I'd suggest reading the official forums. Most people seem to be very happy and subscription numbers are rising. With the recent news on Book 10 and beyond, people are just that much more excited.

Originally posted by phluux

Originally posted by Torak

 

Originally posted by Lisaka

I really don't get it why people are satisfied with so little. Yes, the game was perfect technically (except the utterly boring non-dynamic combat). But content wise there is only the minimum. All those "free content updates" (the first one and probably 2-3 next) should have been since start. Don't blame people they leveled too fast. This is their style. Nowhere was written "Don't level fast or you may run out of content". This means only one thing - leveling is the only content in the game.

About WoW comparison for the content. Well, WoW had much much more content at start. 1 endless 55-60 dungeon, 4 - 60, 1 -20 (UBRS was 20 or 40 capped at start, not sure) and 2 -raid instances. Those story driven quest lines were present in WoW also (Onyxia, Plaguelands, Deadmines anyone?). Quest hubs were times better and bigger. There  was a fair share of solo and group content so you can always have what to do.

There was PvP since release ( omg I said it). In fact PvP was instanced because servers couldn't meet the world PvP clashes. Southshore/Tarren Mill and Crossroads raids were ok with 60-70 ppl participating but big cities raids could take up to 500+ people sometimes.

One of the biggest flaws in LOTRO imo was the lack of incentive to repeat content. FFS I did Dead mines 18 times on release and it was always fun. LOTRO instances are either far too short or extremely long (Fornost took us 6 hours). Not instanced dungeons are total disaster. Go afk 2 mins and you have respawns - and there are no save spots.

Classes - whose idea was the game should have only 1 healing class?

Main reason for LOTRO failure - you can't promote group centric, grind heavy (traits) games as casual.

And the talk about most people haven't reached top levels...  What exactly takes you so long. The only reason I see is you do nothing for the 2-3 hours while looking for group.

P.S. These are my observations only as I feel it. I have lvl 47,5 guardian  whose last 20-30 quests  he did  were dark  red  just because there was nothing else to be done.

 

Where are you guys getting your information that LotRs failed? Can someone produce something that backs that up at all....even a little??? (anything, post some sort of support to these statments, otherwise its just "LotR failed to me IMO" statements)

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it failed. In fact LotRs is probably the only successful MMO since WoW and GW launched 3 years ago.

Its ranked no.5 on xfire use http://www.xfire.com/cms/stats/ (June top 10 MMO stat)

Its getting stellar reviews and its ranked very high on retail sales.

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/middleearthonline/review.html?tag=tabs;reviews AVERAGE rating is 8.7 based on 39 reviews.

You guys trying to pass this game off as failure on the level of some of the trainwrecks like anything with SOE stamped on it are just...... well..........on crack.

I'm not saying that LotRO is a failure or a bad game, since I haven't played it yet, but basing a games success off a gamesites review doesn't prove much. Games that were exellently reviewed like Supreme Commander are often outsold by worse rated games due to people more interested in the "worse" game (such as movie liscensed games). Did you know that the game "Viva Pinata" based off the children's show was almost universally acclaimed by gamesites, but I will bet you money it was completely outsold by badly reviewed games such as "Transformers" just because most people wouldn't give a game based on a kid's show a second glance. All I'm trying to point out is that 39 reviews proves nothing when viewing a game as a commercial success or failure.

Just an observation, of this and other threads....

Most the people defending LotRO are either new, or haven't really progressed very far.  But if someone has reached 40+ they seem far more often than not to be inclined to post that they are bored or disappointed with the end game.

I only got to level 30 myself before that happened (course I had a 24 alt) but it does seem to be a trend..... game starts out really fun...but you burn out on it as you reach the upper levels...

Originally posted by tallshortguy

 

 

I'm not saying that LotRO is a failure or a bad game, since I haven't played it yet, but basing a games success off a gamesites review doesn't prove much. Games that were exellently reviewed like Supreme Commander are often outsold by worse rated games due to people more interested in the "worse" game (such as movie liscensed games). Did you know that the game "Viva Pinata" based off the children's show was almost universally acclaimed by gamesites, but I will bet you money it was completely outsold by badly reviewed games such as "Transformers" just because most people wouldn't give a game based on a kid's show a second glance. All I'm trying to point out is that 39 reviews proves nothing when viewing a game as a commercial success or failure.

Yes, everyone knows reviews are never accurate and always wrong. There is no way 39 of them all from different organizations like PCGamer, 1UP, Gamespy... could even be close to correct. As far as the rest...who knows. But there is no way any revieew could be even close to correct in the case of this game.

