| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
| Star Wars Galaxies Review @ Gamespy |
|
Gamespy have posted their Star Wars Galaxies <a href="http://www.gamespy.com/reviews/july03/swgalaxiespc/" target="_blank">review</a> and although it's fairly positive they haven't been as generous as others with a final score of 75%. Here's a slightly lengthy clip:
<br><blockquote><em>So where does the truth lie? As in most cases, somewhere in the middle. It must be acknowledged that, as a gaming experience and as a commercial product, Star Wars: Galaxies is a huge, bug-infested mess. It suffers from the kinds of issues that plague nearly every MMO around launch time - broken servers, broken quests, buggy gameplay, lack of content - and adds to it some uniquely Galaxies issues such as infrequent patching and truly poor customer service all at a premium price.
<br>
<br>Yet for all that, why do I think about the game all the time? Why, even in the middle of writing this review, did I sneak into the game to see whether or not that cool coat I put a bid on in the bazaar has finally come through? Why am I so proud that my Twi'lek scout has finally managed to get enough Imperial faction points to become a Lance Corporal in Palpatine's New Order? Why am I having so much fun in a game that frequently drives me insane?</em></blockquote> |
Tue Jul 15, 2003 9:08 am |
|
|
methusala
Tempered Warlord
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 281
Location: Odinwald |
Why? Because,like alot of fanatics,you will swallow anything to do with anything that has to do with "Star Wars". |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 9:10 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
It seemed a fairly balanced review to me. I see no problem with pointing out that despite the technical problems, he still had fun. You're free to decide if the technical aspects will outweigh the benefits for you. |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 9:13 am |
|
|
methusala
Tempered Warlord
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 281
Location: Odinwald |
I agree that it is a fair review.What I am responding to is that only a fanatically-minded Star Wars fan can"have so much fun in a game that frequently drives him insane". I do not understand people that are critical but still play the game.Whats the point of the whole thing? Is he telling people to buy it or leave it alone?A movie critic will tell his audience to either"go see this,it was great" or "stay home and wash the dog,its time better spent".I do not respect people that sit on a fence and say things like,"I spent 2 hours trying to install the thing,another hour and a half d/l the up-dates and patches,crashed to the desk-top before I was finished with character creation,got a mission to make some money and found,after 15 minutes out-running mobs,that the beam in the sky led me to a bare piece of ground,but all in all,this game is great and I'm so WIRED that I can't stop thinking about it and I recommend it to any other person out there who is as confused as I am. |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 10:16 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
First off, I'm neither playing SWG nor planning too, so I don't really care personally  .
However, I disagree with the point of a review. I don't expect a reviewer to tell me what to do - I just want them to give me information so that I can weigh the options myself; in my opinion he did a good job of that.
I can certainly understand that many people are frustrated with game bugs and problems but they've never bothered me excessively. Perhaps it's sheer luck but generally most game bugs have only been an irritation (actually, IWD2 most affected me the most with 2x scripting bugs which were fixed within an hour or two of posting in the forum). Foolish or not, I'm the kind of guy who would like to get a game earlier and live with a few rough edges (perhaps one day I'll be bitten by this but that's another story).
So...if a review says "it's full of bugs - don't buy it!", that doesn't necessarily answer *my* questions. A review that says "it's full of bugs but I still enjoyed it" tells me there's some gameplay aspects that *might* be worth the risk if I don't mind riding some technical bumps.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not condoning poorly made software. I'm just saying this review was informative and I'm quite happy not to have an absolute "buy" or "don't buy" at the end. |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 11:44 am |
|
|
methusala
Tempered Warlord
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 281
Location: Odinwald |
The guy is just giving us his impressions.Its up to you,no matter what he says to either play or not.There are game-play aspects in even the worst of games and I'm just tired of hearing nothing but bull-shit and alot of un-true hype from the developers,marketing and big publishing people. I want someone to give me an honest,straight forward opinion of a game that this person sticks too.Not a half-yeah its got alot of bugs but they all do so its not that bad.I'm just wondering if reviewers are afraid to come down too hard on big name games,for fear of some kind of reprisal?Its just my review of reviewers in general.There are a few out there that are really good,but the vast majority aren't worth the effort to read their garbage. |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 12:42 pm |
|
|
Ekim
Eagle's Shadow
Joined: 27 May 2002
Posts: 2365
Location: Montreal, Canada |
quote:
Originally posted by methusala
I'm just wondering if reviewers are afraid to come down too hard on big name games,for fear of some kind of reprisal?Its just my review of reviewers in general.There are a few out there that are really good,but the vast majority aren't worth the effort to read their garbage.
Did it ever occur to you that if the guy says that the bugs are making him go crazy but still sticks with the game is not so much because he's a "fence-sitter" but because the good things, the good experiences within the game outweigh the bad and the bugs? 
