Strange, all I can assume is that scores like this come from non pvprs.
edit - Just read it. Yep pve guy here. "you can't limit a group search to your own campaign is a drag" lmao. All you do is type LFG you have a group of 20+ in a couple minutes if not instant.
im a non pvpr could care less about it but i love this game. Its more than likely ESO didnt pay off those reviewers.... or those reviewers cant be bothered to grind or earn crap.
Metacritic score is a good 75/100. IGN rated it 7.8/10. ESO is geting more above average to good ratings then bad. As of now id give it a 7/10. In its current state ESO deserves a 7 or 8/10 score.
Let me guess - you haven't played the game and are just reading from the hate parade cue cards, right? I'm seeing the same handful of posters promoting this review who have been lingering in this forum giving cheap shots for weeks. Look over the OP posting history here, for example, if you want a representative example...
What does the OP's posting history have to do with the review they linked?
Another website reviewed ESO. Someone posted a link to that review on the ESO forums here.
It doesn't matter who posted it. The review stands on its own. That you don't like the review doesn't change that.
Again, it's just amazing the ridiculous things some of you people will say in defense of someone criticizing "your game".
There is a long list of reviews, and people like the OP only select and promote the most hostile ones. This is flat-out propaganda - making it appear as if there is a consensus (as in the text of his "post") by selective presentation of the evidence. If someone else posted the MMORPG or IGN review and claimed that they spoke for some universal consensus they'd be doing the same thing - but notice that it only seems to be the detractors who play this game. In this very thread there is another poster accusing the author of a positive review of being paid off.
There really is a dedicated cohort of posters who don't play the game, hate it, and gather every single negative thing that they can find and throw it at people who do enjoy the game. That's really messed up.
Oh so you mean there is long list of reviews with very high and positive scores for ESO by well known sites and critics?
Where? mind posting it here? no one is stopping you now is it? not like you don't have your own agenda behind relentless defense of the game.
And i don't understand how anyone is throwing anything at you? are you being forced to visit this website? i guess not.
If you want only one type of topics where people are gushing over the game i suggest join Tamariel Foundry or other fansites. because this ain't one.
Bigdaddyx, the used to be white knight ESO defender, who has now checked out and got a seat on the cool kids hate wagon, salute
Can we all agree now that these scores are simply (9+3)/2, the average of lovers and haters? For some, it's 9. For others, it's 3. It's not fair to say it is 6 to general gamers because there are no general gamers.
Weird thing is, reviewers usually sugar these things, AAA titles rarely if ever go below 7, quite frankly you do not bite the hand that feeds you.
6 is not average, the lower end of the scale is rarely used.
How many games get between 7 and 9?
Probably over 80%.
I do not have a dog in this fight really, I preordered the imperial version but I have yet to start playing, figuring I would let them fix the most glaring bugs from beta, as the mythical "closed beta has a different build that fixes everything", patch did not come to pass.
Time will tell of course and I will use up my 30 days at some point, but the reception of this game puzzles me a bit.
6 from a "professional" reviewer is pretty much bottom out, and even though there were a lot stuff that annoyed me during beta, that seems a bit harsh.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weird thing is, reviewers usually sugar these things, AAA titles rarely if ever go below 7, quite frankly you do not bite the hand that feeds you.
6 is not average, the lower end of the scale is rarely used.
How many games get between 7 and 9?
Probably over 80%.
I do not have a dog in this fight really, I preordered the imperial version but I have yet to start playing, figuring I would let them fix the most glaring bugs from beta, as the mythical "closed beta has a different build that fixes everything", patch did not come to pass.
Time will tell of course and I will use up my 30 days at some point, but the reception of this game puzzles me a bit.
6 from a "professional" reviewer is pretty much bottom out, and even though there were a lot stuff that annoyed me during beta, that seems a bit harsh.
Exactly
Since when getting 6/10 is good? especially for a supposed AAA title with a big money, a big trademark and a big company behind it?
Originally posted by mithrillion Can we all agree now that these scores are simply (9+3)/2, the average of lovers and haters? For some, it's 9. For others, it's 3. It's not fair to say it is 6 to general gamers because there are no general gamers.
I havent read the review, but objectively Id rate ESO 6/10 also, because sometimes it really feels like beta 2.0. Still, 6 in my book means slightly above average. If I were to rate some previous "AAA" mmos on the same scale..SWTOR would be 5/10 and GW2 4/10.
Suprisingly the "Elder Scrolls" in the title of this game is hurting the "professional" reviews a lot.
A lot of the reviewers are stumbling on the predjudice that this game is a sequel to Skyrim.
If they had released it as "Tamriel Online" they would probably got +1 or more to the review scores due to different point of view from the Skyrim illusion, but there would have been less preorders most likely.
All mmorpgs I have played in the last couple of years would get 4-7/10 from me, ESO is probably at 7/10 since I like the quests mostly, quite a bit, but I'd almost like to raise it by +1 for the awesome day/night cycle and weather effects!
Comments
Don't many many poster's here go on and on and on about how Gamespot, IGN and others are payed by the publisher's to give a good review
So what happened here? Did Zenimax forget to pay the bill?
/sarcasm
The game is not good and it's not bad. It's average and deserves an average score.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
im a non pvpr could care less about it but i love this game. Its more than likely ESO didnt pay off those reviewers.... or those reviewers cant be bothered to grind or earn crap.
6/10? I don't see problem. It's not like 2/10. But, again which scale is used?
Metacritic score is a good 75/100. IGN rated it 7.8/10. ESO is geting more above average to good ratings then bad. As of now id give it a 7/10. In its current state ESO deserves a 7 or 8/10 score.
As if 6/10 is a bad score.
It is slightly above average. that isn't bad. It could be worse.
And for those making comparisons with SWTOR other than Ilum's debacle the problems of SWTOR looks like minor annoyance compared to ESO.
Bigdaddyx, the used to be white knight ESO defender, who has now checked out and got a seat on the cool kids hate wagon, salute
Weird thing is, reviewers usually sugar these things, AAA titles rarely if ever go below 7, quite frankly you do not bite the hand that feeds you.
6 is not average, the lower end of the scale is rarely used.
How many games get between 7 and 9?
Probably over 80%.
I do not have a dog in this fight really, I preordered the imperial version but I have yet to start playing, figuring I would let them fix the most glaring bugs from beta, as the mythical "closed beta has a different build that fixes everything", patch did not come to pass.
Time will tell of course and I will use up my 30 days at some point, but the reception of this game puzzles me a bit.
6 from a "professional" reviewer is pretty much bottom out, and even though there were a lot stuff that annoyed me during beta, that seems a bit harsh.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
Since when getting 6/10 is good? especially for a supposed AAA title with a big money, a big trademark and a big company behind it?
No, you don't make much sense with your logic.
I havent read the review, but objectively Id rate ESO 6/10 also, because sometimes it really feels like beta 2.0. Still, 6 in my book means slightly above average. If I were to rate some previous "AAA" mmos on the same scale..SWTOR would be 5/10 and GW2 4/10.
If they had released it as "Tamriel Online" they would probably got +1 or more to the review scores due to different point of view from the Skyrim illusion, but there would have been less preorders most likely.
All mmorpgs I have played in the last couple of years would get 4-7/10 from me, ESO is probably at 7/10 since I like the quests mostly, quite a bit, but I'd almost like to raise it by +1 for the awesome day/night cycle and weather effects!
Gamespot have had zero credibility for years. A 6/10 usually means no backhander was paid /shrug.