Sorry bro, it does prove something. The xfire stats clearly prove many people are playing. The 39 reviews clearly shows that reviews like it.

I haven't seen a game yet that got bad reviews and was wildly popular...strange coincidence???? You get bad reviews, your game dies.  See just about any MMO released in the past 3 years if you need proof. How about that Dark and Light? Maybe Vanguard? Oh I know D&D.....errr..........maybe Roma Victor....Phantasy Star? Ryzom? All great successes dispite the bad reviews? Hardly. How about WoW and GW? Good reviews and strangely enough.........they are commercial successes. Thats weird how that works, isn't it?

Fact of the matter is you can not show me a game that has been commercially successful that got bad reviews. You may not like that but there it is.

Originally posted by Kyleran

Most the people defending LotRO are either new, or haven't really progressed very far.  But if someone has reached 40+ they seem far more often than not to be inclined to post that they are bored or disappointed with the end game.

This might be true ye, depending on what kinda player you are. If you're a hardcore gamer with what, 4+ hours (this is assuming you have a job or whatever... if not I can see players doing 8+hours per day no sweat) gaming every day then yes you will probably get bored. Yes fine, we've established this now from countless posts here on MMORPG.com. Now then surely the average player plays 4+hours per day right? I dont think so tbh. So this is not the game for you then, just move along instead of wasting shitloads of time constantly bashing this game on a friggin forum. No offence ofc 

And to the ppl who desperatly keep claiming LOTRO is a failure... maybe a realitycheck would be in order I dunno 

Originally posted by Torak

 

Originally posted by tallshortguy

 

 

I'm not saying that LotRO is a failure or a bad game, since I haven't played it yet, but basing a games success off a gamesites review doesn't prove much. Games that were exellently reviewed like Supreme Commander are often outsold by worse rated games due to people more interested in the "worse" game (such as movie liscensed games). Did you know that the game "Viva Pinata" based off the children's show was almost universally acclaimed by gamesites, but I will bet you money it was completely outsold by badly reviewed games such as "Transformers" just because most people wouldn't give a game based on a kid's show a second glance. All I'm trying to point out is that 39 reviews proves nothing when viewing a game as a commercial success or failure.

Yes, everyone knows reviews are never accurate and always wrong. There is no way 39 of them all from different organizations like PCGamer, 1UP, Gamespy... could even be close to correct. As far as the rest...who knows. But there is no way any revieew could be even close to correct in the case of this game.

 

Sorry bro, it does prove something. The xfire stats clearly prove many people are playing. The 39 reviews clearly shows that reviews like it.

I haven't seen a game yet that got bad reviews and was wildly popular...strange coincidence???? You get bad reviews, your game dies.  See just about any MMO released in the past 3 years if you need proof. How about that Dark and Light? Maybe Vanguard? Oh I know D&D.....errr..........maybe Roma Victor....Phantasy Star? Ryzom? All great successes dispite the bad reviews? Hardly. How about WoW and GW? Good reviews and strangely enough.........they are commercial successes. Thats weird how that works, isn't it?

Fact of the matter is you can not show me a game that has been commercially successful that got bad reviews. You may not like that but there it is.

I'm really sorry that you can't read my post and/or comprehend it. I obviously said commercial success (BTW if you plan on highlighting what i say, you might want to read it first). I never stated that highly reviewed games aren't good games, I stated that highly reviewed games many times aren't commercial successes. Please try to fully read my posts next time you plan on criticizing me. 1UP, I believe, gave a unfavorable review to NeverWinter Nights 2 and a massive outcry prompted them to rereview the game and give it a high score. Now this proves that game sites can be wrong and even if 1UP had kept their review, the game would have been a success nevertheless. Also, you should probably read the other examples I gave. I also said that many games that were reviewed favourably were big comercial successes. There's a reason site (that you mentioned) have awards for best game never played during their yearly awards.

Honestly, did you just skim through my post looking for something to flame? I never said LotRO was a failure, I was simply stating a flaw in your claims that game reviews always determine a game's success.

Since this godforsakne thread is already at the top I'll go ahead and post. The OP is an obvious troll post using a straw man argument.  Very few people ever thought LotRO would "kill" WoW, and whether it did or not has no bearing on whether it was a financial and critical success.  It clearly was.

