a few instances in single-player dungeons where the game never recognized combat was over and I had to slowly run back to the entrance to leave (and it wasn't one of the dungeons with the convenient teleports at the end).
Anyway, just a few other pain points in Blade and Soul.
As fair as I want to be with you regarding your review, these are the type of examples given by you that tell me that you weren't as fair as you should have been with your review. Aside from the point that windstriding can be viewed as a subjective enjoyment, the points that you put out as making windstriding as having been poorly designed are not factually grounded in fact. Personally, I have no problem maintaining my stamina for as long as necessary. Once you attain all of your windstriding skills, of which there are about a good half dozen of them, you can windstride for long periods of time without running out of stamina at all. Its just a matter of juggling between all of your windstriding skills, coupled with taking advantage of the many mountains and hills, to be able to travel for long periods at fast speeds without breaking a stride. In addition, there is nothing painfully slow about the regaining of stamina. It regains extremely quickly, and it even regains while gliding. The fact that you fail to realize this tells me that you did not care to play the game long enough to give it a fair score.
Regarding aggro while windstriding, well navigating the dangers of the world while windstriding is part strategy and part fun. Why should there be the expectation that windstriding is safe travel in this dangerous world. That's an unrealistic expectation. The strategy of utilizing the terrain while windstriding is part of the fun of the game. If a mob aggros you, you drop down and fight them. Sometimes you drop down in the middle of numerous mobs and it presents you with a challenging combat to survive. Combat is fun, this shouldn't be viewed as an inconvenience.
Aside from that is the matter of your judging the game for what it is not. It is obvious that BnS is not a full-featured MMORPG so it shouldn't be judged on that scale. What it is, is a hybrid MMORPG that features excellent action combat, very good arena PvP, and OwPvP for those that chose to engage in it. It also features a very unique system of PvP engagement requiring those who do not wish to engage in PvP to simply not wear the required PvP outfit which is a system that can be very appealing to a PvE centric player, and heads above any other system of OwPvP used to date (Ie., flagging, OwPvP @ Level 30 etc). And there is also the grouping dynamic that allows a player to find groups not only withing their own server (F7), but also cross-server (F8). This is done exceptionally well grouping players together with very little wait by allowing them to make the choice to either form their own groups, to group with only players in their own server, or finding a cross-server group if they so desire.
The cinematics and voice acting are also very well done, and the world is aesthetically quite pleasing offering a variety of scenic settings. Unlike the Wildstar world setting which though liked by some, was quite universally criticized by many. I personally hated the Wildstar world setting but i recognize that this is a personal preference and would not downgrade a game for it if I were a professional reviewer and was assigned to provide a fair review of the game.
Lastly, I can't emphasize enough the importance of accurately categorizing a game and reviewing for what it is, what it does, and how it does it, and not for what it isn't, what it doesn't do, and how it doesn't do it. A fair reviewer does not compare an economy car against a luxury car and then detracts points in their review of the economy car because it isn't luxurious. It compares the economy car to other economy cars and renders a fair review based on that comparison. BnS is a hybrid MMORPG. It does an outstanding job of accomplishing to do what it intended to do very well. And that is the barometer by which it should be reviewed.
I disagree with his whining about "breast physics"...boobs have physics in real life too. It's a shame he wastes a whole paragraph to show his insecurity about breasts.
Blade and Soul is a very shallow PVP game aimed at the Korean internet gaming cafe market (it's an incredibly niche title aimed at a specific playerbase), that's why they were in no rush to bring it to the west. It will lose players very fast over the coming months because it's not aimed at home gamers at all and that's all of the western market, it's aimed at the kind of people who play games in an internet cafe and want quick and fun gaming (the starcraft 2 crowd). Just think if you're in a gaming cafe, what kind of game would you want to play? a heavily story based pve game or a fun mash and smash PVP game? It has great combat, no tanks or healers all dps, and does PVP really well.
Home gamers prefer a game with meat on it, that they can get stuck into. Something like Gw2, Tera or Black desert. Compared to those Blade and Soul is a tiny little rainwater pool, what it does it does really well (pvp) but it's not going to be good enough to keep western players invested because as I say...it's a one trick pony aimed at a specific market that does not exist here.
It tops the internet gaming cafe charts (which is 18% of the korean mmo market) in Korea because it was made to do so, not so much in terms of the vast majority or home gamers though (korean and western), that's why it will have some of the worst retention issues of any mmo.
Blade and Soul is a very shallow PVP game aimed at the Korean internet gaming cafe market (it's an incredibly niche title aimed at a specific playerbase), that's why they were in no rush to bring it to the west. It will lose players very fast over the coming months because it's not aimed at home gamers at all and that's all of the western market, it's aimed at the kind of people who play games in an internet cafe and want quick and fun gaming (the starcraft 2 crowd). Just think if you're in a gaming cafe, what kind of game would you want to play? a heavily story based pve game or a fun mash and smash PVP game? It has great combat, no tanks or healers all dps, and does PVP really well.
Home gamers prefer a game with meat on it, that they can get stuck into. Something like Gw2, Tera or Black desert. Compared to those Blade and Soul is a tiny little rainwater pool, what it does it does really well (pvp) but it's not going to be good enough to keep western players invested because as I say...it's a one trick pony aimed at a specific market that does not exist here.
It tops the internet gaming cafe charts (which is 18% of the korean mmo market) in Korea because it was made to do so, not so much in terms of the vast majority or home gamers though (korean and western), that's why it will have some of the worst retention issues of any mmo.
I agree with a lot of points in your post but one that I vehemently disagree with is your prediction that it targets a specific market that does not exist here. The reason it is so popular in the east is because of its Esport excellence. When you say that this market doesn't exist here you are making the assumption that players in NA/EU are not Esport oriented. While that may turn out to be true, it has yet to be confirmed. Personally, I am of the opinion that this market does, in fact, exist here. It just simply hasn't been realized. There is a reason why games like LoL, MOBAs and FPS games have millions of people playing them. And that reason is grounded behind the same PvP game mechanic featured in BnS. Only time will tell, but when it does I will make sure to necro this thread. By the same token, if does not, feel free to do the same. I am quite confident that I will be vindicated in my prediction. That said, if I am not, I will humbly admit I was wrong. Time will tell.