I am also wondering how much you played the game yourself to wonder if "reviewers are afraid to come down too hard on big name games"? You seem to believe that some (if not most) positive SWG review is biased. I respect that you don't like the game (if you've played it at all), but don't assume that any opinion opposite yours are biased or wrong. There are 15 servers full of people at prime time, and half of them at least are probably willing to disagree with you.
_________________
=Proud Father of a new gamer GIRL!=
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild=
=Worshiper of the Written Word= |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 2:33 pm |
|
|
Utnayan
Guest
|
I am sure he might still be having fun. And so do most people with the game for the first 2-3 sometimes 4 weeks. Then, out of no where, people hit a brick wall and could careless about logging in. People are starting to post about it in mass over on almost every gaming forum it seems. Every other thread is abouw how boring something is - and to be realistic - it's happening right in the 3 week time frame as well.
/shrug.
All the power to you if you like this sort of gameplay and it can actually hold your interest. For at least the vocal minority, they are getting bored really fast - and with this I mean even the biggest of fanboy's that were last week defending this game to their grave.
It's funny to see them all of a sudden start realizing that their game isn't really fun. |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 5:56 pm |
|
|
Greymane
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 08 Apr 2002
Posts: 47
Location: Texas |
Well, I'm playing SWG now, and I agree with the reviewer on this one.
There are any number of technical reasons to not care for the 'game' and move on.
The 'game' is not finished, but that is a given, known and accepted fact. More content is coming and will come every month. That is the way online persistent worlds work.
As a 'game' it is not the best I've played by far. As an online persistent state world.. it has it's 'charm'.. the core is there.. I see it and many others do. If it doesn't improve .. I may drop out for a while, but it has such a nice foundation and 'charm'.. that I am certain I would continue to check back on it.
SWG fanatic? Not on your life bud.. I could care less about Luke Skywalker's adventures.. but it has afforded a very nice change in atmosphere in online worlds from what I've seen in others..
The people in it are for the most part a decent sort and it's easy to find others to 'interact' with. What can I say? If you're into finding a 'home' in a persistent state world that may be a little week on content but has a lot of promise, if you don't mind wading through some bugs while they finish the beta testing.. heh, then this might be the game for you.
I am in the mode of just building my character, in expectations that new things will come along to do and get interested in.. I do hope so. |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 6:36 pm |
|
|
Farscry
Village Dweller
Joined: 04 Mar 2003
Posts: 8
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa |
You know, I've ranted on this enough that I should eventually tire of it. But here's my opinion again: Dark Ages of Camelot showed us something. It showed us that if a company cares enough to, it IS possible to actually release a relatively polished MMOG.
Maybe I'm crazy, but a game that isn't actually ready for release isn't ready for a real review yet. Maybe I'm a looney in thinking a game should actually work for the most part before it's worthy of being considered a game and not alpha, beta, what-have-you software.
The fact that reviews and consumers keep excusing companies for having buggy, incomplete releases only encourages them to keep ripping off consumers. DAoC should have been the end of retail betas, since it proved you need only care enough to not jilt your customers of several months' subscription fees. And yes, I know that no MMOG is ever truly complete, but there's a point at which the software actually works as intended with only a minor bug here and there, or has actual content for the playerbase regardless of their level or skill.
Have I purchased Galaxies? No, I'll wait several months. But it sure would be nice someday to be able to fulfill my excitement by purchasing a game around, oh, the release day perhaps. I enjoy being a part of experiencing something new. I don't enjoy being a part of a corporate joke. Unfortunately, whether I purchase this or not won't change a thing. The majority of mainstream buyers don't care. |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 10:20 pm |
|
|
methusala
Tempered Warlord
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 281
Location: Odinwald |
Yeah Ekim I played SWG,I was in beta and probably know more about the history of the developement than alot of people,including you.Alot of good people with great ideas and a sense of what is fair to put out to the masses,left while in the end stages of beta,because they realized that this product was not what was promised and ,at best, a sorry compromise.I don'y care that you and a couple hundred thousand "little ekims" play this mess,what upsets me is that you and some other reviewers accept all thats wrong with SWG and always put in"well,all mmorpgs ship full of bugs and little content".What you are now paying for is an extended "beta phase".Something that should of been done before it shipped is now being financed by all the people that excuse SOE and LA for shipping a crappy product.What you haven't discovered yet is that even when everything is fixed and content starts rolling in,this is not the mmorpg everyone was promised. |
|
Wed Jul 16, 2003 5:03 am |
|
|
Hyrrix
Fourty-two
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 282
|
I haven't played SWG (yet), so maybe my opinion doesn't count, but I don't really see how you could determine a mmorpg to be finished or not. Sure, this one probably looks more like a beta test, but does that mean people are no longer allowed to say that they actually love the game, if they do? Yes, DAoC was a much more finished product, but they promised us Housing and controlable horses before release two years ago... Does that mean that DAoC wasn't finished at release? Of course it wasn't "finished", but it was ready for release since it was playable well enough. SWG has bugs, yes. But Gothic 2 has bugs, Daggerfal had bugs. I still enjoyed those games though. Should reviewers just don't mention the gameplay aspect and only the technical flaws, simply because they'd otherwise encourage publishers/developers to release more un-finished software?
