Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
This Forum is Read Only

Square Enix: “Don’t Review FF14!"Follow

#1 Oct 05 2010 at 3:23 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,431 posts
http://n4g.com/news/619907/square-enix-dont-review-ff14-players-38-site-nsfw

I honestly dont want to stir up the haters, but the media is the media. I know SE will fix most of the serious gripes, but thats the point to a beta where they refused to listen... They got what they deserve(?)
#2 Oct 05 2010 at 3:27 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,987 posts
Square Enix: “Don’t Review FF14!"

Ha!!! It's so gonna get bashed to **** and back.
____________________________
=10 is about My Little Pony.
Some people say I'm the DEVIL.
Aluus wrote:
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU EVIL EVIL *******!!!!!!!!

KaneIsthara wrote:
You are the devil. Now it's gonna happen.

Kaolian wrote:
Also Tofu. We totally ban over Tofu as well.

My Brute - Valiarius
#3 Oct 05 2010 at 3:29 PM Rating: Good
**
603 posts
I agree that the game is not at the standard that they originally anticipated it being at release. That being said, the developers were not the ones who pushed the release. The end of September was the end of SEs financial year, enough said.

Is that an excuse? Not at all. I do however trust the developers, and think they were pressured into a release date when the game wasn't quite ready. If they are asking for a month for a decent review is because most likely in less than a month they have a serious update planned.

I do not believe it is fair to request that reviews be put off, but on the other hand, this game has an amazing potential, and I think it deserves a little more time to blossom before being sent off to the gallows.
#4 Oct 05 2010 at 3:30 PM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
Yoichi Wada wrote:
In response Square Enix Wada is reported as saying “That’s just how the Internet is. I’m even telling the creators not to take any notice.”


Because it's important to ignore the fact that a large number of people don't like your product... Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#5 Oct 05 2010 at 3:31 PM Rating: Decent
*
230 posts
I hope whoever reviews it mentions the Skill Point glitch where you dont get skill points even tho it says your getting it.

THAT IS THE FIOHE(*RY@#*($Y@*(#Y$(*@#Y$(*@$ worse glitch imaginable. Iv lost thousands of SP because of this.

;/

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:33pm by geotrick
#6 Oct 05 2010 at 3:33 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,987 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Yoichi Wada wrote:
In response Square Enix Wada is reported as saying “That’s just how the Internet is. I’m even telling the creators not to take any notice.”


Because it's important to ignore the fact that a large number of people don't like your product... Smiley: oyvey


He shouldn't worry, the potential customers aren't taking any notice, either, lol!!! We will simply not buy your faulty product, there, you happy now?

How I wish I could speak directly to Wada.
____________________________
=10 is about My Little Pony.
Some people say I'm the DEVIL.
Aluus wrote:
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU EVIL EVIL *******!!!!!!!!

KaneIsthara wrote:
You are the devil. Now it's gonna happen.

Kaolian wrote:
Also Tofu. We totally ban over Tofu as well.

My Brute - Valiarius
#7 Oct 05 2010 at 3:33 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
29 posts
SE deserves the reviews it gets. This goes for all MMO developers/publishers. Either release the game in a state you don't have a problem being reviewed or don't release until then. Demanding that people don't review it is just unreasonable and stupid. What can be reviewed up front should be. Many things about a MMO can be reviewed right away. Several weeks isn't needed. One can go back and do an update review to talk about content and system you don't have access to until you've played for months.

If they didn't want the game reviewed right away they should be working their butts off to patch the game daily. To show reviewers the game is improving.

I can understand if it was pushed out early so their quarterly reports looked better. However that doesn't excuse some of the problems that game has. Things that should be polished such as the UI, inventory systems, etc. Core aspects of the game. It's not like the lack of content is what people have a problem with it. I'd like to know exactly what they were doing during development for this game? Engine, interface, and systems are the most important aspects of a MMO. All of those should be solid and thought out in the beginning of development. Did they spend all the time on the graphics I wonder?