You say things like my analysis of windstriding isn't grounded in fact, and then start your defense of them with "Personally," -- so already you're admitting that your take on windstriding is just as ungrounded in fact as mine is. In addition, you take your disagreement with my opinion and use it to jump to conclusions about how much time I've invested in the game as a way to discredit my argument. You should see if there's a better way of dismantling my opinions without resorting to claims which you can't support.
The fact is, I found windstriding to be a unique idea that rarely catered to the potential of its strengths. This was further exacerbated by other elements, like the awful quest design, which I felt pushed me towards "rushing" through the game because so little of its moment-to-moment gameplay was satisfying. It's a vicious downward cycle: The more unsatisfying a moment of the game is, the more I want to push through it to find something that is satisfying, and the more I run into obstacles preventing me from doing that (monster aggro).
Because the game basically has a couple hundred quests requiring you to kill a couple thousand creatures, and all of it feels tedious, I resented the idea of killing a monster that wasn't tied to a quest. So being pulled into combat by a thing I have no interest in killing and being forced to fight became very frustrating because it was actively preventing me from getting where I wanted to go.
There is very little objective fact to be found in either of our discussions of windstriding, but I'm not trying to present my opinion of it as such. Compared to other MMORPGs which have alternative modes of travel that aren't as frequently impeded by monsters or held hostage by arbitrary stamina meters, I felt like windstriding was poorly designed. Tell me, what's the purpose of having a stamina meter gauging how far you could windstride? And furthermore, would it not have been more beneficial to simply have unlimited access to it? When I take into account my larger frustrations with the game, I'm not to happy with Blade and Soul's answer to those questions!
A problem with a lot of your opinions on how reviews should be handled is that if you attempt to try and account for every opinion, the more you weaken the analysis of a game. Sure, I could've loaded up my review with statements like "Some people might like it" and "other people might feel differently", but those people aren't me and this isn't their review of the game. The more you do that, the more you weaken a review to the point where the idea of even criticizing something becomes pointless. If we're scared of upsetting someone with our opinion, what's the point of even sharing it in the first place?
It's awesome that you're enjoying the story and characters of Blade and Soul, and just because I don't doesn't mean that either of us is wrong. I'm sure in the coming weeks you will find reviews that better represent your opinion of the game, but even reading the comments its easy to see that quite a few people agree with mine. So let's not be unfair here.
And finally, I can definitely see why you think I mis-categorized Blade and Soul or held it to a different standard, and to an extent I think there is a danger in that. For example, no one should be comparing an iPhone game to The Division, that's silly.
But even though you might argue that Blade and Soul isn't intended to be a "fully-featured MMORPG" doesn't stop the fact that it still endeavors to accomplish many of the things fully featured MMORPGs do. There's still a hefty investment needed to see and experience everything in the game, but it lacks much of "horizontal progression" other MMORPGs have that can be rewarding distractions from the main goal of leveling up your character or getting better gear. Now, if Blade and Soul's core progression were better, I wouldn't have brought up the lack of housing or deeper character customization (like WildStar's dye systems). But the fact that it fails to create a compelling hybrid experience means that the lack of those other features makes it an even weaker product to recommend to people who might be interested in it.
Yes, the combat is good and its sad that other games don't have it, but in the bigger picture of Blade and Soul as a whole, the combat doesn't salvage the other aspects of the game that I had big problems with. Thus I think that, on the whole, I feel like other MMORPGs are still superior products.
I gave examples as to why your analysis of windstriding wasn't grounded in fact. Any attempt to discount those facts are simply word play and semantics on your part. We may have had a different enjoyment out of the mechanic, which is were I injected my "personal" opinion, but lets not let our personal preferences and/or opinions cloud the facts. As to my jumping to a conclusion that you haven't invested enough time in the game, that conclusion is justified by the fact that your description of the elements of windstriding where inaccurate. It is either that, or you were wrong with your details of how it works. I'll let you chose which one is more agreeable to you.
In regard to your question "Tell me, what's the purpose of having a stamina meter gauging how far you could windstride?" ... it is simply a mechanism implemented to simulate getting tired. Remember, you aren't on a mount, or a vehicle, you are exerting your own energy while performing the act. So while yes it would have been beneficial to have unlimited access to it, it would not have been realistic to do so.
Listen, I don't dispute the fact that there are people that agree with you. We all have different preferences is game play and our expectations of how an MMORPG should be played. I accept the fact that there will be supporters and detractors of every game. I also fully understand that BnS is succeptible to even more criticism simply because it is an Asian import and in many respects trivializes an MMORPG in the eyes of purists. Heck, even a game that at one point boasted and was enjoyed by nearly 15 million players had a large number of haters. My point is that a professional reviewer should present a review in a fair and objective manner and refrain from injecting their own personal biases into their reviews. This objectivity and fairness in reviewing a game is what differentiates a professional reviewer for an acclaimed magazine from the novice poster reviewing a game on a game forum like MMORPG.com. I realize its difficult, but it's why you get paid the big bucks.
In conclusion, bottom line it is your review. Some will agree with it, some will not. That's to be expected. I am voicing my opinion toward it not because I find no faults in BnS, because I do, but because I feel it was unfairly judged more for what it is not, than what it is. For what it's worth, I am waiting for the Black Dessert release but I am just not one to keep silent against matters of unfairness regardless of the subject matter.
Hey! First of all, I just want to thank you for at least being mostly respectful as we talk about this!
Secondly, if you reread both of our statements, you'll see that there's still very little "fact" present in either.
The facts of windstriding would be things like the units of speed that your character moves or how many units of stamina is recovered when not using it. Those are the facts.
Your defense of it isn't based in fact, just like my criticism isn't based in fact, so we should stop misusing the word. Also, you didn't address my complaints that windstriding frequently causes characters to get stuck on level geometry, which I found very annoying. Everything you had to say was how you "feel" about windstriding, which is okay that it's different from mine! That's what makes games beautiful.
When you say that it doesn't regenerate slowly, there is no fact that that is based on, instead it's based on how quickly you "feel" it regenerates.
Finally, gliding does regain your stamina (never said it didn't), but it also seems to move about the same rate as regular ground travel, so while you're technically windstriding, you're not receiving the same benefit of moving quickly.
