Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Early impressions coming out.Follow

#1 Sep 25 2010 at 9:08 PM Rating: Good
http://pc.ign.com/articles/112/1123322p1.html

Seems to be a pretty fair assessment of the game at this point, going to be curious to see what scores this game is going to receive over the next couple months.
____________________________

#2thehellfire, Posted: Sep 25 2010 at 11:11 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Not an acurate assessment seeing hes reviewing open beta /facepalm
#3 Sep 25 2010 at 11:15 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
568 posts
He only refers to his experiences in open beta as he reviews the CE.
#4 Sep 25 2010 at 11:16 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,536 posts
As much as I love this game so far and as much as I and probably many here see the potential in it I'm leaning toward bad reviews or very sub par at best, just a feeling in my gut, I really hope not but unlike us a reviewer isn't going to give SE the benefit of the doubt and say "In the near future, this game is going to be great...soooo we'll just give it a perfect 10/10 right now."

I remember Age of Conan got abysmal reviews when it was released and now the game is probably a million times better and gamespot even did a "re- review" of the game sometime down the road which gave it a 8.5 score as opposed to its initial 6/10 i think...AoC never recovered from its slump. Now although I don't think an FF game is going to fail, I still don't wanna see wasted potential here.

Edited, Sep 26th 2010 1:18am by SolidMack
____________________________
MUTED
#5 Sep 26 2010 at 12:02 AM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
SolidMack wrote:
I remember Age of Conan got abysmal reviews when it was released and now the game is probably a million times better and gamespot even did a "re- review" of the game sometime down the road which gave it a 8.5 score as opposed to its initial 6/10 i think...AoC never recovered from its slump.


Depends on how you're defining "recover".

Sure, they're likely never going to hit the 700k mark again, but they're releasing their first expansion and the population is actually growing (over 50% in the first half of 2010).
#6 Sep 26 2010 at 12:51 AM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
SolidMack wrote:
unlike us a reviewer isn't going to give SE the benefit of the doubt and say "In the near future, this game is going to be great...soooo we'll just give it a perfect 10/10 right now."
...why in the **** would any reviewer ever do that? On top of that, you don't know that the game is going to be great. You may say that the game has a lot of potential, but saying that the game will be great down the road is dishonest at best. Reviewing games based on what they could be like seems like the exact opposite of what you want a review to be. Time travel based reviews do not count.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#7 Sep 26 2010 at 1:32 AM Rating: Excellent
*
216 posts
It seems like a fair write-up, maybe even a little on the generous side considering how much is still to be implemented ingame.

thehellfire wrote:
Not an acurate assessment seeing hes reviewing open beta /facepalm
The game is pretty much identical to open beta right now, so his assessment can't be that inaccurate. The only things that have really changed would be the hardware mouse, more responsive UI, 36 hour rather than 48 guildleves, and 4 hour anima regen rather than 6.

I'm wondering if SE is going to put out a patch on the 29/30th in preparation for the "official" launch day. That would contain the chocobos, the random world quests, the companies, multiple retainers, etc. It would be awesome if they did, but I'm not betting on it.

Edited, Sep 26th 2010 3:41am by theweenie
#8 Sep 26 2010 at 6:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
I'm just waiting for Yahtzee to review it.

Cause you just know he's going to savage it.

Edited, Sep 26th 2010 9:59am by Lobivopis
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#9 Sep 26 2010 at 7:03 AM Rating: Decent
FFXIV has gotten off to a good start, but it depends on what version they do a review on, beta or retail. Retail has a few glaring issues but beta was ten times worse. If they review beta I hope they at least make it clear that their opinions reflect their views of beta and not the actual retail game. That's the problem with reviews that came out so soon, they're primarily based on the beta version of the game and not the actual retail version. I'll start believing reviews once it's been at least a month since the standard edition was released.
____________________________
FINAL FANTASY XIV Roleplayer

Sair Gammonari - Hyur Midlander Male - Conjurer (Somewhat retired.)
Mihana Zhralyia - Miqo'te Seeker of the Sun Female - Archer



#10 Sep 26 2010 at 7:07 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
751 posts
theweenie wrote:
It seems like a fair write-up, maybe even a little on the generous side considering how much is still to be implemented ingame.

thehellfire wrote:
Not an acurate assessment seeing hes reviewing open beta /facepalm
The game is pretty much identical to open beta right now, so his assessment can't be that inaccurate. The only things that have really changed would be the hardware mouse, more responsive UI, 36 hour rather than 48 guildleves, and 4 hour anima regen rather than 6.