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:38pm by NeoStar9
#8 Oct 05 2010 at 3:36 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,450 posts
NeoStar9 wrote:
SE deserves the reviews it gets. This goes for all MMO developers/publishers. Either release the game in a state you don't have a problem being reviewed or don't release until then. Demanding that people don't review it is just unreasonable and stupid. What can be reviewed up front should be. Many things about a MMO can be reviewed right away. Several weeks isn't needed. One can go back and do an update review to talk about content and system you don't have access to until you've played for months.

If they didn't want the game reviewed right away they should be working their butts off to patch the game daily. To show reviewers the game is improving.


My question is: if the game wasn't in a state you wanted it reviewed in, why was it in a state you wanted people to pay money for it?

Why are these states different? If you're asking for money, people deserve to know what they're getting, and that's what reviewers do.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#9 Oct 05 2010 at 3:40 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
29 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:

My question is: if the game wasn't in a state you wanted it reviewed in, why was it in a state you wanted people to pay money for it?

Why are these states different? If you're asking for money, people deserve to know what they're getting, and that's what reviewers do.


Those are very good questions.
#10 Oct 05 2010 at 3:42 PM Rating: Good
***
1,422 posts
Am I the only one who noticed that the "full article" was hosted on none other than SankakuComplex? As much as I enjoy seeing richly-deserved **** slung at SE, they're not exactly the most credible source of information.

That said...

NeoStar9 wrote:
SE deserves the reviews it gets.

This.

Archmage Callinon wrote:
My question is: if the game wasn't in a state you wanted it reviewed in, why was it in a state you wanted people to pay money for it?


And this.
____________________________
FFXIV: Raji Skybrand (Leviathan)
Give a man a fish, he'll be fed for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll scream "F*** off noob, I know what I'm doing!" and continue to do it wrong.
#11 Oct 05 2010 at 3:43 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
691 posts
The actual wording was more along the lines of "wait until after a month into release like every other major game you guys review." The implication of "if you do, we won't give you free games before they release to the mainstream" was there, as well. Sound familiar? Yeah, most big companies do the same thing.
#12 Oct 05 2010 at 3:44 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,535 posts
Sankaku Complex making a big deal out of something very few people are making an issue out of? Stop the presses!
#13 Oct 05 2010 at 3:46 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
RajiFarlander wrote:
Am I the only one who noticed that the "full article" was hosted on none other than SankakuComplex? As much as I enjoy seeing richly-deserved sh*t slung at SE, they're not exactly the most credible source of information.
SankakuComplex isn't the first place I've heard of people saying this.
____________________________
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.
#14 Oct 05 2010 at 3:48 PM Rating: Decent
**
292 posts
Quote:
I agree that the game is not at the standard that they originally anticipated it being at release. That being said, the developers were not the ones who pushed the release. The end of September was the end of SEs financial year, enough said.

Is that an excuse? Not at all. I do however trust the developers, and think they were pressured into a release date when the game wasn't quite ready. If they are asking for a month for a decent review is because most likely in less than a month they have a serious update planned.

I do not believe it is fair to request that reviews be put off, but on the other hand, this game has an amazing potential, and I think it deserves a little more time to blossom before being sent off to the gallows


Of course it's not their fault!

They were forced into it!

They're victims, don't you see?!

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:50pm by Carbi
____________________________
"Crab, Beetle, Crawler, Crab, Beetle, Crawler, Crab, Crab, Crab, the odd Bat or Worm, Crab. All the time Crab... Thickshell, Steelshell, Snipper, Bigclaw, Rock Crab, Robber Crab. Enough with the **** Crab." -Diamondis

Yay!
#15 Oct 05 2010 at 3:49 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
167 posts
I don't care what most people say about a game. I will buy the game and try it out myself.

I'd rather make my own "review" of a game than read a review of any MMO in today's age.
Most reviewers have probably played WoW, and that isn't a fault against them, but it is very likely that they are unconsciously biased to any MMO not WoW. I understand that, and that is the reason I can't wait to try this game out for myself. Plus, no one i the same. What might be fun to you could be unbearable to someone else.

Everyone will exaggerate their beliefs. If someone says the game is bad... chances are they exaggerated a bit to make it worse than it is. Vice Versa. A excellent review is probably exaggerated to make his/her view "better."

Just try the game out for yourself and ignore most reviews. I like to read the 3 star or 2 star reviews. Those are the ones that hold the truth.