What we both are left with is interpretations of how windstriding is implemented into the world and how we feel those mechanics hinder or aid in our experience with the game. Those are opinions, both subjective. There's no objectivity there, so let's just drop the pretense of it!
Secondly, you say the limits on stamina are meant to be realistic because your character is tired. Is this the same character that can basically fight an endless stream of monsters without really needing to sleep? The same character that can jog through a world without needing to sit down and rest their feet (not to mention many do it entirely in high heels). There's no pretense of realism, so the result is that the stamina seems like an arbitrary barrier to inhibit speedy travel, one that I can't find any reason it should exist.
Once again, you use the word "objective", which you will find many, many professional video game critics make no intention to use in their reviews. If you want, you can read my comments from earlier in the thread where I address that objectivity does have a place in a game, but a much smaller portion than many people seem to think. Just like a movie or a book, there's basic fundamentals you can look at, such as grammar, that can be objectively appraised (The grammar in a book was terrible, so we can objectively talk about it) but the larger impact of the themes, and implementation of them are subjective. People interpret them differently.
Objectivity isn't what separates professional reviews from the amateur ones. It's the ability to effectively and concisely articulate what you like and don't like about a game and why. Given my responses here and in the actual review itself, I think its fair to say that I did a pretty good job of both. I don't resort to logical fallacies to support my arguments (like I addressed earlier when people say things like "if you don't like X, don't play it").
So what we're still left with at the end of the day is that you have a different opinion of the game than me, which is totally fine. Awesome even! The big difference is that I acknowledge and respect your opinion, while you're still trying to discredit mine.
Some people might question why I'm in here talking about this review at length when I could just be ignoring all of these comments, but I see a cool opportunity to have a discussion on reviewing in general and clear up many of the misconceptions that people have about game reviews.
Tough score for the 5th most played game in Korea. But everyone does have different tastes...
It's what they like to play down there. I'm guessing internet cafe's and online gaming are much more common in South Korea than in the US, where console gaming is filling the role. Also, don't forget they are much bigger on competitive and cooperative games than single player.
I disagree with his whining about "breast physics"...boobs have physics in real life too. It's a shame he wastes a whole paragraph to show his insecurity about breasts.
i think u people need to understand these people just dont like the game.. a fucking review means nothing unless its played by someone who reached the endgame. and i bet these idiots of reviewers dont have any clue how a game is endgame cause they normally just play to lvl 10 or so and say oh this is shit. so i call Bullshit. just cause its not his cup of coffe.. idiots is all i have to say.
oh and just how is the Pve horrible? it's quite fun and the PVP is the selling point in this game its all about skill not gear. which all other MMO or games depends on SKILL is what this game requires. try get gold or plat rank.
I disagree with his whining about "breast physics"...boobs have physics in real life too. It's a shame he wastes a whole paragraph to show his insecurity about breasts.
i think u people need to understand these people just dont like the game.. a fucking review means nothing unless its played by someone who reached the endgame. and i bet these idiots of reviewers dont have any clue how a game is endgame cause they normally just play to lvl 10 or so and say oh this is shit. so i call Bullshit. just cause its not his cup of coffe.. idiots is all i have to say.
oh and just how is the Pve horrible? it's quite fun and the PVP is the selling point in this game its all about skill not gear. which all other MMO or games depends on SKILL is what this game requires. try get gold or plat rank.
Typical excuse. Oh they didn't play enough. Or, oh they didn't play it right. BS. They thought the game sucked. Deal with it.
We don't need to get down to unit of speed when speaking of facts as they relate to your description of windstriding. That's just intentionally muddying the waters. You say Windstriding was a poor design because ...
* It scraps the convenient faster mount systems that have been around forever.
Fact: It is not intended to compete with other game's modes of travel. This mode of travel is unique to BnS and meant to replicate the time period (Wuxia). This is a prime example of player's who are always criticizing games for being the same, but when something new and innovative is introduced they criticize it for not being the same as the dozens of other copy/paste games currently on the market. If utilized correctly it provides for uninterrupted fast travel just as any other fast travel mechanism in any other game.
* Monsters pull you out of windstriding when they damage you.
Fact: They only do so if you glide over them withing their agro range. This is as it should be unless you expect to continue gliding uninterrupted when you come withing a mobs agro range.
* Monster populations are so dense on the narrow maps that getting from point A to point B easily can be so frustrating when monsters you don't even have a quest to kill are constantly aggroing you and pulling you into combat, which has a really slow movement speed.
Fact: If you chose your path strategically and correctly, mobs will not agro you and interrupt your glide. If the area is too densely populated making it difficult for you to glide over them, then perhaps that is not the best method to get from point A to point B and you should not be windstriding.
* Then, when you finally kill the thing, sometimes it takes dozens of seconds before the game recognizes you're out of combat, leaving you to move at a dreadfully slow pace until it does.
Fact: It takes literally 4-5 seconds, not dozens of seconds. This is an exaggeration that only serves to illustrate a negative bias.
* When you say that it doesn't regenerate slowly, there is no fact that that is based on, instead it's based on how quickly you "feel" it regenerates.
Fact: Left untouched stamina regenarates from 0 to full in literally seconds. I would guess anywhere from 10 to 15 seconds. This can be easily tested by anyone playing the game. As a matter of fact, you or I can log into the game right now and come back in seconds with the accurate number. I don't think anyone would consider that to be "painfully slow" regeneration of stamina. As I mentioned earlier, it allows for fast uninterrupted travel over long distances if utilized correctly.
Those are all facts that can be easily proven by anyone playing the game.
The rest of your explanation regarding objectivity and fairness while reviewing a subject matter I disagree with as I feel that it is the very foundation that lends credibility to a professional review. Every reader considering the review has to be given an objective and fair point of view of the game in an effort to allow the reader, regardless of their play preference, to decide whether the game is worthy of their time. If the review is not fair and objective, and it is only viewed from a biased point of view, then it holds no value as a dependable review.
In conclusion, I do acknowledge and respect your review as presented by you from your personal point view. I just disagree with it for the reasons given.
if people believe in those blind fooled idiots.. then shit. u really need to check again. alot of games that actually suck gets a insanely score while games that Actually does play right gets a low score. just because it's not up to the idiotic reviewer.
dont base the game on reviews but rather on your own..
since a review doesnt give u crap but shit loads of useless information
I agree that you did state certain facts, but you're still not addressing how my analysis of that game design is somehow wrong.
