mmorpg's review

[Abriael]

But you dont know that... I mean all we kinda know is the small hints of the forums and the lodestone information (that incluides a letter from tanaka). There are many things that can happen... before that.. just look at what happend with the whole tsunami, and earthquake. You dont even know if the new system without fatigue is going to be good (after all we are all going to beta test it... kinda of). Afterall , by guiding ourselves by ur arguments then it would never be a "good moment" to make a review. When the first patch was comming out it would be like "give it time, tanaka just took the lead". Before the 1.17 it would be like "Grand companies are being anounced maybe they are comming next patch". This game is leading everyone by the hope of the "next big one" . Even if they review the game after 1.18 then it would be like "He should wait until 1.19 when chocobos are comming". Afterall you cant argue with "in two days its going to be garbage or misleading" because you dont know whats going to happen on the future. And this game is leading us by hopes about the next patch being an "improvement" to the game.

The review TODAY is good. In three or four days IF they release 1.18 and IF they dont split it into 1.18a and 1.18b and IF they implement everything they had promised so far and IF the new changes are good and they actually improve the gameplay THEN I say we go and start a flame war on the forums (count me in), and ask (in a very demanding way) for a new review for the game.

Afterall those are alot of "IF" and I really do have my hopes those ifs come true... im here posting, reading the lodestone hoping for the best, and I know im not alone.

The review is good today... if the guy who made this review made a review that its going to be valid only for 3 days then its HIS problem (afterall he would have to work on a new one, as he says..).

I hate to repeat myself but...

We DO know that there's going to be a sizable amount of additional content in the game compared to now. Also, we do know that combat is going to be factually different.

Better or worse has no relevance to that fact. The fact is that the game is going to be *different* turning this "review" into an irrelevant heap of ill-conceived hyperbole.
The changes *are* going to happen, and they are no "rumor" (as the wannabe writer writes). They are officially confirmed information.

A review is not just it's score. The fact that the score might be higher or lower in four days is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the information included in the review is going to be irrelevant and misleading in four days.

As for being "good today". Sorry but no. That review is made of 10% fact and 90% hyperbole. Without even counting all the missed elements (that are the reason why a reviewer should play a game a reasonable amount of time, which the reviewer didn't, as the screenshots imply), it's simply no representation of what the game is today.

The fact that she may have randomly stumbled on *some* actually valid complaints doesn't make the review any more valid. A review isn't simply a list of complaints (that you can find in any forum, as that writer probably did), but a fair assessment of a game's pros and cons. This review doesn't even get near to that.

Let's not even go into the fact that she doesn't even know how to technically write a review (considering the functionality of the UI in the score for the graphics? LOL. Where are we, preschool?), and the picture is clear.

Not only this review is poor (and suspicious) in it's timing, but it's quality is extremely poor under every point of view.
I'd expect better from an even slightly experienced random blogger. From someone that fancies herself a journalist on a high-traffic site, this is simply shameful.

As someone that has been a gaming writer (both on print and online) for several years, I find absolutely baffling that there are some willing to defend "writers" that went out of their way to misinform them.

Unfortunately the internet has taught me new and creative meanings for the definition "devil's advocate".

[giftforce]

One aspect of FFXIV that is a refreshing change from the norm is the class system.

Hilarious.

A feature Yoshi is DESTROYING patch after patch.

[Abriael]

One aspect of FFXIV that is a refreshing change from the norm is the class system.

Hilarious.

A feature Yoshi is DESTROYING patch after patch.

Got banned again Gifthorse?

I don't see anything being "destroyed" (mind you, your statement is also factually false due to the fact that the team didn't touch the class system *at all* yet, let alone "patch after patch"). "destroying" would be taking the armory system and just trashing it as some ill advised goons demanded in this forum and elsewhere.
What the team is doing (unless they completely go back on what they announced so far) is building upon the armory system, actually adding even more options.

[giftforce]

Reading the comments for the review is hilarious.

I wish there were more people like that on these forums. People who actually want things instead of the apologetic and ever-forgiving FF fans here who would be happy with nothing at all provided they had some vague promise by the leadership of adding something "in the future, maybe".

[Cichy]

Reading the comments for the review is hilarious.

I wish there were more people like that on these forums. People who actually want things instead of the apologetic and ever-forgiving FF fans here who would be happy with nothing at all provided they had some vague promise by the leadership of adding something "in the future, maybe".

Alot of those people get banned on here for speaking out their mind as alot of the times they have strong opinion about the game.

[Joeking]

The review is correct for its intended audience, people who hold no reverence for "Final Fantasy". Plus I thought it would be more joyous around here considering it got 51/100.. 51 that's pretty good considering, though if I reviewing it would look something like this, short and simple;

<Insert Title>

Game is crap.

<insert pleasant closure>

[Raze]

Anyone who plays multiple MMOs and looks at their corresponding reviews will quickly see that the site is complete horse hockey. They gave Warhammer a pretty outstanding rating when it first came out (and Mythic was giving them advertising $$$ for months) and once they cut the advertising (it turns out the game was... gasp!... not as good as they said), they began dropping the rating. Give me a break. Like FFXIV, don't like FFXIV, whatever. Do yourself a favor and don't base your opinion on this high school rumor mill of a web site.

[Joeking]

Anyone who plays multiple MMOs and looks at their corresponding reviews will quickly see that the site is complete horse hockey. They gave Warhammer a pretty outstanding rating when it first came out (and Mythic was giving them advertising $$$ for months) and once they cut the advertising (it turns out the game was... gasp!... not as good as they said), they began dropping the rating. Give me a break. Like FFXIV, don't like FFXIV, whatever. Do yourself a favor and don't base your opinion on this high school rumor mill of a web site.

Metacritic average score from 26 reviews
49/100

3 reviewers gave it 80+ out of 100.... these people must of been paid.

[Raze]

Metacritic average score from 26 reviews
49/100

3 reviewers gave it 80+ out of 100.... these people must of been paid.

Hey give me more evidence from like 3 months ago please. You're really making a good point for yourself early 2011. Pat yourself on the back.

[Joeking]

Hey give me more evidence from like 3 months ago please. You're really making a good point for yourself early 2011. Pat yourself on the back.

Just some reviews based on your warhammer comments on its release and how they paid people. I would pat myself though currently in public don't wanna weird people out.