P.S. ibuypower needs to hurry up.
#16 Oct 05 2010 at 3:50 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,450 posts
Uryuu wrote:
The actual wording was more along the lines of "wait until after a month into release like every other major game you guys review." The implication of "if you do, we won't give you free games before they release to the mainstream" was there, as well. Sound familiar? Yeah, most big companies do the same thing.


I'm going to call bullsh*t on this for the following reason:

FFXIII was released in the US on March 9 according to gamespot
On March 15, kotaku posted their "Frankenreview" which is a review composed of other reviews... in this case 5 other reviews which must all have taken place before the publication date of the composite review

So it's clearly not a measure taken for every major release, this is a special request SE has made on behalf of FFXIV

EDIT: See below post for more-relevant comparison

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:00pm by Callinon
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#17 Oct 05 2010 at 3:52 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
SleeplessMickey wrote:
I agree that the game is not at the standard that they originally anticipated it being at release. That being said, the developers were not the ones who pushed the release. The end of September was the end of SEs financial year, enough said.

Is that an excuse? Not at all. I do however trust the developers, and think they were pressured into a release date when the game wasn't quite ready. If they are asking for a month for a decent review is because most likely in less than a month they have a serious update planned.

I do not believe it is fair to request that reviews be put off, but on the other hand, this game has an amazing potential, and I think it deserves a little more time to blossom before being sent off to the gallows.
If they needed an extra month to get the game ready, then every paying customer right now should get an extra free month of play.

Even if that is true, why not just come clean? They'll get so much more respect for being open and honest rather than being isolationist.

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 4:58pm by bsphil
____________________________
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.
#18 Oct 05 2010 at 3:52 PM Rating: Good
**
412 posts
SE telling reviewers not to review it so fast is somewhat ridiculous.
Most reviewers wait at least a month or more before reviewing MMORPGs. Why would they make an exception with FF14?
This just makes them look even more bad...like they themselves KNOW the game is in a somewhat abysmal state yet they choose to release it one month before its miraculous update that is going to net their game favorable reviews.

I feel stupid backing up SE even know...I'm going to wait and see what SE has in mind but I feel terrible about it.
____________________________
They appeared from the sky, the one without a heart... "Omega"...And the one who followed it..."Shinryuu"...
Final Fantasy 5
#19 Oct 05 2010 at 3:52 PM Rating: Good
***
2,987 posts
Carbi wrote:
Quote:
I agree that the game is not at the standard that they originally anticipated it being at release. That being said, the developers were not the ones who pushed the release. The end of September was the end of SEs financial year, enough said.

Is that an excuse? Not at all. I do however trust the developers, and think they were pressured into a release date when the game wasn't quite ready. If they are asking for a month for a decent review is because most likely in less than a month they have a serious update planned.

I do not believe it is fair to request that reviews be put off, but on the other hand, this game has an amazing potential, and I think it deserves a little more time to blossom before being sent off to the gallows


Of course it's not their fault!

They were forced into it!

They're victims, don't you see?!


Sarcasm-o-meter detecting a signal in the thousands, over 9000, to be exact!
____________________________
=10 is about My Little Pony.
Some people say I'm the DEVIL.
Aluus wrote:
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU EVIL EVIL *******!!!!!!!!

KaneIsthara wrote:
You are the devil. Now it's gonna happen.

Kaolian wrote:
Also Tofu. We totally ban over Tofu as well.

My Brute - Valiarius
#20 Oct 05 2010 at 3:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
1,431 posts
I realize I'm only using one reviewing site, but history shows the MMO reviews do come out before a month, actually right about now FFXIV is due @ IGN (have to include the early release edition since they didn't change anything)...
FFXIV (in progress) : not looking so good...
AION: 8.5
LOTR: 8.6
WoW: 9.1
FFXI: 6.9 (BS)


Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:56pm by sideways
#21 Oct 05 2010 at 3:55 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
OmegaTyrant wrote:
Sarcasm-o-meter detecting a signal in the thousands, over 9000, to be exact!
"A sarcasm detector? Oh yeah, that's a real useful invention."