 LotRO was pretty big commercial success.  It was in the top ten PC sales charts for something like 2 solid months.  Even assuming 3/4 of those players already left, that's still huge subs.  It also received high review scores from most of the press.  No financial success and review scores aren't always correlated.  Enter the Matrix was universally reviled by reviewers and sold like hot cakes.  ICO was universally praised by reviewers and sold very poorly.  But LotRO seems to have done well on both fronts.  So, by any objective measure the game was pretty successful.  

If I had to guess I would say that the game will settle on long terms subs somewhere between EQ II and WoW, and end up the second most popular MMO in NA and Europe (behind WoW).  I don't think any sane person expected it to overtake WoW.   I honestly don't remember too many people saying that here, though I'm sure you could have found some loonies spouting that BS on the official boards during Beta.  It clearly is not (and I don't think is designed to be) a "WoW killer."

But has the game been a hit?  With critics and the public, the answer is yes.    With you personally, maybe not.  And probably not with the average person that hangs out on site for that matter.  This is after all a pretty rarefied crowd.  I mean seriously, anyone that thinks MMOs haven't improved at all since Kunark era EQ and UO is definitly on the fringe (to put it politely).  And you'll find a lot of people that honestly feel that way hanging out on these boards.  

Originally posted by ormstunga

 

Originally posted by Kyleran

Most the people defending LotRO are either new, or haven't really progressed very far.  But if someone has reached 40+ they seem far more often than not to be inclined to post that they are bored or disappointed with the end game.

 

 

This might be true ye, depending on what kinda player you are. If you're a hardcore gamer with what, 4+ hours (this is assuming you have a job or whatever... if not I can see players doing 8+hours per day no sweat) gaming every day then yes you will probably get bored. Yes fine, we've established this now from countless posts here on MMORPG.com. Now then surely the average player plays 4+hours per day right? I dont think so tbh. So this is not the game for you then, just move along instead of wasting shitloads of time constantly bashing this game on a friggin forum. No offence ofc 

 

And to the ppl who desperatly keep claiming LOTRO is a failure... maybe a realitycheck would be in order I dunno 

The only way to advance and level is to do quests.  So what's a casual player going to do when he runs out of solo quests?  And when the game starts to dwindle in population, it's going to be even harder to find groups.  When instances take 4+ hours to complete, how will they be able to level?  Don't forget to add on another hour or so just to get a group formed.  Grinding mobs isn't going to work either.

If you can't level, your options are very limited.

• /emote
• /music
• reroll
• pvp
• cancel

I didn't add crafting because you also need to level for that.

Ok here's my learned and unbiased opinion.

1. i played since the first beta after alpha

2. at the time the only thing that was clearly developed were the hobbits

3. i thought the game was horrible and had ZERO to do with lord of the rings, it was not immersive and not nearly different from any korean game i play on a regular basis.

4. i left short after

5. returned when i got invited to the next phase of beta, there were updates but still it lacked content

6. it's an ugly game.  even with everything turned up to lag inducing graphics mode, it's a hideous game IMO.  the graphics are unstable on my setup, [note that wow graphics are completely tested on every possible setup known to man and are unflinchingly stable]

7. i reported everything

8. i left and came back for a final beta invite. the pre launch open beta.  it was still boring, ugly, not immersive, not unique, not lordsy enough for me.

Note when i posted that it was boring, or not immersive on the forumns everyone jumped on me and said how wonderful the game was.

My friend bought the game i found out, like a week ago.  I went to see how much it cost in the store, to give it one last try.  It's $50.00 furikkin bucks plus the monthly fee.  are you furikkin kidding me????? yeah not in this life time buddy.  

In my honest opinion.  this game release did a disservice to the good name of Tolkien and the LOTR franchise as a whole.  It's as bad as what Sony did to Star Wars with SWG.  These licensors should ultimately put in the contract that they have final say if the game should be released.

Originally posted by shakaama

Ok here's my learned and unbiased opinion.

1. i played since the first beta after alpha

2. at the time the only thing that was clearly developed were the hobbits

3. i thought the game was horrible and had ZERO to do with lord of the rings, it was not immersive and not nearly different from any korean game i play on a regular basis.

4. i left short after

5. returned when i got invited to the next phase of beta, there were updates but still it lacked content

6. it's an ugly game.  even with everything turned up to lag inducing graphics mode, it's a hideous game IMO.  the graphics are unstable on my setup, [note that wow graphics are completely tested on every possible setup known to man and are unflinchingly stable]

7. i reported everything

8. i left and came back for a final beta invite. the pre launch open beta.  it was still boring, ugly, not immersive, not unique, not lordsy enough for me.

