Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

85/100 Metascore on MetacriticFollow

#1 Sep 17 2013 at 12:15 PM Rating: Excellent
This was posted within the 9.5 on Forbes thread, but wanted to post it here, too, because Metacritic is perhaps the most relevant of all gaming review scores.

Good review scores are great and all, but the real test will be how this game has evolved a year or two from now.

Keep it going, Yoshi-P!
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#2 Sep 17 2013 at 2:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,208 posts
LINK FOR THE GOOGLE IMPAIRED
____________________________
The Kraken Club - (Ultros FC)
Character Name: Meat Mithkabob
#3 Sep 17 2013 at 2:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Thank you, Hairspray.

Effing Google!

Funny thing about the negative reviews... the vast majority of them are about the server issues, which were resolved a couple weeks ago. That's unfortunate... the user ratings would have been much higher had SE known it would have such a hit on its hands.

Very glad though to see that the professional reviewers are rating the game based on actual gameplay.

Seriously, who would have predicted an 85% score back in 2010?

Edited, Sep 17th 2013 1:40pm by Thayos
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#4 Sep 17 2013 at 2:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,208 posts
Thayos wrote:
Thank you, Hairspray.

Effing Google!


I used "Moogle" Smiley: grin

MOOGLE
____________________________
The Kraken Club - (Ultros FC)
Character Name: Meat Mithkabob
#5 Sep 17 2013 at 2:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Love it!
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#6 Sep 17 2013 at 3:20 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
**
340 posts
This is the best for the google impared people.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=metacritic+FFXIV&l=1

Hope it teaches some at the same time :)
____________________________
Pryssant Novio - Ultros Server.
<Chocobo> <cooking>? <Yes, please>!
HOOYA!!!!
http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=97
#7 Sep 17 2013 at 3:52 PM Rating: Decent
24 posts
Sounds about right to me!
#8 Sep 17 2013 at 4:59 PM Rating: Excellent
I use lmgtfy.com all the time! Best site ever.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#9 Sep 17 2013 at 5:07 PM Rating: Default
****
4,146 posts
Thayos wrote:
Seriously, who would have predicted an 85% score back in 2010?


After 3 years? Sounds legit to me.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#10 Sep 17 2013 at 8:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Yeah, SE used its time with the new game wisely!

I am also glad most reviewers are done crying over FFXIV being p2p. Hearing about how it should be free was getting old... I'm glad Yoshi-P stood up and said "enough."
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#11 Sep 17 2013 at 9:00 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,948 posts
TESO announced P2P with Cash Shop and people are calling murder.
____________________________




#12 Sep 17 2013 at 10:27 PM Rating: Good
***
3,442 posts
Khornette wrote:
TESO announced P2P with Cash Shop and people are calling murder.


I suppose it depends what they put in it.

WoW has a cash shop too. Somehow the world has not come to an end.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#13 Sep 17 2013 at 10:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
TESO announced P2P with Cash Shop and people are calling murder.


I think this is a far better option than F2P/cash shop, because you still get the quality that you can only get with P2P games.

You can count on everything in the cash shop being pure fluff items.

Keep in mind, Yoshi-P said if FFXIV ever did go F2P, then the game would probably remain P2P but maybe just have some F2P servers. It's pretty clear that P2P is the way to go, otherwise, more developers would just launch their games as F2P.

Edited, Sep 17th 2013 9:35pm by Thayos
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#14 Sep 17 2013 at 10:34 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*
150 posts
funny just about every single negative review is over the launch log in issue. all are like rated 0.

game would be about a 90-95 if you counted people who are rating it based on the game not the login issues the first week.
#15 Sep 17 2013 at 10:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
game would be about a 90-95 if you counted people who are rating it based on the game not the login issues the first week.


Yep. And deservedly so!
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#16 Sep 18 2013 at 1:55 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Quote:
Keep in mind, Yoshi-P said if FFXIV ever did go F2P, then the game would probably remain P2P but maybe just have some F2P servers. It's pretty clear that P2P is the way to go, otherwise, more developers would just launch their games as F2P.


If you simply think logically this is what you will come up with.

Free to play makes more money, however free to play means you have to give the game away as a free download.

If you launch as pay to play, you can sell boxes for $30-60. Wait 12 months, go free to play (this is what I can see XIV doing just as those others are going to do).