As for the game getting boring after some time: well, it hasn't been released for a month yet, so why don't we just wait? Ekim wrote his review after a week or two playing and he (and others) will write mini-reviews every month or so to update his review conclusion with the new experiences he had later on in the game. How can a reviewer possibly judge the game on something that hasn't occured yet? We will do so later, and you'll know it if our reviewers find SWG to get boring after some time.
_________________
Vault Network Editor |
|
Wed Jul 16, 2003 10:02 am |
|
|
Ekim
Eagle's Shadow
Joined: 27 May 2002
Posts: 2365
Location: Montreal, Canada |
quote:
Originally posted by methusala
What you are now paying for is an extended "beta phase".Something that should of been done before it shipped is now being financed by all the people that excuse SOE and LA for shipping a crappy product.What you haven't discovered yet is that even when everything is fixed and content starts rolling in,this is not the mmorpg everyone was promised.
Well, regardless of your sinical tone, I agree with you on that to a certain degree. But even if I am paying for a final BETA stage (or whatever you want to call it) does that automatically mean that I should be outraged and that the game is poor by default? Is it wrong for me to have a good opinion of the game? I wasn't expecting SWG all that much. Well, I was anxious to see what they would do with it, but I didn't follow the game's progress at all because I know how hype can literally make you expect too much by design. I hate that. I try to stay away from it as much as I can. So, coming into the game upon release without any sort of expectations beyond the fact that I expected the game to at least "feel" a little like Star Wars, I guess that I didn't feel this elusive disapointment factor that a lot of BETA testers felt (and many other gamers that got in the game so far as well). Does that make my review biased? Does that make Gamespy's review biased?
I know there are problems with SWG, I know there is a lack of content, I know that by most's definition the game is not "complete", but as Hyrrix already pointed out, when is an MMORPG truly finished? To this day if you browse through the Vault forums for DAoC there are tons of people crying foul about their own class, or some particular skills that they feel is no good. If I was to gauge DAoC's quality just by going from those threads I read anywhere on the web I would think that it's one of the worst games on the market. But it's not. DAoC, just like any other MMORPG on the market, is growing. SWG is still at its first steps, and considering what I've seen, and with my experience as an MMORPG player I think those first steps are adequate (if only a little shaky). Mind you, things could go downhill from here, I know that.... But they could also get much better. How can I truly take that into account in a review except by saying that the future is still uncertain.
I'm not defending SWG, I don't want to, I'm defending my opinion
_________________
=Proud Father of a new gamer GIRL!=
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild=
=Worshiper of the Written Word= |
|
Wed Jul 16, 2003 2:29 pm |
|
|
Dwango
Head Merchant
Joined: 06 May 2002
Posts: 68
|
quote:
I am paying for a final BETA stage (or whatever you want to call it) does that automatically mean that I should be outraged and that the game is poor by default?
As a consumer, in general, this might be a good case for outrage.
First, players of SWG are paying the highest price of any MMORPG on the market. That alone should require a minimum of excellence higher than of those other MMORPGs.
Second, the hype is not the player's fault. Sony and LucasArts are the purveyor of the hype. They promised full Jedi powers, vehicles, interesting quests, and a grand Star Wars setting. They lure in a unsuspecting players with this hype, only to give less than promised. They should be up front with the problems the launch is having, yet in their press release they state this is the greatest launch of an MMORPG ever. When they make such statements, how can players seriously consider any of their promises as valid.
Accepting poor quality and paying high prices justifies the companies theory that a great brand name is all you need. Why make a great game if you can save money by making a mediocre game and still make money?
quote:
Is it wrong for me to have a good opinion of the game?
Hell no, you can think its great. Daggerfall was a great game but buggier than a pile of leaves. Players just need to know the bugs and content issues before they get into the game, so they won't waste their money if they won't be able to handle them. And some indignity about quality wouldn't hurt. I still wasn't happy Daggerfall has so many problems, and let Bethsoft and friends know about it.
quote:
I know there are problems with SWG, I know there is a lack of content, I know that by most's definition the game is not "complete", but as Hyrrix already pointed out, when is an MMORPG truly finished?
The argument that when is a MMORPG ever complete is laughable. If I put your chacter in a room and gave you a promise of a door later, would that be enough content? Without the door, my MMORPG is not complete so any lack of content is not my fault.