I'll just address each in the same order that you've given them for convenience sake, but I'll also say now that I might not be able to keep this conversation going with you. It's been great chatting, and I've enjoyed hearing you out, but I'm sure you can understand that I don't have a ton of free time to be debating (as much as I wish I did!). I'm just letting you know as a courtesy in case I don't respond any further . And, the more we talk, the more I think we'll probably just never reach an understanding (which is okay!).
1. I can understand how you think I might feel that way, but the reason I brought up mounts wasn't to be a hypocrite and suggest that BnS just conform to what other MMORPGs do. As I said many times, I think the idea of windstriding is great but its the implementation that I feel is flawed. I absolutely believe games should innovate and try new things, but when those things are worse at solving problems than other tried and true methods, I'd rather have something that is familiar but works than something that is new but doesn't. Does that make sense?
2. What you state is a fact, however it still fails to address the larger problem of why I found monsters aggroing me and pulling me out of my windstride frustrating. Why does my character suddenly lose the ability to windstride once a monster does damage to them? I can understand that there might be a given in-game logic, like breaking my concentration, but it still feels like a poor solution. There could have been a much more intuitive system, like an ability to dodge incoming attacks while windstriding (after all, the game emphasizes countering and dodging abilities frequently). GIven the larger context of my frustrations with the game, the fact as you state it doesn't solve anything.
3. This is certainly an interesting idea, and I think there's probably merit to what you have to say. If someone watched how I windstride, I definitely think there could be a case made that I'm doing it "wrong". However, simply resting on that assumption doesn't do anything. You could make a million arguments for why every reviewer is doing something "wrong." You suggest that maybe I shouldn't be windstriding in those denser areas, but what's the alternative? Fighting every monster? Cautiously avoiding them? Neither of these are solutions that address the larger question of why I'm so frustrated with the fights that I want to avoid them in the first place. For example, in Diablo 3, I'm happy to smash the face in of every enemy I meet, regardless of whether or not they are associated with a quest. Why is that and why is that different from Blade and Soul?
4. If you read what I actually said, I said that there were instances where, for reasons that were never made clear, exiting combat wouldn't happen for a period of time much longer than usual. I suspect that this might be a glitch, but the result is that I've had several moments where windstriding wasn't made available after killing a bad guy until many seconds longer than usual. Either way, while the time it takes to exit combat might literally be 5 seconds, It's absolutely fair for me to subjectively decide whether or not that is a good or bad amount of time to wait.
5. Once again, the actual time it takes for stamina to regenerate is irrelevant. What is relevant is how we perceive that time and how it plays into the pacing of the game. I find the pauses between combat or while waiting for stamina to regenerate to ruin the pace of playing. Just because you don't doesn't automatically make you correct and me wrong.
I encourage you to do some reading into criticism of art, especially video games (there's a ton of stuff worth reading on the subject), it might help you better understand where I'm coming from as a professional reviewer. As I've said, games are no different from movies and books. There are definitely elements that we can apply relative objectivity to, like grammar, but the vast majority of an opinion on a game is filtered through our own inherent bias that we all have. Yes, even you. Once again, the difference between me and someone who isn't paid to do this for a living is that I strive to dig into my feelings and discover why I feel like that. If you want an objective review, you can go read hardware reviews for hard drives and sticks of RAM. But for cultural works of art, like most media, it is hypocritical to pretend like any of us don't have bias that informs how we perceive things.
Thanks for taking the time discuss your review of the game Steve. Many other reviewers, if any, would not have taken the time to do so. If for nothing else, I give you a 10/10 for your availability to address concerns regarding your review. Thanks again. It is highly appreciated.
Hey no problem! It's interesting to note that even games criticism can have differing views of how it should be handled. I guess all I'm trying to say is that if things like objectivity are important to you, maybe seek venues that specialize is that time of critique. As it stands, you'll find the prevailing philosophy for gaming reviews is that subjectivity is welcome and encouraged.
The problem is that more often than not (not saying you do this, though) when people say objective, it's just a crutch to lean on when they really mean they want reviews that validate their own opinions of a game. That's dangerous. It's an incredibly difficult line in the sand to try and draw, so many reviewers have decided to stop drawing it altogether. There is a difference between factual misinformation, however. But even still, you can see how highly contested that topic can become as you and I go back and forth on just ONE single aspect of the game, haha.
The other big qualifier is obviously finding reviewers who are passionate about the type of game for which they are reviewing. People can debate to high heaven that I'm unqualified to write a review on Blade and Soul, but it's not like I was chosen from a lottery to handle that review. If you care to, you can dig into articles I've written and I think you'll see I definitely love MMORPGs. I just think they can do better.
After reading the above two posts I'm starting to see why bit-tech moved away from a numbered rating system. Besides the entire problem of having all games on the same scale even if they aren't comparable to each other, it really doesn't take a number to rate a game. It's sort of like people who like western movies will probably go see a mediocre western movie and enjoy it, where as someone who doesn't like westerns could go see the best western of all time and hate it.
I agree this game is the same old tired hand holding bullshit that we've come to expect from money grubbing developers who have no concept of creating a game with substance and depth.
My biggest beef with the review at this point is the number. 52 to me indicates something is seriously wrong with the game to the point of not being playable.
My biggest beef with the review at this point is the number. 52 to me indicates something is seriously wrong with the game to the point of not being playable.
52 means = mediocre
Something seriously wrong is 30 and below IMO - that would indicate serious problems.
I think people are thinking school grades as in everything below 60 is failing - that's not how game scores work.
Relative to the scores of other games on most sites, or even just on PCGamer itself, 52 is incredibly low.
My biggest beef with the review at this point is the number. 52 to me indicates something is seriously wrong with the game to the point of not being playable.
52 means = mediocre
Something seriously wrong is 30 and below IMO - that would indicate serious problems.
I think people are thinking school grades as in everything below 60 is failing - that's not how game scores work.