You just got the best of both worlds. Publishers aren't launching as p2p because it's the better option, they are doing it because they can sell you the game that way and get a lump of money upfront.
____________________________
BANNED
#17 Sep 18 2013 at 5:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
745 posts
The negative reviews due to server issues remind me of the Amazon reviewers that rate a product low because it shipped later than they expected or the box was dented.
____________________________
FFXIV - Neo Geo (formerly Droxy Durango)
FFXI - Brit *Manly man on the Fairy server*
{Retired for good in 2010 after the server transfer and forced name change)

#18 Sep 18 2013 at 5:54 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Droxy wrote:
The negative reviews due to server issues remind me of the Amazon reviewers that rate a product low because it shipped later than they expected or the box was dented.


Complaining because an online only game is unplayable for well over a week seems a pretty valid complaint to me.
____________________________
BANNED
#19 Sep 18 2013 at 6:00 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
24 posts
I think 85/100 is pretty fair and mostly accurate. Login issues aside, you can't ask reviewers to simply ignore not being able to login to the game. However, it seems that most of the reviewers actually gave weight to the ACTUAL gameplay instead of bashing a wonderful game because of launch issues. I think there is a happy medium between bashing and blind fanboism with FFXIV. Did the game have issues? Yes. Is the game awesome? Yes.
#20 Sep 18 2013 at 7:02 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
**
600 posts
preludes wrote:
Droxy wrote:
The negative reviews due to server issues remind me of the Amazon reviewers that rate a product low because it shipped later than they expected or the box was dented.


Complaining because an online only game is unplayable for well over a week seems a pretty valid complaint to me.


How can one review a game's "Gameplay" if they can't or don't actually "Play" the game? Smiley: dubious Thus one should wait until they can actually play the game before they rate the contents of the game. Complain about the servers on the SE forums. Smiley: lol
____________________________

Quote:
Fiddle Faddle!

#21 Sep 18 2013 at 8:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Keep in mind, Yoshi-P said if FFXIV ever did go F2P, then the game would probably remain P2P but maybe just have some F2P servers. It's pretty clear that P2P is the way to go, otherwise, more developers would just launch their games as F2P.


I think SE has learned through FFXI that P2P is the best way to make more money over longer periods of time. By having a few F2P servers, SE could keep the game P2P for its gamers who enjoy P2P, and then there could be a few servers with limited versions of the game and the typical F2P pay walls. I'm actually surprised that kind of setup isn't more common.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#22 Sep 18 2013 at 9:08 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
I can just imagine a F2P server's specific blocks: $5 for your airship pass, $10 for your chocobo, $1 access per dungeon raid, etc.

By the time you pay for all that stuff a la carte you might as well have just paid a **** sub fee.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#23 Sep 18 2013 at 9:22 AM Rating: Decent
****
5,745 posts
jayfly wrote:
preludes wrote:
Droxy wrote:
The negative reviews due to server issues remind me of the Amazon reviewers that rate a product low because it shipped later than they expected or the box was dented.

Complaining because an online only game is unplayable for well over a week seems a pretty valid complaint to me.

How can one review a game's "Gameplay" if they can't or don't actually "Play" the game? Smiley: dubious Thus one should wait until they can actually play the game before they rate the contents of the game. Complain about the servers on the SE forums. Smiley: lol

You completely missed preludes point. Shipped-late and dented-box complaints are not analogous to can't-play complaints for FFXIV.
____________________________
Lyonheart, like Eorzia, will be reborn in FFXIV!

FFXI veteran (Lyonheart and Lakiskline of Lakshmi)
1/467 on signed HQ Weskit!!!
#24 Sep 18 2013 at 9:38 AM Rating: Good
***
3,442 posts
preludes wrote:
Droxy wrote:
The negative reviews due to server issues remind me of the Amazon reviewers that rate a product low because it shipped later than they expected or the box was dented.


Complaining because an online only game is unplayable for well over a week seems a pretty valid complaint to me.


It is a completely valid complaint.

It is not a review of the product.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#25 Sep 18 2013 at 9:52 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
I've been a FFXIV hater ever since 1.0 released and ruined the brand. Luckily some old friends talked me into trying Beta 3 and the rest was history. SE had restored my confidence so much during the beta. Ironically, I was now defending SE for the server issues following the Phase 3 and the launch. Maybe it was because of my IT background, but I knew the servers were overloaded and SE obviously wasn't ready for that many people. Yoshi later confirmed my hunch which proved beyond doubt, SE was really taken back by the support. People need to realize that if the game itself wasn't ready, FFXIV would of had many update patches. This wasn't the case, the majority of issues were server side. SE communicated their issues and fixed them in a timely manner. Maybe not soon enough for some people, but these server expansions weren't easy to do. SE risked destabilizing the entire network if they failed to do it right. In essence, Square put it all on the line with FFXIV ARR much like they did in the late 80's when this sleeper title called Final Fantasy was supposed to be the company's final project.