*BOOM!*
____________________________
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.
#22 Oct 05 2010 at 3:58 PM Rating: Default
*
196 posts
bsphil wrote:
SleeplessMickey wrote:
I agree that the game is not at the standard that they originally anticipated it being at release. That being said, the developers were not the ones who pushed the release. The end of September was the end of SEs financial year, enough said.

Is that an excuse? Not at all. I do however trust the developers, and think they were pressured into a release date when the game wasn't quite ready. If they are asking for a month for a decent review is because most likely in less than a month they have a serious update planned.

I do not believe it is fair to request that reviews be put off, but on the other hand, this game has an amazing potential, and I think it deserves a little more time to blossom before being sent off to the gallows.
If they needed an extra month to get the game ready, then every paying customer right now should get an extra free month of play.


umm..you do have an extra free month of play. oh wait you want TWO extra free months of play.
#23 Oct 05 2010 at 3:58 PM Rating: Decent
**
292 posts
sideways wrote:
I realize I'm only using one reviewing site, but history shows the MMO reviews do come out before a month, actually right about now FFXIV is due @ IGN (have to include the early release edition since they didn't change anything)...
FFXIV (in progress) : not looking so good...
AION: 8.5
LOTR: 8.6
WoW: 9.1
FFXI: 6.9 (BS)


Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:56pm by sideways


Hmmm..
Didn't know about the 6.9 for FFXI. I saw mostly 7s and 8s.
But if FFXI got a 6.9 (which i understand. People who played other mmos have different assumptions of what an mmo is and FFXI hardly met any of them.) then FFXIV might be the first negative review on IGN. :0 Unprecedented! -2.5!
____________________________
"Crab, Beetle, Crawler, Crab, Beetle, Crawler, Crab, Crab, Crab, the odd Bat or Worm, Crab. All the time Crab... Thickshell, Steelshell, Snipper, Bigclaw, Rock Crab, Robber Crab. Enough with the **** Crab." -Diamondis

Yay!
#24 Oct 05 2010 at 3:59 PM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
On the off chance my earlier post is invalid because FFXIII isn't an MMO... that's fair... here's an MMO

Star Trek Online was released Feb 2 and reviewed by IGN on Feb 17, a mere 15 days later.

I apologize for not comparing apples to apples in my earlier post
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#25 Oct 05 2010 at 4:01 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
691 posts
In reply to the question of "Why would a magazine review a MMO earlier than other MMOs?"

Probably because certain companies have a large investment in gaming magazine media. You do know of Vivendi, right? They could "nudge" EGM or some other magazine to review earlier in order to keep their games looking good.

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:02pm by Uryuu
#26 Oct 05 2010 at 4:01 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
852 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
On the off chance my earlier post is invalid because FFXIII isn't an MMO... that's fair... here's an MMO

Star Trek Online was released Feb 2 and reviewed by IGN on Feb 17, a mere 15 days later.

I apologize for not comparing apples to apples in my earlier post


You could hit cap in STO in two weeks, so that's not surprising. What a wreck that game was/is.
____________________________
#27 Oct 05 2010 at 4:06 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Carbi wrote:
sideways wrote:
I realize I'm only using one reviewing site, but history shows the MMO reviews do come out before a month, actually right about now FFXIV is due @ IGN (have to include the early release edition since they didn't change anything)...
FFXIV (in progress) : not looking so good...
AION: 8.5
LOTR: 8.6
WoW: 9.1
FFXI: 6.9 (BS)


Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:56pm by sideways


Hmmm..
Didn't know about the 6.9 for FFXI. I saw mostly 7s and 8s.
But if FFXI got a 6.9 (which i understand. People who played other mmos have different assumptions of what an mmo is and FFXI hardly met any of them.) then FFXIV might be the first negative review on IGN. :0 Unprecedented! -2.5!
For some reason he decided to only show the 360 score for FFXI, which was understandably low because of how crappy the port was (the game was very obviously not of current-gen quality just in terms of graphics and performance). IGN puts FFXI for PS2 at 8.8 and for PC at 8.0, and metacritic puts the PC and ps2 version at 8.5. FFXI reviewed fairly well, really.