Mediocre is a bad thing to be in the MMO genre. You can slant it anyway you like but a score of 2.5/5 or 5/10 is indicative of a game not worth recommending and with very little redeeming value. You may not like theme park MMORPGs (which I do not like either btw) and take points away from it for that, but there are a lot of things that BnS does right and much better than many other games in its genre. The story line, graphics, cinematics, voice acting, music score, dungeon group finders, and especially combat are all pretty much top notch when compared to its counter part MMORPGs. It is a hybrid MMORPG that accomplishes everything it sets out to accomplish really well. The fact that it arguably has the best active combat mechanic of any other game of its kind alone, when combined with everything else it offers, is enough to warrant it a higher score than a 5/10.
Comments
I'd probally have liked blade and soul more if the char designs didn't look so weird, and if it came out before tera did in english.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
If you are then those gaming cafe listings are not even all gaming cafes, they are very selective and give no real numbers about how many cafes make up the charts. Also different charts also give different numbers.
Those charts are as stupid as Xfire or Steam to judge the popularity of an mmo, from what I remember MMO internet bang cafes make up around 15% of the Koeran MMO market.
They give a small slice of mmo gamers, they are in a placement that is easily abused by big comapnies like NCsoft giving them money and by their nature they favor games that are shallow.
We are not a very happy community, and the people bashing your review are just doing something that happens a lot around here. A large part of our community will flame and troll every game but their own, because their game is perfect and everyone needs to play it.
It was cool of you to come and explain why you wrote that, but it is a waste of time trying to reason with people that hate your review. For those people that are making BnS their main game right now, anything below an 85% would have ticked them off. They aren't interested in the truth about flaws in their game, they are interested in promoting it, getting more players, and making sure it stays around for a long time.
Edit: It is also worth noting that tough reviews are welcome. We complain a lot about reviews being too high, even on our own site. I remember one of the mods (I think Bill) pointing out that MMORPG.com actually consistently rates below average scores, because users were accusing them of rating games advertised here too highly.
There's a lot of stuff about "objectivity" being thrown around, which is interesting since few, if any, outlets make any statements about their reviews being objective based. So if I can jump in and explain some of that, people might not make the misunderstanding in the future when they read something that isn't in line with their own personal views on a game. We all have our bias, even the people flaming me for having mine. The difference is that I'm making an effort to use my bias to enhance the conversation around a game, not stop it altogether.
The art of criticism doesn't need to be a big secret, but it is a skill that needs to be trained and understood. I'm not saying I'm an amazing critic by any stretch, but I see a lot of people's negative responses also have arguments that weaken the power of criticism as a whole and diminish the conversation surrounding video games too. They are, in a sense, logical fallacies.
For example, a lot of the responses I'm reading are things like "Well, if you don't like boobs, just turn off the physics or don't play a Gon since they're so sexualized."
Criticism is essentially a discussion on the components of a game, and so anything that enables that discussion to happen on a deeper level is a good thing. That's why I don't feel like topics like "boobs" should be off limits, as some people obviously wish.
When your argument in defense of something is that "If you don't like it, don't play it", all you're doing is limiting the conversation around a game, effectively diminishing our ability to engage and examine it. That's not a good thing. Especially because, more often than not, that argument comes from a selfish place. The person saying it usually feels threatened because maybe they enjoy that aspect that is being critiqued, so instead of engaging it honestly they try and stifle the conversation so they don't have to feel judged or, even worse, address why they like that particular aspect. In a wider context, that weakens any form of media as a whole because it's an attempt to never examine the motivations and consequences of a thing. In many cases, people respond that way because they don't want to be honest about where that conversation might lead or what it may or may not imply, so they lash out.
There's certainly nothing wrong with sexuality in games, but there is a lot to be said about how sophisticated the portrayal of that sexuality can be and how it colors our perception of sexuality in the real world. Some games handle it really well, or they create characters that can be attractive and sexual without resorting to shallow tricks. I feel like a lot of the characters in Blade and Soul are one dimensional, so instead of making sexually attractive characters, they simply slapped a giant pair of boobs and a skimpy bikini top on them in an effort to achieve the same result. And it's just not effective at all. Thus I find the portrayal of human sexuality in Blade and Soul to be about as sophisticated as a pair of boobs drawn in the margins of a middle school textbook, and I think game designers can do much better.
Anyway, this conversation is fun and I like talking with people, so I'm down to keep chatting with those who have interesting things to say!
As fair as I want to be with you regarding your review, these are the type of examples given by you that tell me that you weren't as fair as you should have been with your review. Aside from the point that windstriding can be viewed as a subjective enjoyment, the points that you put out as making windstriding as having been poorly designed are not factually grounded in fact. Personally, I have no problem maintaining my stamina for as long as necessary. Once you attain all of your windstriding skills, of which there are about a good half dozen of them, you can windstride for long periods of time without running out of stamina at all. Its just a matter of juggling between all of your windstriding skills, coupled with taking advantage of the many mountains and hills, to be able to travel for long periods at fast speeds without breaking a stride. In addition, there is nothing painfully slow about the regaining of stamina. It regains extremely quickly, and it even regains while gliding. The fact that you fail to realize this tells me that you did not care to play the game long enough to give it a fair score.
Regarding aggro while windstriding, well navigating the dangers of the world while windstriding is part strategy and part fun. Why should there be the expectation that windstriding is safe travel in this dangerous world. That's an unrealistic expectation. The strategy of utilizing the terrain while windstriding is part of the fun of the game. If a mob aggros you, you drop down and fight them. Sometimes you drop down in the middle of numerous mobs and it presents you with a challenging combat to survive. Combat is fun, this shouldn't be viewed as an inconvenience.
Aside from that is the matter of your judging the game for what it is not. It is obvious that BnS is not a full-featured MMORPG so it shouldn't be judged on that scale. What it is, is a hybrid MMORPG that features excellent action combat, very good arena PvP, and OwPvP for those that chose to engage in it. It also features a very unique system of PvP engagement requiring those who do not wish to engage in PvP to simply not wear the required PvP outfit which is a system that can be very appealing to a PvE centric player, and heads above any other system of OwPvP used to date (Ie., flagging, OwPvP @ Level 30 etc). And there is also the grouping dynamic that allows a player to find groups not only withing their own server (F7), but also cross-server (F8). This is done exceptionally well grouping players together with very little wait by allowing them to make the choice to either form their own groups, to group with only players in their own server, or finding a cross-server group if they so desire.