I'm giving FFXIV ARR a solid 9.0. Thank you Yoshi for this wonderful game.
#26 Sep 18 2013 at 10:29 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Thayos wrote:
Quote:
Keep in mind, Yoshi-P said if FFXIV ever did go F2P, then the game would probably remain P2P but maybe just have some F2P servers. It's pretty clear that P2P is the way to go, otherwise, more developers would just launch their games as F2P.


I think SE has learned through FFXI that P2P is the best way to make more money over longer periods of time. By having a few F2P servers, SE could keep the game P2P for its gamers who enjoy P2P, and then there could be a few servers with limited versions of the game and the typical F2P pay walls. I'm actually surprised that kind of setup isn't more common.


It's non-existent because it doesn't work. Games that offer bad f2p models don't get players, the problem simply is that there have been really good f2p models and f2p players won't put up with p2w type systems anymore (even in Japan). You have to be one thing or the other or you achieve nothing by doing it.
____________________________
BANNED
#27 Sep 18 2013 at 10:37 AM Rating: Good
****
5,745 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
preludes wrote:
Droxy wrote:
The negative reviews due to server issues remind me of the Amazon reviewers that rate a product low because it shipped later than they expected or the box was dented.


Complaining because an online only game is unplayable for well over a week seems a pretty valid complaint to me.


It is a completely valid complaint.

It is not a review of the product.

It's an incomplete review of the product. Server availability is part of the product, unlike the shipping issues in the Amazon reviews mentioned by Droxy.
____________________________
Lyonheart, like Eorzia, will be reborn in FFXIV!

FFXI veteran (Lyonheart and Lakiskline of Lakshmi)
1/467 on signed HQ Weskit!!!
#28 Sep 18 2013 at 11:32 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
630 posts
Just as, if not more so, important than the critic reviews is the actual gamer reviews. FFXIV 1.0 Gamer reviews were horrendous.

Add on top of that the amount of reviews that have come in are more than double 1.0 as well. All in all very positive signs for the game, I'm excited to keep moving forward:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/final-fantasy-xiv-online

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/final-fantasy-xiv-online-a-realm-reborn
#29 Sep 18 2013 at 12:11 PM Rating: Decent
*
249 posts
Strangerous wrote:
funny just about every single negative review is over the launch log in issue. all are like rated 0.

game would be about a 90-95 if you counted people who are rating it based on the game not the login issues the first week.


Thayos wrote:
Quote:
game would be about a 90-95 if you counted people who are rating it based on the game not the login issues the first week.


Yep. And deservedly so!

Reviews come out moment one of a game's launch. If the game isnt stable at launch it will get justifiably bad reviews. Its not the reviewers fault, but SE's.
#30 Sep 18 2013 at 1:39 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,442 posts
Quote:
Reviews come out moment one of a game's launch. If the game isnt stable at launch it will get justifiably bad reviews. Its not the reviewers fault, but SE's.


Most reviewers at this point realize that it takes longer than that to review an MMO effectively.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#31 Sep 18 2013 at 1:40 PM Rating: Default
*
249 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Quote:
Reviews come out moment one of a game's launch. If the game isnt stable at launch it will get justifiably bad reviews. Its not the reviewers fault, but SE's.


Most reviewers at this point realize that it takes longer than that to review an MMO effectively.

Most reviewers write their reviews during open beta.
#32 Sep 18 2013 at 3:21 PM Rating: Excellent
How that everyone's talking about ARR, I think the game will gain even more steam with the first few patches, especially after the virtual trickle of content that's came following F2P games like GW2... that game hyped up regular content updates, but really didn't follow through. SE pumping legit content into FFXIV will be a pleasant surprise for the industry.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#33 Sep 18 2013 at 4:30 PM Rating: Default
*
249 posts
Thayos wrote:
How that everyone's talking about ARR, I think the game will gain even more steam with the first few patches, especially after the virtual trickle of content that's came following F2P games like GW2... that game hyped up regular content updates, but really didn't follow through. SE pumping legit content into FFXIV will be a pleasant surprise for the industry.