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 5:14pm by bsphil
____________________________
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.
#28 Oct 05 2010 at 4:11 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
991 posts
When it comes to reviews, one big thing i always point out

DO NOT LOOKE AT THE NUMBER VALUE, it really says nothing
if you read the review itself youll even find 9.0+ games being bashed for features that would cause other games to get 5.0's.
Aion was a huge example of this, high review scores, but if you read the review, they really hated the game, but something had to have caused that higher score(influence due to cash perhaps?)
Also XI was reviewed well after the game had been released, and when some games are on an older engine type, they get compared to newer games still and thus get scored lower cuz of it.

Also you gotta love some of these reviews that go into detail about a game, yet obviously never played it when you see what they wrote about said details(cuz they are very off)

But in all fairness, when it coems to MMOs especialy, reviews at launch are a bad idea, they dont really give you the true ins and outs, 3 months minimum before a real review comes out should be the standard.
Unlike ever other game out there, ALL MMOs are released incomplete by the standard(even wow was) and thus you can always find things wrong to downrate them.
____________________________


#29 Oct 05 2010 at 4:31 PM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
bsphil wrote:
RajiFarlander wrote:
Am I the only one who noticed that the "full article" was hosted on none other than SankakuComplex? As much as I enjoy seeing richly-deserved sh*t slung at SE, they're not exactly the most credible source of information.
SankakuComplex isn't the first place I've heard of people saying this.


They're not to first place to mention it, no.

They are the first English-speaking place I've seen to make a big deal out of it though.

From what I've seen, SE said what amounts to "we'd really like it if you wait a few weeks before slapping the numbers on" and then SankakuComplex screamed "ZOMG REVIEW EMBARGO!!!!!!!111!!!!!111!!1one!!1"
#30 Oct 05 2010 at 4:37 PM Rating: Default
***
2,987 posts
BastokFL wrote:
bsphil wrote:
RajiFarlander wrote:
Am I the only one who noticed that the "full article" was hosted on none other than SankakuComplex? As much as I enjoy seeing richly-deserved sh*t slung at SE, they're not exactly the most credible source of information.
SankakuComplex isn't the first place I've heard of people saying this.


They're not to first place to mention it, no.

They are the first English-speaking place I've seen to make a big deal out of it though.

From what I've seen, SE said what amounts to "we'd really like it if you wait a few weeks before slapping the numbers on" and then SankakuComplex screamed "ZOMG REVIEW EMBARGO!!!!!!!111!!!!!111!!1one!!1"


I bet Wada is actually expecting the reviews to start coming after PS3 release, when the actual retail version of FFXIV comes out. Too bad everyone else considers the PC version to be retail, instead of the Beta it actually is.
____________________________
=10 is about My Little Pony.
Some people say I'm the DEVIL.
Aluus wrote:
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU EVIL EVIL *******!!!!!!!!

KaneIsthara wrote:
You are the devil. Now it's gonna happen.

Kaolian wrote:
Also Tofu. We totally ban over Tofu as well.

My Brute - Valiarius
#31 Oct 05 2010 at 4:37 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
29 posts
The IGN review is going to be low for FFXIV looking at what they've already wrote. Rightfully so when you look at the issues being brought up.
#32 Oct 05 2010 at 4:39 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,987 posts
NeoStar9 wrote:
The IGN review is going to be low for FFXIV looking at what they've already wrote. Rightfully so when you look at the issues being brought up.


Wanna take bets?

IGN will give FFXIV a 4.5, in my opinion.
____________________________
=10 is about My Little Pony.
Some people say I'm the DEVIL.
Aluus wrote:
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU EVIL EVIL *******!!!!!!!!

KaneIsthara wrote:
You are the devil. Now it's gonna happen.

Kaolian wrote:
Also Tofu. We totally ban over Tofu as well.

My Brute - Valiarius
#33 Oct 05 2010 at 4:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
1,416 posts
Quote:
Too bad everyone else considers the PC version to be retail, instead of the Beta it actually is.

Must be because they paid $50-$70 for it? On top of whatever they spent getting their computer up to par?

I haven't been lucky enough to play beta or "live" yet, however I also saw someone say that there was no mail system? Please tell me that is not the case...
____________________________
Abort, Retry, Fail?
TeamAFK!