The cinematics and voice acting are also very well done, and the world is aesthetically quite pleasing offering a variety of scenic settings. Unlike the Wildstar world setting which though liked by some, was quite universally criticized by many. I personally hated the Wildstar world setting but i recognize that this is a personal preference and would not downgrade a game for it if I were a professional reviewer and was assigned to provide a fair review of the game.
Lastly, I can't emphasize enough the importance of accurately categorizing a game and reviewing for what it is, what it does, and how it does it, and not for what it isn't, what it doesn't do, and how it doesn't do it. A fair reviewer does not compare an economy car against a luxury car and then detracts points in their review of the economy car because it isn't luxurious. It compares the economy car to other economy cars and renders a fair review based on that comparison. BnS is a hybrid MMORPG. It does an outstanding job of accomplishing to do what it intended to do very well. And that is the barometer by which it should be reviewed.
(Retired)- Anarchy Online/Ultima Online/DAoC/Horizonsz/EQ2/SWG/AC1&2/L2/SoR/WoW/TMO/Requiem/Atlantica Online/Manibogi/Rift+(SL)/Lol/Hon/SWTOR/Wakfu/Champions Online/GW/Lotr/CO/TcoS/Tabula Rasa/Meridian 59/Vanguard/Shadowbane/Fury/SotW/Dreamlords/HGL/RoM/DDO/FFXI/Aoc/Eve/Warhammer Online/Gw2/TSW/Tera/Defiance/STO/AoW/DE/Firefall/Darkfall/Neverwinter/PS2/ESO/FF14/Archeage/Gw2
Home gamers prefer a game with meat on it, that they can get stuck into. Something like Gw2, Tera or Black desert. Compared to those Blade and Soul is a tiny little rainwater pool, what it does it does really well (pvp) but it's not going to be good enough to keep western players invested because as I say...it's a one trick pony aimed at a specific market that does not exist here.
It tops the internet gaming cafe charts (which is 18% of the korean mmo market) in Korea because it was made to do so, not so much in terms of the vast majority or home gamers though (korean and western), that's why it will have some of the worst retention issues of any mmo.
I agree with a lot of points in your post but one that I vehemently disagree with is your prediction that it targets a specific market that does not exist here. The reason it is so popular in the east is because of its Esport excellence. When you say that this market doesn't exist here you are making the assumption that players in NA/EU are not Esport oriented. While that may turn out to be true, it has yet to be confirmed. Personally, I am of the opinion that this market does, in fact, exist here. It just simply hasn't been realized. There is a reason why games like LoL, MOBAs and FPS games have millions of people playing them. And that reason is grounded behind the same PvP game mechanic featured in BnS. Only time will tell, but when it does I will make sure to necro this thread. By the same token, if does not, feel free to do the same. I am quite confident that I will be vindicated in my prediction. That said, if I am not, I will humbly admit I was wrong. Time will tell.
The fact is, I found windstriding to be a unique idea that rarely catered to the potential of its strengths. This was further exacerbated by other elements, like the awful quest design, which I felt pushed me towards "rushing" through the game because so little of its moment-to-moment gameplay was satisfying. It's a vicious downward cycle: The more unsatisfying a moment of the game is, the more I want to push through it to find something that is satisfying, and the more I run into obstacles preventing me from doing that (monster aggro).
Because the game basically has a couple hundred quests requiring you to kill a couple thousand creatures, and all of it feels tedious, I resented the idea of killing a monster that wasn't tied to a quest. So being pulled into combat by a thing I have no interest in killing and being forced to fight became very frustrating because it was actively preventing me from getting where I wanted to go.
There is very little objective fact to be found in either of our discussions of windstriding, but I'm not trying to present my opinion of it as such. Compared to other MMORPGs which have alternative modes of travel that aren't as frequently impeded by monsters or held hostage by arbitrary stamina meters, I felt like windstriding was poorly designed. Tell me, what's the purpose of having a stamina meter gauging how far you could windstride? And furthermore, would it not have been more beneficial to simply have unlimited access to it? When I take into account my larger frustrations with the game, I'm not to happy with Blade and Soul's answer to those questions!
A problem with a lot of your opinions on how reviews should be handled is that if you attempt to try and account for every opinion, the more you weaken the analysis of a game. Sure, I could've loaded up my review with statements like "Some people might like it" and "other people might feel differently", but those people aren't me and this isn't their review of the game. The more you do that, the more you weaken a review to the point where the idea of even criticizing something becomes pointless. If we're scared of upsetting someone with our opinion, what's the point of even sharing it in the first place?
It's awesome that you're enjoying the story and characters of Blade and Soul, and just because I don't doesn't mean that either of us is wrong. I'm sure in the coming weeks you will find reviews that better represent your opinion of the game, but even reading the comments its easy to see that quite a few people agree with mine. So let's not be unfair here.
And finally, I can definitely see why you think I mis-categorized Blade and Soul or held it to a different standard, and to an extent I think there is a danger in that. For example, no one should be comparing an iPhone game to The Division, that's silly.
But even though you might argue that Blade and Soul isn't intended to be a "fully-featured MMORPG" doesn't stop the fact that it still endeavors to accomplish many of the things fully featured MMORPGs do. There's still a hefty investment needed to see and experience everything in the game, but it lacks much of "horizontal progression" other MMORPGs have that can be rewarding distractions from the main goal of leveling up your character or getting better gear. Now, if Blade and Soul's core progression were better, I wouldn't have brought up the lack of housing or deeper character customization (like WildStar's dye systems). But the fact that it fails to create a compelling hybrid experience means that the lack of those other features makes it an even weaker product to recommend to people who might be interested in it.
Yes, the combat is good and its sad that other games don't have it, but in the bigger picture of Blade and Soul as a whole, the combat doesn't salvage the other aspects of the game that I had big problems with. Thus I think that, on the whole, I feel like other MMORPGs are still superior products.
