And these are valid questions answered on other game reviews? Are all game reviews invalidated if they do not break down how many hours they spent across which character classes to what level and how many hours of PvP/PvE they logged?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Angry Joe Elder Scrolls Online Review
- Thread starter crazepharmacist
- Start date
And these are valid questions answered on other game reviews? Are all game reviews invalidated if they do not break down how many hours they spent across which character classes to what level and how many hours of PvP/PvE they logged?
Unknown Soldier
Member
MMOs have lots of problems but gold spammers are in all MMOs. Unless it is literally your first MMO you should be used to spammers by now.
There is a reason why spammers are allowed to spam. Banning spammers does nothing, they just make a new spam account and keep going. Instead you let them spam so you can watch for players to buy gold and which accounts actually deliver gold and find the network. Then you drop the banhammer on the gold buyer, the mule hosting the gold, the bot feeding the gold, etc. MMO publishers aren't stupid, they've been fighting RMT longer than you've been playing MMOs.
Rinaldimanc
Banned
That is right angry joe! I've been telling my brother this
this game is a....
this game is a....
My point stands. It is incorrect to review a MMO and allocate a score without having sufficient experience of the content and mechanics. Of course you are entitled to your opinion of ESO after dedicating 60 hours to it. The difference is you aren't "professionally" reviewing it and allocating a score.
With you being one of the more vocal defenders of Joe so I have to ask you a couple of fairly simple question. Is it ok to review and allocate a score without completing the game? For example how would you feel if [insert web site] offered a 10/10 score to Watchdogs only to find out the reviewer played 40% of the content?
So then no industry review of an MMO has ever been valid since the genre started. Not just MMO's, do you think reviewers completed Skyrim to 100% of every quest before reviewing it? WoW? Everquest? DAoC?
Maximus.
Member
I can't say that is the case because I don't actively read through all the threads with him in the title. I don't have a vendetta against him and you are acting like he is your personal friend. I am just saying I don't agree with one reviewer getting his own threads when usually everyone else is consolidated into one thread. Now if there was a thread with all of his videos like what was suggested, then maybe people wouldn't come into it and constantly disagree with the threads. I appreciate his stance and opinion, I just don't like his style of video and don't understand why he gets his own threads when other reviews typically don't.
So go complain to the people that care is what I shall repeat again...
And defending Joe makes him my friend? So the others in here hating on him are his enemies? Lolwat. I just get bored of people shitting on these threads every time.
Really people who go into threads just to shit post and and talk crap are all sad in general, no matter how great your intentions are to keep the forum clutter free or that you believe his reviews are crap. Have you got nothing better to do that rag on stuff people enjoy?
Haunted
Member
Watch Dogs is not an MMO. Different rules apply.
I've long been a proponent of reviewers showing their game time and game progress in detail. Not to justify their opinion or anything, just for context and transparency. If you think 60 hours isn't enough to form an opinion on a game and write a fair review, that's your prerogative, but don't be surprised if there are few people sharing your stance.
Herbspiceguy
Member
Interesting opinions.
I feel the opposite about PvP. A mindless zergfest where you feel you're not doing anything significant. Go away from the zerg and you'll get ripped apart and/or just run around a lot. It's actually the reason I asked and got a refund.
I also don't think the combat is such a step up from other MMORPG's, it feels very clunky to me.
I feel the opposite about PvP. A mindless zergfest where you feel you're not doing anything significant. Go away from the zerg and you'll get ripped apart and/or just run around a lot. It's actually the reason I asked and got a refund.
I also don't think the combat is such a step up from other MMORPG's, it feels very clunky to me.
Why are you so hung up on him being a professional? A professional is literally defined as someone who is engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime. Joe is a professional. That is all it takes to be a professional and I wish you would stop throwing it out there like it was an insult because it makes the rest of your post, which has valid points, look jaded and biased.
Now, to your question, yes. It is fair when the requirement is intense and the content has no clear end point. MMOs, MOBAs, online-only FPSs, and so on. These games have no hard end. You're supposed to play these games for hundreds of hours and never truly see all the content, or even if you do, it's quickly replaced by more content. You invest enough time to where you believe you can make an honest opinion of the game as a whole. If the game was, say, Watch Dogs, Child of Light, or Dragon Age: Inquisition, then no, 40% is not acceptable.
I have read plenty of good specialist reviews of the genre. Most of which contain caveats relating to the constant development and progress of the game.
Doesn't sound as intensive as getting your mount on FFXIV ARR. That actually kind of sucks he cherrypicked when you're saying quests give you 100+ gold and you can sell items for more gold.
Not usually mainstream game reviewers. The "specialist reviews" are usually MMO enthusiasts who were already going to put in hundreds if not thousands of hours into the game regardless of whether or not they wrote a review.
Based on your review requirements, IGN, Gamespot, Edge, Eurogamer, NONE of them should be writing MMO reviews.
It is a cherry-pick when there are more valid complaints. I agree with a lot of his review, but sometimes he harps on things too hard.