/equip Head Knowledge
You gain the latent effect of Power.
#34 Oct 05 2010 at 4:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
852 posts
sixgauge wrote:
Quote:
Too bad everyone else considers the PC version to be retail, instead of the Beta it actually is.

Must be because they paid $50-$70 for it? On top of whatever they spent getting their computer up to par?

I haven't been lucky enough to play beta or "live" yet, however I also saw someone say that there was no mail system? Please tell me that is not the case...


No mail, no auction house, no market ward/retainer search, no excuse for this game....
____________________________
#35 Oct 05 2010 at 5:10 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
29 posts
OmegaTyrant wrote:
NeoStar9 wrote:
The IGN review is going to be low for FFXIV looking at what they've already wrote. Rightfully so when you look at the issues being brought up.


Wanna take bets?

IGN will give FFXIV a 4.5, in my opinion.


I'll be a bit generous. I'll say 5.5 or 6. Even though they'll have issues with some things they'll still over look certain things. That's what IGN does usually when it comes to non-Nintendo system based games. The Final Fantasy name will earn it some forgiveness. If it didn't have the name I'd say a 4 or 4.5.
#36 Oct 05 2010 at 5:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
1,431 posts
bsphil wrote:
For some reason he decided to only show the 360 score for FFXI, which was understandably low because of how crappy the port was (the game was very obviously not of current-gen quality just in terms of graphics and performance). IGN puts FFXI for PS2 at 8.8 and for PC at 8.0, and metacritic puts the PC and ps2 version at 8.5. FFXI reviewed fairly well, really.


My bad, your right. I was just quickly picking the first result from the google search within IGN. nice catch.
#37 Oct 05 2010 at 5:36 PM Rating: Excellent
*
216 posts
We don't need them to make a giant sized patch that fixes everything all at once. We just need some small patches that help get through some of the more annoying issues right now. For example, the party SP bug. Or the lack of additional retainers.

Or if they can't implement additional retainers right now, give us a temporary fix. Boost the inventory space of current retainers so they can hold 3x the items. I don't care if the bazaar part works, I just need more storage space.
Archmage Callinon wrote:
My question is: if the game wasn't in a state you wanted it reviewed in, why was it in a state you wanted people to pay money for it?

Why are these states different? If you're asking for money, people deserve to know what they're getting, and that's what reviewers do.
You should submit that to Square's "Q&A with the Developers and Management." I sincerely doubt they would respond to it, but maybe it would get them moving faster on some patches.

I don't think the gaming sites should put off reviewing the game. Why SE is asking them to do this is because they're concerned that the low reviews would affect sales, but game companies should not receive a free pass like that. If it's ready to be sold, it's ready to be reviewed.

It's been almost 2 weeks now since the CE release and we still haven't seen any real launch patch. I'm a pretty patient guy, but I'm nearing my limit. They need to put out something soon.
#38 Oct 05 2010 at 5:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Because it's important to ignore the fact that a large number of people don't like your product...


Sadly, it worked for them in FFXI...

I'm of two minds of this.

One, I'm laughing my *** off at the publishers and the people who did, in fact, tell the developers to releace the product by a specific date. That was a majorly bad decission on behalf of management and I'm of full confidence that the developers could have stood to have at least another month or two of Alpha/Beta to polish the prouduct (and likely asked for it and were denied.)

I also, ironically, agree with BSphil in saying that if the company is inclined enough to tell reviewers not to review it, that they should extend the free trial time as well. I enjoy the game and I will defend it for it's good parts, but I won't defend dumb company management. (And yes, publishers and developers are two entirely different entities, just look at Activision/Blizzard and Infinity Ward: Which one do you credit for Modern Warfare 2?) It's not the first time they've awarded a free month either.

This isn't the first time I think SE's managment team and Development Team have been at odds with each other, and the company as a whole suffers for not listening to the developers. They could have saved a lot of initial ongoing subscriptions by keeping it in closed beta till it was more ready.