I gave examples as to why your analysis of windstriding wasn't grounded in fact. Any attempt to discount those facts are simply word play and semantics on your part. We may have had a different enjoyment out of the mechanic, which is were I injected my "personal" opinion, but lets not let our personal preferences and/or opinions cloud the facts. As to my jumping to a conclusion that you haven't invested enough time in the game, that conclusion is justified by the fact that your description of the elements of windstriding where inaccurate. It is either that, or you were wrong with your details of how it works. I'll let you chose which one is more agreeable to you.
In regard to your question "Tell me, what's the purpose of having a stamina meter gauging how far you could windstride?" ... it is simply a mechanism implemented to simulate getting tired. Remember, you aren't on a mount, or a vehicle, you are exerting your own energy while performing the act. So while yes it would have been beneficial to have unlimited access to it, it would not have been realistic to do so.
Listen, I don't dispute the fact that there are people that agree with you. We all have different preferences is game play and our expectations of how an MMORPG should be played. I accept the fact that there will be supporters and detractors of every game. I also fully understand that BnS is succeptible to even more criticism simply because it is an Asian import and in many respects trivializes an MMORPG in the eyes of purists. Heck, even a game that at one point boasted and was enjoyed by nearly 15 million players had a large number of haters. My point is that a professional reviewer should present a review in a fair and objective manner and refrain from injecting their own personal biases into their reviews. This objectivity and fairness in reviewing a game is what differentiates a professional reviewer for an acclaimed magazine from the novice poster reviewing a game on a game forum like MMORPG.com. I realize its difficult, but it's why you get paid the big bucks.
In conclusion, bottom line it is your review. Some will agree with it, some will not. That's to be expected. I am voicing my opinion toward it not because I find no faults in BnS, because I do, but because I feel it was unfairly judged more for what it is not, than what it is. For what it's worth, I am waiting for the Black Dessert release but I am just not one to keep silent against matters of unfairness regardless of the subject matter.
Secondly, if you reread both of our statements, you'll see that there's still very little "fact" present in either.
The facts of windstriding would be things like the units of speed that your character moves or how many units of stamina is recovered when not using it. Those are the facts.
Your defense of it isn't based in fact, just like my criticism isn't based in fact, so we should stop misusing the word. Also, you didn't address my complaints that windstriding frequently causes characters to get stuck on level geometry, which I found very annoying. Everything you had to say was how you "feel" about windstriding, which is okay that it's different from mine! That's what makes games beautiful.
When you say that it doesn't regenerate slowly, there is no fact that that is based on, instead it's based on how quickly you "feel" it regenerates.
Finally, gliding does regain your stamina (never said it didn't), but it also seems to move about the same rate as regular ground travel, so while you're technically windstriding, you're not receiving the same benefit of moving quickly.
What we both are left with is interpretations of how windstriding is implemented into the world and how we feel those mechanics hinder or aid in our experience with the game. Those are opinions, both subjective. There's no objectivity there, so let's just drop the pretense of it!
Secondly, you say the limits on stamina are meant to be realistic because your character is tired. Is this the same character that can basically fight an endless stream of monsters without really needing to sleep? The same character that can jog through a world without needing to sit down and rest their feet (not to mention many do it entirely in high heels). There's no pretense of realism, so the result is that the stamina seems like an arbitrary barrier to inhibit speedy travel, one that I can't find any reason it should exist.
Once again, you use the word "objective", which you will find many, many professional video game critics make no intention to use in their reviews. If you want, you can read my comments from earlier in the thread where I address that objectivity does have a place in a game, but a much smaller portion than many people seem to think. Just like a movie or a book, there's basic fundamentals you can look at, such as grammar, that can be objectively appraised (The grammar in a book was terrible, so we can objectively talk about it) but the larger impact of the themes, and implementation of them are subjective. People interpret them differently.
Objectivity isn't what separates professional reviews from the amateur ones. It's the ability to effectively and concisely articulate what you like and don't like about a game and why. Given my responses here and in the actual review itself, I think its fair to say that I did a pretty good job of both. I don't resort to logical fallacies to support my arguments (like I addressed earlier when people say things like "if you don't like X, don't play it").
So what we're still left with at the end of the day is that you have a different opinion of the game than me, which is totally fine. Awesome even! The big difference is that I acknowledge and respect your opinion, while you're still trying to discredit mine.
Some people might question why I'm in here talking about this review at length when I could just be ignoring all of these comments, but I see a cool opportunity to have a discussion on reviewing in general and clear up many of the misconceptions that people have about game reviews.
oh and just how is the Pve horrible? it's quite fun and the PVP is the selling point in this game its all about skill not gear. which all other MMO or games depends on SKILL is what this game requires. try get gold or plat rank.
We don't need to get down to unit of speed when speaking of facts as they relate to your description of windstriding. That's just intentionally muddying the waters. You say Windstriding was a poor design because ...
* It scraps the convenient faster mount systems that have been around forever.
Fact: It is not intended to compete with other game's modes of travel. This mode of travel is unique to BnS and meant to replicate the time period (Wuxia). This is a prime example of player's who are always criticizing games for being the same, but when something new and innovative is introduced they criticize it for not being the same as the dozens of other copy/paste games currently on the market. If utilized correctly it provides for uninterrupted fast travel just as any other fast travel mechanism in any other game.
* Monsters pull you out of windstriding when they damage you.
Fact: They only do so if you glide over them withing their agro range. This is as it should be unless you expect to continue gliding uninterrupted when you come withing a mobs agro range.
* Monster populations are so dense on the narrow maps that getting from point A to point B easily can be so frustrating when monsters you don't even have a quest to kill are constantly aggroing you and pulling you into combat, which has a really slow movement speed.
Fact: If you chose your path strategically and correctly, mobs will not agro you and interrupt your glide. If the area is too densely populated making it difficult for you to glide over them, then perhaps that is not the best method to get from point A to point B and you should not be windstriding.
* Then, when you finally kill the thing, sometimes it takes dozens of seconds before the game recognizes you're out of combat, leaving you to move at a dreadfully slow pace until it does.
Fact: It takes literally 4-5 seconds, not dozens of seconds. This is an exaggeration that only serves to illustrate a negative bias.
* When you say that it doesn't regenerate slowly, there is no fact that that is based on, instead it's based on how quickly you "feel" it regenerates.