We shall see if they keep that lofty goal of constant content. Many mmo developers have aimed for the same goals (TSW monthly content, rift 3 months content) to only drop that plan after a couple of updates when they ran out of pre made material left over from development.
#34 Sep 18 2013 at 8:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
745 posts
ShadowofaDoubt wrote:
Thayos wrote:
How that everyone's talking about ARR, I think the game will gain even more steam with the first few patches, especially after the virtual trickle of content that's came following F2P games like GW2... that game hyped up regular content updates, but really didn't follow through. SE pumping legit content into FFXIV will be a pleasant surprise for the industry.

We shall see if they keep that lofty goal of constant content. Many mmo developers have aimed for the same goals (TSW monthly content, rift 3 months content) to only drop that plan after a couple of updates when they ran out of pre made material left over from development.


Your name is appropriate. Quite the doubter. You are right about those games, however those publishers didn't make an MMO over a decade ago that is still getting updates and paid subscriptions like SE has done with FFXI. How many expansions has that had now? They also haven't spent the time to revive a horrible product into a **** fine experience like SE has done with FFXIV, either.

I'm going to go ahead and give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. There will be content for a while to come.
____________________________
FFXIV - Neo Geo (formerly Droxy Durango)
FFXI - Brit *Manly man on the Fairy server*
{Retired for good in 2010 after the server transfer and forced name change)

#35 Sep 18 2013 at 8:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Yep... those of us who were around during the heyday of FFXI know that SE is more than capable of pumping out great content.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#36 Sep 19 2013 at 2:58 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Thayos wrote:
Yep... those of us who were around during the heyday of FFXI know that SE is more than capable of pumping out great content.


Didn't really work for Rift, that game added more content than any mmo has ever added before. Still continued to decline.

We will see if XIV ARR is a builder or a sinker over the coming months, if they have to start adding servers then it's a builder (launch server additions don't count, see swtor). Most failed mmos start big and go downhill from there.
____________________________
BANNED
#37 Sep 19 2013 at 4:27 AM Rating: Default
The score is about right... well more like it should be at 80. The game has potential maybe after a few patches, but as of right now, it's getting kind of boring. Grinding the same primals and dungeons for 2 weeks straight already gets really old. So only thing we have to look forward to is Bahumut's Coil? Game might be better in 3 months when they release new content, but I simply can't see myself grinding what they already have out right now and waiting 3 months for something different.
#38 Sep 19 2013 at 6:26 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
**
600 posts
svlyons wrote:
jayfly wrote:
preludes wrote:
Droxy wrote:
The negative reviews due to server issues remind me of the Amazon reviewers that rate a product low because it shipped later than they expected or the box was dented.

Complaining because an online only game is unplayable for well over a week seems a pretty valid complaint to me.

How can one review a game's "Gameplay" if they can't or don't actually "Play" the game? Smiley: dubious Thus one should wait until they can actually play the game before they rate the contents of the game. Complain about the servers on the SE forums. Smiley: lol

You completely missed preludes point. Shipped-late and dented-box complaints are not analogous to can't-play complaints for FFXIV.


And you completely missed my point. How can one "review" a product if the product is held up by the "producer" of the product, i.e. if I order a toothbrush (game) from walmart online (SE), and the shipping line (Servers) is holding up my product because of traffic, then how can I say (review) that the toothbrush (game) sucks and won't clean my teeth?

Edited, Sep 19th 2013 8:28am by jayfly
____________________________

Quote:
Fiddle Faddle!

#39 Sep 19 2013 at 8:27 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
FFXI just had it's 5th major expansion and it had 6 mini expansions prior to that as well. (3 of those, collectively known as Abyssea, broke the game and shook it up more than any of the big expansions did since CoP.)

SE also adds content to games outside of expansions via patches. We're getting them about every six weeks in FFXI now.

There are two types of content devs can add to games: New stuff, or new story/game mechanics. SE always adds both in their patches.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#40 Sep 19 2013 at 10:04 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Catwho wrote:
FFXI just had it's 5th major expansion and it had 6 mini expansions prior to that as well. (3 of those, collectively known as Abyssea, broke the game and shook it up more than any of the big expansions did since CoP.)

SE also adds content to games outside of expansions via patches. We're getting them about every six weeks in FFXI now.

There are two types of content devs can add to games: New stuff, or new story/game mechanics. SE always adds both in their patches.


Expansions aren't guaranteed.

What FFXI has done really has nothing to do with what FFXIV will do, so many variables have changed since then. The company spent far more money making this than they did FFXI, the company needs money far more now than they did back then, they have different people in charge of the company and leading the game than when XI was in its prime, mmo players are far less likely to stick with games than they used to and far less likely so buy an exp ontop of paying a sub, FFXI didn't peak till years into its life while modern mmos peak early and lose players.