All this is, is Damage control, and everyone knows it. But if they're wanting to buy more time for the sake of the game's development and reputation, the first place they should be shelling out their money is to the subscribers. (Even IF I'm enjoying the game as is.)
#39 Oct 05 2010 at 5:48 PM Rating: Default
*
219 posts
IGN are never actual in their idiotic review.

For example, Lost planet 2. It should did Capcom a number on such a great title. Heck Lost planet 2 is even better then Resident Evil 5 or other capcom title that deserved a 9. But NO, IGN gave them 6.0 for
"buggy".

Buggy my ***, IGN's reviewer is just a horrible unskilled @ FPS complain about being shot off the train easily and die in few hits. I beat that level with ease with a friend because lost planet 2 is design to be COOP 100% and never solo friendly.

There you have it, that is the future of FFXIV. 3.0 @least. with a big liner say "We don't have anyone to play with, everyone just mind their own beeswax and we are lonely" IGN reviewers are practical loner with no friends. Please someone give them a facebook contact or something.

I will never follow IGN reviews. Redemption a 9.5? ****, i threw that game out instantly and WoW deserve a 9.1? ****, i threw it as soon expansion came. I am always amazing how grindtastic people never realize they are just buying a new expansion TO GRIND.

FFXI expansion doesn't make you grind! they give you great story and great content, not RAIDS that takes 5 days a week to crack.


And you guys, STOP with the BETA longer, first off, if this game don't release @ its peak, it lose its graphical advantage.

Secondly, BETA can't last too long for MMORPG because everyone will hit CAP and played everything by then.

Thirdly, limited content BETA can't be a good TESTING.

Lastly, Heck i love FFXIV and have it release now then later. If you don't like get off the game.

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 7:51pm by wrongfeifong
#40 Oct 05 2010 at 5:50 PM Rating: Good
***
2,815 posts
Quote:
But if they're wanting to buy more time for the sake of the game's development and reputation, the first place they should be shelling out their money is to the subscribers. (Even IF I'm enjoying the game as is. then they better start patching yesterday because they're almost out of time.


Fixd
____________________________
Minecraft : My anti-MMO
Terraria : My anti-Minecraft
#41 Oct 05 2010 at 5:54 PM Rating: Excellent
*
63 posts
Quote:
All this is, is Damage control, and everyone knows it. But if they're wanting to buy more time for the sake of the game's development and reputation, the first place they should be shelling out their money is to the subscribers. (Even IF I'm enjoying the game as is.)

They need to do something, be it an extra month to those who have purchased the game, or unleash that mythical patch that will make the game palatable to game critics (and by extension, players). The thing is... they only have thirty days to do either of these options. ****, at this point even a good faith attempt at a patch that fixes some of the minor (yet easily fixable issues) and an statement that they acknowledge the multitude of issues and are addressing them would tide many people over.

In terms of customer service, nobody ever dislikes you for giving away free days/months. It's an acknowledgment that you as a company understand and respect what consumers expect to be playing, and it respects the players for their initial investment. I can't remember many people being angry that a company admitted their faults and ate their loss to keep you around until things got better.
#42 Oct 05 2010 at 6:15 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
OmegaTyrant wrote:
NeoStar9 wrote:
The IGN review is going to be low for FFXIV looking at what they've already wrote. Rightfully so when you look at the issues being brought up.


Wanna take bets?

IGN will give FFXIV a 4.5, in my opinion.
I'd guess 7.

Hyrist, ****** Superhero wrote:
One, I'm laughing my *** off at the publishers and the people who did, in fact, tell the developers to releace the product by a specific date. That was a majorly bad decission on behalf of management and I'm of full confidence that the developers could have stood to have at least another month or two of Alpha/Beta to polish the prouduct (and likely asked for it and were denied.)
I have my doubts that "just another month" would polish the final product, based on how little polishing occurred during the 5 months they did get.

Hyrist, ****** Superhero wrote:
I also, ironically, agree with bsphil
The f*ck? ¬_¬

Hyrist, ****** Superhero wrote:
This isn't the first time I think SE's managment team and Development Team have been at odds with each other, and the company as a whole suffers for not listening to the developers. They could have saved a lot of initial ongoing subscriptions by keeping it in closed beta till it was more ready.
Well, not only that, but the developers have to listen to the community outreach team, and that team has to listen to the players. It's a full chain of operation that is unfortunately rife with problems across the board.