Note when i posted that it was boring, or not immersive on the forumns everyone jumped on me and said how wonderful the game was.

 

My friend bought the game i found out, like a week ago.  I went to see how much it cost in the store, to give it one last try.  It's $50.00 furikkin bucks plus the monthly fee.  are you furikkin kidding me????? yeah not in this life time buddy.  

 

In my honest opinion.  this game release did a disservice to the good name of Tolkien and the LOTR franchise as a whole.  It's as bad as what Sony did to Star Wars with SWG.  These licensors should ultimately put in the contract that they have final say if the game should be released.

So you played in beta and thought the game sucked. Then you never played after full release and thought the game sucked. Does that sum it up?

You do realize when you are invited to a beta its not a finished game. Your there to help not play a free game.

Your post has 0 merit and has failed.

Originally posted by seabass2003

 

Originally posted by shakaama

Ok here's my learned and unbiased opinion.

1. i played since the first beta after alpha

2. at the time the only thing that was clearly developed were the hobbits

3. i thought the game was horrible and had ZERO to do with lord of the rings, it was not immersive and not nearly different from any korean game i play on a regular basis.

4. i left short after

5. returned when i got invited to the next phase of beta, there were updates but still it lacked content

6. it's an ugly game.  even with everything turned up to lag inducing graphics mode, it's a hideous game IMO.  the graphics are unstable on my setup, [note that wow graphics are completely tested on every possible setup known to man and are unflinchingly stable]

7. i reported everything

8. i left and came back for a final beta invite. the pre launch open beta.  it was still boring, ugly, not immersive, not unique, not lordsy enough for me.

Note when i posted that it was boring, or not immersive on the forumns everyone jumped on me and said how wonderful the game was.

 

My friend bought the game i found out, like a week ago.  I went to see how much it cost in the store, to give it one last try.  It's $50.00 furikkin bucks plus the monthly fee.  are you furikkin kidding me????? yeah not in this life time buddy.  

 

In my honest opinion.  this game release did a disservice to the good name of Tolkien and the LOTR franchise as a whole.  It's as bad as what Sony did to Star Wars with SWG.  These licensors should ultimately put in the contract that they have final say if the game should be released.

So you played in beta and thought the game sucked. Then you never played after release and thought the game sucked. Does that sum it up?

 

You do realize when you are invited to a beta its not a finished game. Your there to help not play a free game.

Your post has 0 merit and has failed.

Let ME sum up what i said.  I played in all the closed beta since alpha.  I also played in the prerelease phase which alloyed everyone to get in early and get a prerelease order package or did you miss that part?  The game was finished.  I played right up to the day before release in retail, AND THEN QUIT.

Now the fact that many agree with my opinion gives me vindication right there.    Don't get all fanboi on me, did you even play?  Lastly you have something confused.  Open beta doesn't mean the game isn't comparable to it's release phase.  On the contrary, open beta is a bunch of stress testing to see if the servers can handle the server load.  They are done with the game.  Or maybe you didn't know that MR. expert betaphobe.

Go flame somewhere else.

Originally posted by tallshortguy

 

Originally posted by Torak

 

Originally posted by tallshortguy

 

 

I'm not saying that LotRO is a failure or a bad game, since I haven't played it yet, but basing a games success off a gamesites review doesn't prove much. Games that were exellently reviewed like Supreme Commander are often outsold by worse rated games due to people more interested in the "worse" game (such as movie liscensed games). Did you know that the game "Viva Pinata" based off the children's show was almost universally acclaimed by gamesites, but I will bet you money it was completely outsold by badly reviewed games such as "Transformers" just because most people wouldn't give a game based on a kid's show a second glance. All I'm trying to point out is that 39 reviews proves nothing when viewing a game as a commercial success or failure.

Yes, everyone knows reviews are never accurate and always wrong. There is no way 39 of them all from different organizations like PCGamer, 1UP, Gamespy... could even be close to correct. As far as the rest...who knows. But there is no way any revieew could be even close to correct in the case of this game.

 

Sorry bro, it does prove something. The xfire stats clearly prove many people are playing. The 39 reviews clearly shows that reviews like it.

I haven't seen a game yet that got bad reviews and was wildly popular...strange coincidence???? You get bad reviews, your game dies.  See just about any MMO released in the past 3 years if you need proof. How about that Dark and Light? Maybe Vanguard? Oh I know D&D.....errr..........maybe Roma Victor....Phantasy Star? Ryzom? All great successes dispite the bad reviews? Hardly. How about WoW and GW? Good reviews and strangely enough.........they are commercial successes. Thats weird how that works, isn't it?