It's hard to justify making and publishing proper expansions if you can't justify it based on player numbers, GW2 promised expansions but once they saw player loss they changed it to patches only. Developer team size is also based on player numbers. The whole point is to update the game to stop players leaving not to spend more money than you're making.
____________________________
BANNED
#41 Sep 19 2013 at 10:20 AM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Expansions aren't guaranteed.


An expansion for FFXIV is like 99.9% guaranteed. A lot of work is already done.

While FFXIV certainly cost more to make, all of the work on ARR was paid for in house, just as work for XI was. The fact there are no shareholders to repay is HUGE. All FFXIV needs to do to be successful is pay for costs from here on out. That said, this game should have no problem making an overall profit... it's just that good of a game.

Also, whereas FFXI launched in Japan a year before NA, FFXIV is getting a worldwide launch, hence the HUGE playerbase right off the bat (which FFXI didn't have). That will greatly bridge the gap between how long FFXIV needs to be overall profitable. And, unlike FFXI, XIV will be debuting on a third platform within the next 8 months or so... that will bring in even more subscribers.

FFXIV is also getting much more media attention early on than XI ever did. Ironically, the reason for the attention was the failed first attempt back in 2010. Fortunately for SE though, they did such a good job with ARR that now most of the media attention is overwhelmingly positive.

85 on metacritic.com? 8.5/10 or whatever on IGN? 9.5 by Forbes? The 3.5/5 from that smaller Web site is the worst review I've seen yet, and even that review is a good review! I've read numerous other reviews that give the game tons of praise, but not a number score.

The future is so, so bright for Eorzea!
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#42 Sep 19 2013 at 10:31 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Quote:
An expansion for FFXIV is like 99.9% guaranteed. A lot of work is already done.


That was the case for GW2 also and expansions was one of the main ways they were going to make money even, they still went back on it based on player loss. They could easily split up an expansion and feed it out in bits as patches over years.

Nothing is guaranteed.

Funnily enough, the staggered release for FFXI was one of the things that helped keep it going for so long.

As for reviews? Well other mmos have had far higher review scores from the sites you mentioned and it didn't help them that much.
____________________________
BANNED
#43 Sep 19 2013 at 11:12 AM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
That was the case for GW2



GW2 was F2P, and the F2P model isn't really conducive to actual content expansions.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#44 Sep 19 2013 at 12:14 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Thayos wrote:
Quote:
That was the case for GW2



GW2 was F2P, and the F2P model isn't really conducive to actual content expansions.


It was not F2P it was B2P and expansion packs were supposed to be integral to making the large development budget back since it had a pretty weak cash shop at launch. Free to play means you pay no sub and download the game for free. You had to buy GW2 for $60.

Oh and also Guild Wars 1 was exactly the same and put out 4 or 5 expansions, it was an integral part of why the game was successfull because they made money from those expansions.

Did I just prove that a previous successful game doing something doesn't guarantee a follow up will do the same thing? I think I did. There goes the anything FFXI did or achieved applies to FFXIV argument.

Edited, Sep 19th 2013 2:18pm by preludes
____________________________
BANNED
#45 Sep 19 2013 at 12:36 PM Rating: Excellent
I don't really see your point.

1) F2P and B2P are pretty much the same, in terms of this discussion... no subscription fees. I've never heard anyone cry over having to pay for the FFXIV software, just the monthly fee.

2) GW1 had expansions, and GW2 did not. GW1 was successful, GW2 was not.

FFXIV has an expansion planned to roll out, and SE's track record on delivering expansions is 100 percent. So...

I guess agree, that's just one more thing that will make FFXIV successful.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#46 Sep 19 2013 at 12:39 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Warhammer Online announced it is shutting down completely instead of going full F2P.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#47 Sep 19 2013 at 12:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Wow.. Gotta wonder of gamers are getting fatigued by the F2P model.

Best things in life aren't free... ;)

Edited, Sep 19th 2013 11:48am by Thayos
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#48 Sep 19 2013 at 12:56 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Catwho wrote:
Warhammer Online announced it is shutting down completely instead of going full F2P.


Quote:
Fantasy MMO Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning will come to an end on 18th December, developer Mythic has announced.

This is due to the developer's licensing deal with IP-owner Games Workshop coming to an end. Since Mythic will cease to run the game in December, it's no longer selling three month game subscriptions or allowing players to renew their account for that long.