Refresherize wrote:
They need to do something, be it an extra month to those who have purchased the game, or unleash that mythical patch that will make the game palatable to game critics (and by extension, players).
/nitpick on

Don't you mean palatable to players, and by extension, game critics?

Edited, Oct 5th 2010 7:23pm by bsphil
____________________________
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.
#44 Oct 05 2010 at 6:35 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,801 posts
Release a crap game, expect crap reviews. Shocking, I know.
____________________________
WoW -- Zaia -- Dragonmaw -- Mage 80 BABY! Alchemy 450
Also... Hunter 62, Rogue 52, Warrior 66, Warlock 43, Death Knight 70, Shaman Who Cares? ;)

FFXI -- Caia -- Retired/Deleted -- Blm 75, Alchemy 97
Pandimonium server - Rank 10 - Bastok

Zaela Rdm -- 35, Alchemy 45 -- Forced into retirement because I didn't have the right kind of credit card. Hope it was worth 18 bucks a month, SE.

#45 Oct 05 2010 at 7:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
I don't trust anything Sankaku Complex says about SE and I actually like Sankaku Complex.

The writers are just completely biased and full of ****. They're basically expected to be trolls.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#46 Oct 05 2010 at 7:20 PM Rating: Decent
*
182 posts
Wow... that's the first time i hear such thing after a release.
Think positive... at least they know they gave us crap. And if they want reviews 1 month after release i guess a patch which will make it rain gil, stop the lag, make people actually be able to partyplay will appear in the next few days and make us all be very happy. kumbaya my lord kumbaya
#47 Oct 05 2010 at 7:24 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
If you guys are that hung up on SankakuComplex, here's the original article I heard the info from, it came out just about a week before that one did.
____________________________
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.
#48 Oct 05 2010 at 7:24 PM Rating: Good
**
429 posts
SE needs to just come and flat out tell the world that they released the game 6 months too early. The damage control they're trying to pull is doing a lot more damage to the game than telling people it's a premature release.

The game doesn't have an AH/musketeer/inventory sort/whatever not because the devs felt the game didn't need it, but because they didn't have enough time to put them in before release.

They tried to compete with Cataclysm's release date and got burned hard for it.
#49 Oct 05 2010 at 7:27 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
175 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
NeoStar9 wrote:
SE deserves the reviews it gets. This goes for all MMO developers/publishers. Either release the game in a state you don't have a problem being reviewed or don't release until then. Demanding that people don't review it is just unreasonable and stupid. What can be reviewed up front should be. Many things about a MMO can be reviewed right away. Several weeks isn't needed. One can go back and do an update review to talk about content and system you don't have access to until you've played for months.

If they didn't want the game reviewed right away they should be working their butts off to patch the game daily. To show reviewers the game is improving.


My question is: if the game wasn't in a state you wanted it reviewed in, why was it in a state you wanted people to pay money for it?

Why are these states different? If you're asking for money, people deserve to know what they're getting, and that's what reviewers do.


Nail on the head, bud. Smack on.
____________________________
BST90/BLM90/RDM75/WHM80/BRD75/NIN75/SMN75/THF75/WAR75; Goldsmithing 93; Fishing 100; Ebisu Rod.
#50 Oct 05 2010 at 7:31 PM Rating: Decent
Somehow I think FFXIV's release will be known as the MMO Square Enix seriously ****ed up at launch. It's really down to whoever decided they needed to push and shove this game out the door so soon, hopefully those individuals will be fired. Anyway I agree (partially) with SE, wait until the game's been out a month before you give a true review. If the game really still tanks, then bash away, hate away, throw fecal matter at SE headquarters and kick every moogle you see in its kupballs.
____________________________
FINAL FANTASY XIV Roleplayer

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



#51 Oct 05 2010 at 8:00 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
Quote:
That said...


NeoStar9 wrote:
SE deserves the reviews it gets.
This.


Archmage Callinon wrote:
My question is: if the game wasn't in a state you wanted it reviewed in, why was it in a state you wanted people to pay money for it?

And this.


This.
« Previous 1 2
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 14 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (14)