Spiritreaver
Member
As a MMO player I don't agree with not at least reaching end game before making judgements as a reviewer. I'm not speaking for this game specifically, but for most MMOs end game is a big selling point for a lot of people and can make or break the lifelihood of a game just as much as the journey to level cap.
I don't think you can review the genre in the same manner as a single player game.
In the case of ESO though. If you don't like the journey to VR1, you won't like the time spent in VR content, lol.
I don't think you can review the genre in the same manner as a single player game.
In the case of ESO though. If you don't like the journey to VR1, you won't like the time spent in VR content, lol.
Maximus.
Member
You defend this thread as if you have something personally vested in it to the point where you are teetering on personally attacking posters who don't agree with your point of view. Yes I agree I hate when people post shit or don't add anything at all to a thread, but to judge them all is sad isn't the right way to go about it. I don't think his reviews are crap, I have clearly stated my stance on him. Reread my posts if you don't believe me. I do have better things to do, but if I disagree with something I like to voice my disagreement, rather than just ignore the problem. It's my opinion, others agree with it, others don't. You telling people who don't like Joe just to leave the thread and start a multitude of threads to counter the problem doesn't make much sense or just tell those in charge to do something about it. Instead of attacking posters with nonsensical reasoning, perhaps be more open to viewpoints that differ from your own.
Well many mainstream game reviewers do tend to be the jack of all trades due to having to superficially cover all genres.
I love EDGE and have been reading it since Issue 0. Unfortunately their MMO reviews aren't particularly great. I don't pay any attention to what IGN and Gamespot say no matter the game/genre;p
Well you know if you really don't like someone you
Teletraan1
Banned
I think if you are going to put up a review you should at least spend enough time in the game to flesh out the criticism you are making in the review. The horse price bit is insane because he was totally wrong and just connecting dots with the imperial edition. You can buy the starter horse by lvl 15-20 easily by playing the fucking game but he wanted to rail on microtransactions and complain about what is included in a special edition because his schtick is watching out for your consumer rights. But you didn't need to buy any of that to get a comparable horse in game. The imperial race is also not necessary unless you are after some very specific build and that is stretching it. The 15% increase to gaining experience with sword and shield who cares. 4% extra health and stamina. Whoopie. Melee attacks have a 10% chance to restore 2 health. Pretty mundane, other racials have way better bonus'. If you actually bought the imperial edition or care that you didn't you have bigger issues imo.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
He's really not. He's pro "value" which means he wants every game stuffed with everything regardless of it being a bad idea to do so.
TharpDaddy
Member
On twitter i believe he said he hit max level and completed the main story.
Edit: I was mistaken. He says he has played higher level content on his friend's character.
I bought this game with out playing the beta or reading any previews. And I am enjoying the game it plays similar enough to an elder scrolls game and should last about the same amount of time as my typically elder scrolls play time. About 40 hours. I am enjoying the story lines there interesting. I am, still in glemubra and I have enjoyed how the phasing works it gives a nice sense of progress. I have not grouped with anyone so I have not had those issues
I like the combat plays more like an action game then An mmo. The games seems like it would be a great fit on ps4. I will probably double dip
I like the combat plays more like an action game then An mmo. The games seems like it would be a great fit on ps4. I will probably double dip
SuperEpicGuy
Banned
Because they'll understand they can't charge users monthly and give them this garbage expecting positive responses.
It's a mix of both but his "good" reviews are pretty boring; it's more fun to watch him rant about shitty games (watch mindjack or sonic free riders to see what I mean).
He actually likes quite a bit, but I'm sure "bad" reviews get more clicks.
Thanks for the tip, I'll try that.
RicoTheMad
Banned
From what I've seen he's pretty good about pointing out both positives and negatives of games. Unlike a lot of you tubers who just go on an endless tirade the minute they decide they dislike a game and don't stop, Joe seems to switch between good/bad and goes in detail into each thing.
I don't get the anger at this guy. I honestly think he does a decent job.
Ideally, I would've liked overland quest objectives to be shareable with the whole group. Maybe they'll fix that later on..
plasmawave
Banned
Totally unrelated, but Joe has the flattest ears in the world.
I mean the IGN reviewer put in 170 hours and went over all of the stuff mentioned, so yes I would say the IGN review is more validated than AJ's review.
This is actually a good game.
I have been playing MMORPGs since DAoC, and i am having a blast with ESO.
Exploration is extremely rewarding in this game, the quests are much better than the ones in the vast majority of the other games in this genre (not as good as The Secret World quests though).
The fact that classes do not bind you to a certain playstyle because you can use every weapon and armor you want, with related skill lines, makes character progression really, really enjoyable.
The game runs extremely well too. Sure, there are bugs and things that need to be changed.
I feel sorry for anyone who likes MMORPGs, exploration, and to tinker with character builds that doesnt try this game because of reviews like this one.
I have been playing MMORPGs since DAoC, and i am having a blast with ESO.
