mmorpg's review

[Preypacer]

This one is still bein' discussed ? Mmorpg's review shows that the game is at bad state.
Game review is average everywhere 3-5/10, now new one review poped out after 10 months since release showing that the game is horrible. Nothing to be angry about, its review. You can write your owns on blogs, etc.

Let's just hope SE will try fix FFXIV's reputation to succeed with PS3 reviews. I will put it simply, PC reviews kicked game off the list.

Once again... It's not about the score.

There are a number of issues people are bringing up about the review, but none of them have to do with "not liking the score". No one is disagreeing that the game is in a bad state still.

If you're going to respond to a topic, please at least respond to what's actually being discussed.

[whoopeeragon]

This one is still bein' discussed ? Mmorpg's review shows that the game is at bad state.
Game review is average everywhere 3-5/10, now new one review poped out after 10 months since release showing that the game is horrible. Nothing to be angry about, its review. You can write your owns on blogs, etc.

Let's just hope SE will try fix FFXIV's reputation to succeed with PS3 reviews. I will put it simply, PC reviews kicked game off the list.

Again, Synthesis, THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE SCORE.

This is about the suspicious and very bad timing of the review, 4 days right before a patch which addresses issues the review has stated. Not only does it not seem right from a typical journalist's column to write something that will be void in mere DAYS, but it also promotes more hate and worsen the reputation when, really, the game is achieving something beyond just 'horrible'.

This is about the misleading information, with facts and content being officially announced by Square-Enix, such as Auto-Attack, but the review rewrites it as a 'rumour'. From a journalist's perspective, writing false information is the same as lying, and lowers the reviewer's credibility even more. The reviewer lumps UI underneath graphics, when it isn't. The reviewer states guildleves and quests, when they are not; there is no mention about the REAL quests we have. They have not mentioned any improvements or content SE have added; more lore regarding the umbral era, more notorious monsters, more gear. A review is not meant to distribute misinformation to the gaming community.

This is about the reviewer's lack of research, or seemingly lacking in playing the actual game. How does one expect to write a good review when all they've done is the opening cutscene, a marmot kill and a guildleve? Granted, we do not know if the reviewer has done only that, but from what she has shown through her wording and graphic interpretations do not suggest any insight towards the game in even past the beginning stages of the story.

This. Is. Not. About. The. Scores. It is about the integrity and what is expected of a gaming review, of what ethical and social standards they should keep, how to manage their own factual references and their experiences. This review does NONE of that; the score is just that, a score. A number or two have not as much strength as a well-written review.

I repeat again, for those who refuse to read 30-odd pages to distinguish the main complaints from those acting stupid.

This.
Is.
Not.
About.
The.
Score.

I repeat again so that the blinded eyes of those who think numbers and complaints go hand in hand can never say they misunderstood what the majority of the constructive criticism is aimed at.

This.

Is.

Not.

About.

The.

SCORE.

[Zkieve]

....OUT FOR MORE POPCORN......

[whoopeeragon]

....OUT FOR MORE POPCORN......

Caramel popcorn please. With a dish of chocolate fudge along with it.

[Kallera]

....OUT FOR MORE POPCORN......

Can you get me some nachos while you're at it?

[giftforce]

They will review the game when it's ready anyway.

Any review between now and such a time as that is wholy irrelevant so I don't know why you guys don't just treat it that way.

There's no point going insane over this.

[Preypacer]

They will review the game when it's ready anyway.

Any review between now and such a time as that is wholy irrelevant so I don't know why you guys don't just treat it that way.

There's no point going insane over this.

1. Because the interview is poorly researched, shoddily written and inaccurate in information it provides. Citing confirmed changes to the game as "rumored" is indefensible.
2. Because mmorpg.com gets a lot of traffic and when people read the review, they will see incorrect information that is long-since out-dated.
3. Because, again, the timing of it is suspect given how MMORPG.com was determined to "wait it out until the game has improved" before reviewing it, because their review would basically reflect what every other review was saying at the time. So they wait 10 months and, right before the first of a series of really substantial game-affecting changes is rolled out, they decide "they've waited long enough" and release a review that - go figure - reads a lot like the reviews that were written back when the game came out, ignoring huge swaths of information (which has been pointed out a few posts back), miscategorizes UI as "Graphics" and exaggerates issues with the game.
4. Because the review that's there is what people will see until MMORPG.com sees fit to do a re-review and update it. It can be upwards of another year before that happens.
5. Because someone presenting themselves as a "reviewer" should adhere to higher standards than this reviewer did.

I'm not going to bother asking you how you can defend a review that's as shady, poorly researched/supported and shoddily written as that one is... But then, you've been pretty much doing that all along... so... no point in asking.

[Synthesis]

They will review the game when it's ready anyway.

Any review between now and such a time as that is wholy irrelevant so I don't know why you guys don't just treat it that way.

There's no point going insane over this.

I was telling this.

Edit : Its true that timing is bad, you can see my prev. posts to this thread. Anyway it happened. I wonder if they will re-update review. When its once out it doesnt change often. So thats why I was pointing at PS3 reviews - which might be possibly good.

And score in reviews matters. Its final verdict after all. If you think that review could be a bit better after update - which would improve game score - then it is about score. I dont think either.

[Preypacer]

I was telling this.

Edit : Its true that timing is bad, you can see my prev. posts to this thread. Anyway it happened. I wonder if they will re-update review. When its once out it doesnt change often. So thats why I was pointing at PS3 reviews - which might be possibly good.

And score in reviews matters. Its final verdict after all. If you think that review could be a bit better after update - which would improve game score - then it is about score. I dont think either.

No.

Now you are trying to spin and distort what people have said. You're misrepresenting specific arguments people have made - in detail, several times. You're dismissing the real issues at hand (a list of them) and attempting to replace them all with a convenient strawman ("it's about the score").

In other words, you have no valid rebuttal and are being blatantly dishonest at this point.

There has been no ambiguity in exactly what people are taking issue with regarding the review.

[Naqaj]

Noone in this thread has a valid rebutal to anything. Everyone is just throwing incompatible opinions at each other, claiming to be right where the other is wrong, discarding others opinions with bickering about semantics. This is a game forum. That's the way it goes. If you take anything in here serious, you're wasting your time.