I'm wondering if SE is going to put out a patch on the 29/30th in preparation for the "official" launch day. That would contain the chocobos, the random world quests, the companies, multiple retainers, etc. It would be awesome if they did, but I'm not betting on it.

Edited, Sep 26th 2010 3:41am by theweenie


This made me scratch my head. For me, the game is completely different in retail release compared with beta. The things you note are quite big but what about fixing exp for healers, what about greatly improved stability, the UI fix repaired the biggest issue with beta and the hw mouse fixed the second biggest issue.

Maybe it is just my computer but comparing retail to beta is like comparing apples and oranges.
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#11 Sep 26 2010 at 1:03 PM Rating: Good
*
216 posts
HallieXIV wrote:
This made me scratch my head. For me, the game is completely different in retail release compared with beta. The things you note are quite big but what about fixing exp for healers, what about greatly improved stability, the UI fix repaired the biggest issue with beta and the hw mouse fixed the second biggest issue.

Maybe it is just my computer but comparing retail to beta is like comparing apples and oranges.
I never experienced major stability problems in beta. I've had 2 crashes since retail launch, which would be roughly on par with what I would have had during beta. But the game has never been routinely crashing or hanging for me, not even in closed beta.

I mentioned the more responsive UI and hardware mouse. The XP fix for healers is nice, but it's not what I'd consider game changing. There were a few fixes and a few small changes since open beta, but overall we're playing the same game right now. That's what I was trying to say.

When it will become completely different (for me) will be when we get the chocobos easing travel/anima, world quests, linkshell companies, multiple retainers allowing for more crafting, etc. Basically what they mentioned in the pre-live event.
#12 Sep 26 2010 at 1:34 PM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,675 posts
I think it's a fair assessment but usually "pre-reviews" are pretty devoid of judgement.

When FFXI came out I was surprised when Gamespot gave it an 8.2. As the interface, and control system, plus the lack of handholding, I believed at the time, was a dealbreaker for many.

In some ways FFXIV continues that tradition. IT is better in some instances but in others FFXI is better. I think that reviewers will see the discrepancy in the two and ultimately ask, "Why didn't they keep and improve upon things like the party invite system, search functions, AH, etc.... systems?"

I DO NOT see reviewers excusing these sorts of things. If something is different and it works then it will be excused, if something is different and turns out just to be a timesink or just flat out doesn't work, it will be called out on.

In the end though, MMOs are tough to review. You have to contend with being objective, but also playing a game you may not like for a long time to gain a fair judgement. Plus versus the fanbase the reviewer WILL get things wrong, and that's just due to a lack of interest or depth the reviewer can possibly take.

I see it getting an average B/B-, 75-80, type of score. Pretty smooth launch, a bit more handholding than FFXI, great presentation (music/graphics/story), cool job system. On the other hand, questionable UI, questionable omissions (no AH, lack of seek for party, etc.) especially when compared to other current MMOs.

But as with MMOs some of these things if improved on, could make or break the game, and only time will tell.

#13 Sep 26 2010 at 4:25 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
751 posts
theweenie wrote:
HallieXIV wrote:
This made me scratch my head. For me, the game is completely different in retail release compared with beta. The things you note are quite big but what about fixing exp for healers, what about greatly improved stability, the UI fix repaired the biggest issue with beta and the hw mouse fixed the second biggest issue.

Maybe it is just my computer but comparing retail to beta is like comparing apples and oranges.
I never experienced major stability problems in beta. I've had 2 crashes since retail launch, which would be roughly on par with what I would have had during beta. But the game has never been routinely crashing or hanging for me, not even in closed beta.