"Games Workshop has cultivated a world class IP. We were lucky enough to play in their universe for nearly a decade, with five great long years live," said producer Carrie Gouskos in a blog post reflecting on her time on the project. "However, like all things - our contract has come to an end. Both Games Workshop and Mythic agreed to part ways, despite how hard it is emotionally on us to let the game go."

Despite Mythic and Games Workshop splitting up when the licensing deal expires, Mythic is adamant that there's no animosity between the two companies. "It has been a tremendous honor to work with Games Workshop and even though we may be parting ways, our relationship with them remains strong," Gouskos stated.
____________________________
BANNED
#49 Sep 19 2013 at 1:32 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
If they thought the game could be profitable F2P, they could have renegotiated the contract for that purpose.

They didn't.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#50 Sep 19 2013 at 1:33 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
254 posts
jayfly wrote:
svlyons wrote:
jayfly wrote:
preludes wrote:
Droxy wrote:
The negative reviews due to server issues remind me of the Amazon reviewers that rate a product low because it shipped later than they expected or the box was dented.

Complaining because an online only game is unplayable for well over a week seems a pretty valid complaint to me.

How can one review a game's "Gameplay" if they can't or don't actually "Play" the game? Smiley: dubious Thus one should wait until they can actually play the game before they rate the contents of the game. Complain about the servers on the SE forums. Smiley: lol

You completely missed preludes point. Shipped-late and dented-box complaints are not analogous to can't-play complaints for FFXIV.


And you completely missed my point. How can one "review" a product if the product is held up by the "producer" of the product, i.e. if I order a toothbrush (game) from walmart online (SE), and the shipping line (Servers) is holding up my product because of traffic, then how can I say (review) that the toothbrush (game) sucks and won't clean my teeth?

Edited, Sep 19th 2013 8:28am by jayfly

It's more like getting an electric toothbrush that won't start. I would think that game reviewers would like to get their reviews out in the general vicinity of the game's launch. Thererfore they reviewed what they had. It's like the deadline for a paper, if you don't turn in the paper, you get an F.

I love this game & I don't believe those reviews reflect the experience I am having now, but they sure did reflect the first week.
____________________________
Skadi Scion / Ultros Server

formerly Skadisleeves of Lakshmi in FFXI
#51 Sep 19 2013 at 1:43 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Thayos wrote:
I don't really see your point.

1) F2P and B2P are pretty much the same, in terms of this discussion... no subscription fees. I've never heard anyone cry over having to pay for the FFXIV software, just the monthly fee.

2) GW1 had expansions, and GW2 did not. GW1 was successful, GW2 was not.

FFXIV has an expansion planned to roll out, and SE's track record on delivering expansions is 100 percent. So...

I guess agree, that's just one more thing that will make FFXIV successful.


1) It's not free if you have to pay $60. Sub or not makes no difference anyway, Gw1 put out 5 and was also b2p.

2) GW2 was top of the charts everywhere for months, it's sold over 3 million copies and had far more players than XIV. It also had 460,000 concurrent players for NA and EU compared to FFXIV which peaked 325,000 for JP/NA and EU. FFXIV had 3 regions and had no afk kicker so many of those were afk anyway, Gw2 had 2 regions and didn't pad the numbers with afkers and still beat it. If you are saying GW2 wasn't successful what does that say about FFXIV?

Quote:
FFXIV has an expansion planned to roll out, and SE's track record on delivering expansions is 100 percent


Gw2 had an expansion almost ready to roll out and Arenanet had a 100% track record of doing that with Gw1, it still changed its mind about it after seeing player drop.

Quote:
An expansion for FFXIV is like 99.9% guaranteed. A lot of work is already done.


Made up %, nobody knows how far along they are with it at all. There is no release date or even a name for it, vaporware until proven otherwise.

Quote:
If they thought the game could be profitable F2P, they could have renegotiated the contract for that purpose.

They didn't.


If you played the game you would know that there are a lot of reasons it happened the way it did, Mythic were hit with massive layoffs when EA bought them which pretty much crippled them (so they were pretty much unable and unwilling to do the massive patches required to go and continue as a f2p title), they are moving away from these kinds of games and into mobile gaming anyway. Also GW are notorious asshats for overcharging for their licences, I think Mythic just basically had enough though.

The only mmos that close usually are the ones with big issues behind the scenes and that's what happened here.


Edited, Sep 19th 2013 3:59pm by preludes
____________________________
BANNED
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 72 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (72)