Fact of the matter is you can not show me a game that has been commercially successful that got bad reviews. You may not like that but there it is.

I'm really sorry that you can't read my post and/or comprehend it. I obviously said commercial success (BTW if you plan on highlighting what i say, you might want to read it first). I never stated that highly reviewed games aren't good games, I stated that highly reviewed games many times aren't commercial successes. Please try to fully read my posts next time you plan on criticizing me. 1UP, I believe, gave a unfavorable review to NeverWinter Nights 2 and a massive outcry prompted them to rereview the game and give it a high score. Now this proves that game sites can be wrong and even if 1UP had kept their review, the game would have been a success nevertheless. Also, you should probably read the other examples I gave. I also said that many games that were reviewed favourably were big comercial successes. There's a reason site (that you mentioned) have awards for best game never played during their yearly awards.

 

Honestly, did you just skim through my post looking for something to flame? I never said LotRO was a failure, I was simply stating a flaw in your claims that game reviews always determine a game's success.

I wasn't aware that 1UP re-reviewed NWN2 either. You got a link for that? Just curious. 1UP isn't just a web site, whatever they publish there also goes into their magazine (games for windows) and I sub to it and never saw a re-review. Again just wondering if I missed something. Its highly unusual to see a re-review right after a review. In fact I don't think I ever saw it. (except for this site which has like zero review credibility with gamerankings)

Hes right though. Anyone who supports this game is supporting these rush our the door contentless games.

People used to complain about time sinks being in a game. Time sinks are things like grinding that just make you drone at your computer doing boring quests and such. Now people support a game like this which is entirely a time sink.

This game is trash (yes I played it) and if you honestly enjoy every minute of quest grinding you either have an extremly dull personality or are just that dumb. Games are suppose to be exciting and challenging. That is what they were first designed to be.

Originally posted by Ponzini

Hes right though. Anyone who supports this game is supporting these rush our the door contentless games.

People used to complain about time sinks being in a game. Time sinks are things like grinding that just make you drone at your computer doing boring quests and such. Now people support a game like this which is entirely a time sink.

This game is trash (yes I played it) and if you honestly enjoy every minute of quest grinding you either have an extremly dull personality or are just that dumb. Games are suppose to be exciting and challenging. That is what they were first designed to be.

Although I agree with you on a gaming / design level whats with all the hostility? You aren't going to get your point across to anyone by name calling. You just discredit yourself. 

Classic troll flamebait, I know we shouldn't bother, but let's just pinch on the biggest mistakes in there...

Originally posted by shakaama

Ok here's my learned and unbiased opinion. Unbiased  lol.

1. i played since the first beta after alpha

2. at the time the only thing that was clearly developed were the hobbits - the hobbits had more work on, that is true.

3. i thought the game was horrible and had ZERO to do with lord of the rings, it was not immersive and not nearly different from any korean game i play on a regular basis. - first part is a personal opinion, thus has nothing of "truth value", but it cannot be identified as "wrong". However, saying that LOTRO is a korean grindfest only proves one thing: you have zero knowledge about the differences between eastern and western MMORPG's.

4. i left short after

5. returned when i got invited to the next phase of beta, there were updates but still it lacked content

6. it's an ugly game.  even with everything turned up to lag inducing graphics mode, it's a hideous game IMO.  the graphics are unstable on my setup, [note that wow graphics are completely tested on every possible setup known to man and are unflinchingly stable] - what can be said about this? Again, it's a matter of a personal taste, but the VERY LARGE majority of people like or even love LOTRO's graphic, even the harshest critics admit that graphically it is one of the most beautiful games currently. This point of yours is a distillated bottle of flamebait, and nothing else at all.

7. i reported everything - I don't understand. What did you report, to whom? 

8. i left and came back for a final beta invite. the pre launch open beta.  it was still boring, ugly, not immersive, not unique, not lordsy enough for me.

Note when i posted that it was boring, or not immersive on the forumns everyone jumped on me and said how wonderful the game was. - I would not attack you for saying that LOTRO is boring, as getting bored is a totally personal thing. Some people get bored in theme parks, other people can have fun in an empty sandy beach. So that's not a reason to start a fight on!