Exploration is extremely rewarding in this game, the quests are much better than the ones in the vast majority of the other games in this genre (not as good as The Secret World quests though).
The fact that classes do not bind you to a certain playstyle because you can use every weapon and armor you want, with related skill lines, makes character progression really, really enjoyable.
The game runs extremely well too. Sure, there are bugs and things that need to be changed.
I feel sorry for anyone who likes MMORPGs, exploration, and to tinker with character builds that doesnt try this game because of reviews like this one.
Erik Kain gets it a lot too. His articles used to be posted, but since he is "just a blogger/contributor" compared to all these other amazing gaming press from IGN and ect, he gets shit on by alot of the press and those who are fans of the bigger outlets. People have a perception that the gaming sites are more professional in their reviews(I personally find this to be absurd, on average). Not liking AngryJoe cause you ahte his shtick or think he is bad at reviews or unprofessional in the way he conducts himself is one thing, having a pretty dedicated amount of forum posters making it a point to bitch about a gaming personality in every topic he is mentioned is just insane.
60 hours or 170 it doesn't matter. And you trust IGN more? Holy hell one of the things is never do is reading there reviews ever again.
geordiemp
Member
Irrespective of Joes or anyone elses opinion, just simply watching some of the gameplay in Joe's review is enough to put anyone off.
And the micro transactions / monthly fee - just out of principal I would not pay..
Looks bad...
Sham, all allot of people like me want is to play a game like dark souls / skyrim or whatever with a mate.
Surely someone will make such a game...
And the micro transactions / monthly fee - just out of principal I would not pay..
Looks bad...
Sham, all allot of people like me want is to play a game like dark souls / skyrim or whatever with a mate.
Surely someone will make such a game...
Huh? I exclusively level with a group of friends and can track them on the map pretty easily. We go quest to quest just fine and shoot the shit on voice chat or shout if we still need something/help.
That's not what I mean. Apparentley, according to this review, you can be in a group, but each member has to do the quest objectives individually. As in, you all have to hit the switch, you all have to gather x amount of items. Why wouldn't the game pool those objectives, since you're in a group? Seems like MMO 101.
It does matter when one reviewer saw and experienced most of the content and the other did not. And seriously people still give a fuck about which website the reviewer writes for? Their ESO review is fair, a 7.8, and it brings up a lot of positives and negatives about the game.
Joe does the same positive and negative what are you trying to say that he doesn't do a good job of doing a review or something? His 38 minute video gives all the info i need.
QuantumZebra
Member
The incredibly open-world feeling of it. In FFXIV I couldn't even jump into the frigging water half the time. The graphics are jaw dropping in many areas, and the combat is far more difficult than any of the MMOs ive played (and I think ive played all of the big ones) since original WoW/EQ.
I love MMORPGs for the massive scale and feeling of being immersed in a beautiful, breathing world. ESO does that perfectly. Far better than anything since the glory days.
I was answering more of your complaint about IGN in general
Dreams-Visions
Member
This.
But people have said it was shit since the NDA was lifted. Anyone from GAF who saw those comments and *still* bought the game deserve what they've gotten. Game looks like an outright embarrassment to the genre and the Elder Scrolls namesake.
If you would read the OT you would realize that most of the people that bought the game are surprisingly enjoying it.
OT's are usually circlejerks for the most devoted. I guess we will see how well the game did in 6 months.
TheRealTalker
Banned
very good review
put a lot of points across for those wanting to check it out
put a lot of points across for those wanting to check it out
T
TrueMenace
Unconfirmed Member
They probably need a game that can make them money while working on the new Fallout that will never come out.
Aside from Dishonored, Bethesda have a poor catalogue of published games under their belt IMO. And the new Wolfenstein won't help either.
TharpDaddy
Member
Joe makes some good points. I won't pick it up right now, but it seems a chunk of those issues can be fixed over time. If i see it on sale sometime (assuming it's not free to play by then) i'd give it a buy if it it seems like it's improved a bit.
Kagoshima_Luke
Gold Member
Good review by Joe, as expected.
I haven't grouped much yet, so i'm a bit shocked by some of the issues he points out in that area. Floating cursors for your group mates? Yikes. I do like a lot of the phasing stuff they've implemented, but if it breaks grouping that bad, I'm not sure it was worth it.
As a single player MMO (yes, I know that sounds ridiculous), it's pretty good - nice use of phasing, great voice acting, interesting dialogue, etc. But an MMO is an MMO. If I want single player ES experience, I'll fire up Morrowind or Skyrim.
I haven't grouped much yet, so i'm a bit shocked by some of the issues he points out in that area. Floating cursors for your group mates? Yikes. I do like a lot of the phasing stuff they've implemented, but if it breaks grouping that bad, I'm not sure it was worth it.
As a single player MMO (yes, I know that sounds ridiculous), it's pretty good - nice use of phasing, great voice acting, interesting dialogue, etc. But an MMO is an MMO. If I want single player ES experience, I'll fire up Morrowind or Skyrim.