I mentioned the more responsive UI and hardware mouse. The XP fix for healers is nice, but it's not what I'd consider game changing. There were a few fixes and a few small changes since open beta, but overall we're playing the same game right now. That's what I was trying to say.

When it will become completely different (for me) will be when we get the chocobos easing travel/anima, world quests, linkshell companies, multiple retainers allowing for more crafting, etc. Basically what they mentioned in the pre-live event.


As a healer this fix was a pre-requisite for me playing the game and the biggest single issue with beta. If I cant get skill ups from playing my primary role in a party - why would I play my primary role?

Prior to this fix - you would never have been able to form parties in the game. That is why I think this is so critical rather then just being nice.

Biggest issues for me in final release are storage space, travel and trade (AH etc). Seems like we agree on that, and I am pretty sure the rest of the community agree also based on what I have read.

Most other issues are just haters hating and will disappear once many early adopters return to the MMO's they were playing before. Some people just dont like the game design but that is a matter of taste. I dont expect SE to change the menu system for example because lots of people really like it. There will not be changes made for a vocal minority that will alienate their core target market which generally consists of older players, looking for an RPG rather than a button masher.

Edited to write in English

Edited, Sep 26th 2010 6:26pm by HallieXIV
____________________________
FFXIV: Crafty Hallie, Ultros





#14 Sep 26 2010 at 5:02 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,535 posts
Kierk wrote:
I think it's a fair assessment but usually "pre-reviews" are pretty devoid of judgement.

When FFXI came out I was surprised when Gamespot gave it an 8.2. As the interface, and control system, plus the lack of handholding, I believed at the time, was a dealbreaker for many.


Don't forget, however, that game reviewers in general have a noticeable pro-RPG bias; even downright terrible RPGs like Quest 64 have average review scores above 55% while bad games of other genres will easily dip into the sub-40% range.
#15 Sep 26 2010 at 6:23 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
771 posts
BastokFL wrote:
Don't forget, however, that game reviewers in general have a noticeable pro-RPG bias; even downright terrible RPGs like Quest 64 have average review scores above 55% while bad games of other genres will easily dip into the sub-40% range.

WHOA WHOA WHOA!!! Quest 64 terrible? That game was awesome! One of the most innovative battle systems of it's time. Sure, the story was almost non-existent but I loved the nostalgic feel of it, it was like an oldschool NES RPG made 3D. =)
#16 Sep 26 2010 at 7:14 PM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
BRizzl3 wrote:
BastokFL wrote:
Don't forget, however, that game reviewers in general have a noticeable pro-RPG bias; even downright terrible RPGs like Quest 64 have average review scores above 55% while bad games of other genres will easily dip into the sub-40% range.

WHOA WHOA WHOA!!! Quest 64 terrible? That game was awesome! One of the most innovative battle systems of it's time. Sure, the story was almost non-existent but I loved the nostalgic feel of it, it was like an oldschool NES RPG made 3D. =)


The general consensus is that it's a bad game. For comparison's sake, its average review score (56%) is only marginally higher than the abomination that is Secret of the Stars (55%).

The most frequent complain is that the game is entirely too simplistic for a late-90's RPG - essentially a next-gen Mystic Quest. Several reviews flat-out said things like "it's a bad game" or "I'd rather play Final Fantasy or Dragon Warrior on NES" even while giving it scores of 5/10 or 6/10. (I think it's fair to say that if a game makes you want to play games from two generations earlier instead, it is certainly not of "average" quality.)

And regardless of whether or not you personally believe that the reviews were fair or that popular opinion matters at all, that doesn't change the fact that the bottom of the review barrel for RPGs is significantly higher than for other genres.
#17 Sep 26 2010 at 7:18 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
771 posts
Oh man, Secret of the Stars too >=| WTF! Thank you for making me realize how stupid reviewers are. Now reviews mean nothing to me. For RPGs at least.
#18 Sep 26 2010 at 7:24 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
351 posts
All right! Finally an honest-to-goodness revi-

Quote:
For now, though, things seem relatively peaceful


...What planet is this guy living on?
____________________________
Quote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
This may quite possibly be the most epicly failed anti-antitroll trolling attempt.
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 23 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (23)