Fact: Left untouched stamina regenarates from 0 to full in literally seconds. I would guess anywhere from 10 to 15 seconds. This can be easily tested by anyone playing the game. As a matter of fact, you or I can log into the game right now and come back in seconds with the accurate number. I don't think anyone would consider that to be "painfully slow" regeneration of stamina. As I mentioned earlier, it allows for fast uninterrupted travel over long distances if utilized correctly.
Those are all facts that can be easily proven by anyone playing the game.
The rest of your explanation regarding objectivity and fairness while reviewing a subject matter I disagree with as I feel that it is the very foundation that lends credibility to a professional review. Every reader considering the review has to be given an objective and fair point of view of the game in an effort to allow the reader, regardless of their play preference, to decide whether the game is worthy of their time. If the review is not fair and objective, and it is only viewed from a biased point of view, then it holds no value as a dependable review.
In conclusion, I do acknowledge and respect your review as presented by you from your personal point view. I just disagree with it for the reasons given.
dont base the game on reviews but rather on your own..
since a review doesnt give u crap but shit loads of useless information
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
I agree that you did state certain facts, but you're still not addressing how my analysis of that game design is somehow wrong.
I'll just address each in the same order that you've given them for convenience sake, but I'll also say now that I might not be able to keep this conversation going with you. It's been great chatting, and I've enjoyed hearing you out, but I'm sure you can understand that I don't have a ton of free time to be debating (as much as I wish I did!). I'm just letting you know as a courtesy in case I don't respond any further
1. I can understand how you think I might feel that way, but the reason I brought up mounts wasn't to be a hypocrite and suggest that BnS just conform to what other MMORPGs do. As I said many times, I think the idea of windstriding is great but its the implementation that I feel is flawed. I absolutely believe games should innovate and try new things, but when those things are worse at solving problems than other tried and true methods, I'd rather have something that is familiar but works than something that is new but doesn't. Does that make sense?
2. What you state is a fact, however it still fails to address the larger problem of why I found monsters aggroing me and pulling me out of my windstride frustrating. Why does my character suddenly lose the ability to windstride once a monster does damage to them? I can understand that there might be a given in-game logic, like breaking my concentration, but it still feels like a poor solution. There could have been a much more intuitive system, like an ability to dodge incoming attacks while windstriding (after all, the game emphasizes countering and dodging abilities frequently). GIven the larger context of my frustrations with the game, the fact as you state it doesn't solve anything.
3. This is certainly an interesting idea, and I think there's probably merit to what you have to say. If someone watched how I windstride, I definitely think there could be a case made that I'm doing it "wrong". However, simply resting on that assumption doesn't do anything. You could make a million arguments for why every reviewer is doing something "wrong." You suggest that maybe I shouldn't be windstriding in those denser areas, but what's the alternative? Fighting every monster? Cautiously avoiding them? Neither of these are solutions that address the larger question of why I'm so frustrated with the fights that I want to avoid them in the first place. For example, in Diablo 3, I'm happy to smash the face in of every enemy I meet, regardless of whether or not they are associated with a quest. Why is that and why is that different from Blade and Soul?
4. If you read what I actually said, I said that there were instances where, for reasons that were never made clear, exiting combat wouldn't happen for a period of time much longer than usual. I suspect that this might be a glitch, but the result is that I've had several moments where windstriding wasn't made available after killing a bad guy until many seconds longer than usual. Either way, while the time it takes to exit combat might literally be 5 seconds, It's absolutely fair for me to subjectively decide whether or not that is a good or bad amount of time to wait.
5. Once again, the actual time it takes for stamina to regenerate is irrelevant. What is relevant is how we perceive that time and how it plays into the pacing of the game. I find the pauses between combat or while waiting for stamina to regenerate to ruin the pace of playing. Just because you don't doesn't automatically make you correct and me wrong.
I encourage you to do some reading into criticism of art, especially video games (there's a ton of stuff worth reading on the subject), it might help you better understand where I'm coming from as a professional reviewer. As I've said, games are no different from movies and books. There are definitely elements that we can apply relative objectivity to, like grammar, but the vast majority of an opinion on a game is filtered through our own inherent bias that we all have. Yes, even you. Once again, the difference between me and someone who isn't paid to do this for a living is that I strive to dig into my feelings and discover why I feel like that. If you want an objective review, you can go read hardware reviews for hard drives and sticks of RAM. But for cultural works of art, like most media, it is hypocritical to pretend like any of us don't have bias that informs how we perceive things.
Anyway, hope you have a good weekend!
Thanks for taking the time discuss your review of the game Steve. Many other reviewers, if any, would not have taken the time to do so. If for nothing else, I give you a 10/10 for your availability to address concerns regarding your review. Thanks again. It is highly appreciated.
This link is obviously a bit snarky, but I think it does a decent job of highlighting why most video game reviewers fear the idea of objectivity: http://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml
The problem is that more often than not (not saying you do this, though) when people say objective, it's just a crutch to lean on when they really mean they want reviews that validate their own opinions of a game. That's dangerous. It's an incredibly difficult line in the sand to try and draw, so many reviewers have decided to stop drawing it altogether. There is a difference between factual misinformation, however. But even still, you can see how highly contested that topic can become as you and I go back and forth on just ONE single aspect of the game, haha.
The other big qualifier is obviously finding reviewers who are passionate about the type of game for which they are reviewing. People can debate to high heaven that I'm unqualified to write a review on Blade and Soul, but it's not like I was chosen from a lottery to handle that review. If you care to, you can dig into articles I've written and I think you'll see I definitely love MMORPGs. I just think they can do better.
Relative to the scores of other games on most sites, or even just on PCGamer itself, 52 is incredibly low.
Mediocre is a bad thing to be in the MMO genre. You can slant it anyway you like but a score of 2.5/5 or 5/10 is indicative of a game not worth recommending and with very little redeeming value. You may not like theme park MMORPGs (which I do not like either btw) and take points away from it for that, but there are a lot of things that BnS does right and much better than many other games in its genre. The story line, graphics, cinematics, voice acting, music score, dungeon group finders, and especially combat are all pretty much top notch when compared to its counter part MMORPGs. It is a hybrid MMORPG that accomplishes everything it sets out to accomplish really well. The fact that it arguably has the best active combat mechanic of any other game of its kind alone, when combined with everything else it offers, is enough to warrant it a higher score than a 5/10.