Second, the argument basically infers that quality can never be an issue because the game can never be truly complete. But quality is not about completeness. A company can add new areas continuously, and if they break existing code or are buggy in themselves, then the quality is low, no matter how complete the game is. They may have all the pieces of the MMORPG puzzle to make it complete, but if those pieces are buggy or broken or are boring, then the quality stinks.
All this depends on the bare minimum of quality and quantity you accept. Frankly, there really should be a floor here, guidelines in general that all MMORPGs should follow. Maybe we should expect the game to be on par with single player games of similar type, but the multi-player crowd would have fits that you can't compare the two. Maybe a sort of average of other MMORPG launches is suitable, with more expectation built in for the high price. But in general, the developers should make sure the servers can handle the load, the graphics are scalable, the quests are completed and relatively bug free, the characters are developed, etc. The basics should be bug free. And as for content, there should be enough to keep the majority of the player's attention until they add the new content, whether its dancing, quests, or force powers. If not, they fell short.
So, as a consumer of games, I will have high expectations. Because the game vendors cue off the consumer; they will do what it takes to increase thier profit margins as consumers allow.
Don't allow too much!
_________________
Ha, Ha, Ha.... Oh, you were SERIOUS?
-Dwango |
|
Wed Jul 16, 2003 6:48 pm |
|
|
Ekim
Eagle's Shadow
Joined: 27 May 2002
Posts: 2365
Location: Montreal, Canada |
quote:
Originally posted by Dwango
As a consumer, in general, this might be a good case for outrage.
First, players of SWG are paying the highest price of any MMORPG on the market. That alone should require a minimum of excellence higher than of those other MMORPGs.
You know, I totally agree that it's a good case for outrage, but it doesn't automatically mean that as a reviewer I should be. I'm being given a version of the game to review, and I review that. And both the Gamespy review and my own pointed out very clearly that there are definately some bugs that need to look into, and that players should stay away from it until they are taken care of. After warning a reader about that, I can still say the game is good 
quote:
Originally posted by Dwango
Second, the hype is not the player's fault. Sony and LucasArts are the purveyor of the hype. They promised full Jedi powers, vehicles, interesting quests, and a grand Star Wars setting. They lure in a unsuspecting players with this hype, only to give less than promised. They should be up front with the problems the launch is having, yet in their press release they state this is the greatest launch of an MMORPG ever. When they make such statements, how can players seriously consider any of their promises as valid.
No, hype is not the player's fault. But players are an amazing breed. It smells like hype, it looks like hype, they know it's hype, they're being warned by others that it's hype and still they fall prey to it. If gamers would be more careful about hype I gues there would be less of it. It make me think of a child that sticks his fingers in an electric outlet and gets electrocuted, then goes back and does it again and cries every time. At some point the child will learn that he shouldn't put his fingers there because he'll get hurt. Why do players not learn that when hype is concerned? They got disapointed so many times...
Again, hype is not the player's fault, and no one should be blamed for falling prey to it. But then maybe we should all be more careful about it...
quote:
Originally posted by Dwango
Accepting poor quality and paying high prices justifies the companies theory that a great brand name is all you need.
Yes, maybe it does. But that's why we still have the option of quitting the game and stop paying for it. Of course it's not very good that we had to pay for the box and all, but if some people had waited for the reviewes and read what we had to say then maybe they would have saved themselves the money until the game was a little more ready? Which brings back hype to the table I guess 
quote:
Originally posted by Dwango
The argument that when is a MMORPG ever complete is laughable. If I put your chacter in a room and gave you a promise of a door later, would that be enough content? Without the door, my MMORPG is not complete so any lack of content is not my fault.
Yes, I give you that... Maybe we are a little too used to it and maybe we don't underline the fact that a game is not complete enough. But again purely as a reviewer, shouldn't it be enough for us to say that content is severely lacking within the review? And couldn't I still say that the game is quite good regardless of what is "missing"?
Even if an MMORPG came out as complete as it could ever be, our argument (by saying that an MMORPG is never complete) really means that any given game in the genre will evolve greatly over time. I don't think that anyone really meant to say that it's all right that a game comes out without a door, to take your example. As it is now SWG is quite playable. It might be lacking, but it's playable and enjoyable.
quote:
Originally posted by Dwango
The basics should be bug free. And as for content, there should be enough to keep the majority of the player's attention until they add the new content, whether its dancing, quests, or force powers. If not, they fell short.
Well I guess that SWG fell short. As far as bugs go anyway. But again that was mentioned by a lot of reviewers out there. Only I suspect that some people stop at the scores without reading the reviews.
_________________
=Proud Father of a new gamer GIRL!=
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild=
=Worshiper of the Written Word= |
|
Wed Jul 16, 2003 8:44 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:13 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