However, saying that LOTRO is ugly, is just plain BS and admits that you are only there for a fight. The only other option is that you're (at least) colorblind 

 

My friend bought the game i found out, like a week ago.  I went to see how much it cost in the store, to give it one last try.  It's $50.00 furikkin bucks plus the monthly fee.  are you furikkin kidding me????? yeah not in this life time buddy.   - This one is a totally useless and pointless post. Again, what's the purpose (besides obvious trolling?)

 

In my honest opinion.  this game release did a disservice to the good name of Tolkien and the LOTR franchise as a whole.  It's as bad as what Sony did to Star Wars with SWG.  These licensors should ultimately put in the contract that they have final say if the game should be released.

Care to explain how LOTRO does a disservice to the lore? We're open to discussion here, if that is what you'd like.... oh, I didn't think so either 

DB

Originally posted by Ponzini

 Games are suppose to be exciting and challenging. That is what they were first designed to be.

Games are supposed to be FUN. If I'm playing and having fun, the game is successful.

Nobody could force me or any other gamer to play a game if it's not fun (let's not involve gold farmers).

More and more people are playing LOTRO, because it is fun for them - therefore, the game is a success. What's not to understand here? 

DB

Originally posted by Torak

Originally posted by Ponzini

Hes right though. Anyone who supports this game is supporting these rush our the door contentless games.

People used to complain about time sinks being in a game. Time sinks are things like grinding that just make you drone at your computer doing boring quests and such. Now people support a game like this which is entirely a time sink.

This game is trash (yes I played it) and if you honestly enjoy every minute of quest grinding you either have an extremly dull personality or are just that dumb. Games are suppose to be exciting and challenging. That is what they were first designed to be.

Although I agree with you on a gaming / design level whats with all the hostility? You aren't going to get your point across to anyone by name calling. You just discredit yourself. 

He's still suffering from the immaturity disease of "I'm right you're all wrong", i.e.: not being able to differentiate between opinion and universal truth. It'll pass in 5-10 years time 

DB

Originally posted by Torak

 

Originally posted by tallshortguy

 

Originally posted by Torak

 

Originally posted by tallshortguy

 

 

I'm not saying that LotRO is a failure or a bad game, since I haven't played it yet, but basing a games success off a gamesites review doesn't prove much. Games that were exellently reviewed like Supreme Commander are often outsold by worse rated games due to people more interested in the "worse" game (such as movie liscensed games). Did you know that the game "Viva Pinata" based off the children's show was almost universally acclaimed by gamesites, but I will bet you money it was completely outsold by badly reviewed games such as "Transformers" just because most people wouldn't give a game based on a kid's show a second glance. All I'm trying to point out is that 39 reviews proves nothing when viewing a game as a commercial success or failure.

Yes, everyone knows reviews are never accurate and always wrong. There is no way 39 of them all from different organizations like PCGamer, 1UP, Gamespy... could even be close to correct. As far as the rest...who knows. But there is no way any revieew could be even close to correct in the case of this game.

 

Sorry bro, it does prove something. The xfire stats clearly prove many people are playing. The 39 reviews clearly shows that reviews like it.

I haven't seen a game yet that got bad reviews and was wildly popular...strange coincidence???? You get bad reviews, your game dies.  See just about any MMO released in the past 3 years if you need proof. How about that Dark and Light? Maybe Vanguard? Oh I know D&D.....errr..........maybe Roma Victor....Phantasy Star? Ryzom? All great successes dispite the bad reviews? Hardly. How about WoW and GW? Good reviews and strangely enough.........they are commercial successes. Thats weird how that works, isn't it?

Fact of the matter is you can not show me a game that has been commercially successful that got bad reviews. You may not like that but there it is.

I'm really sorry that you can't read my post and/or comprehend it. I obviously said commercial success (BTW if you plan on highlighting what i say, you might want to read it first). I never stated that highly reviewed games aren't good games, I stated that highly reviewed games many times aren't commercial successes. Please try to fully read my posts next time you plan on criticizing me. 1UP, I believe, gave a unfavorable review to NeverWinter Nights 2 and a massive outcry prompted them to rereview the game and give it a high score. Now this proves that game sites can be wrong and even if 1UP had kept their review, the game would have been a success nevertheless. Also, you should probably read the other examples I gave. I also said that many games that were reviewed favourably were big comercial successes. There's a reason site (that you mentioned) have awards for best game never played during their yearly awards.

 

Honestly, did you just skim through my post looking for something to flame? I never said LotRO was a failure, I was simply stating a flaw in your claims that game reviews always determine a game's success.

Well Sorry for ruffling your feathers I did say "commercial success" also. I guess there could have been some highly rated games that were not commercial successes but I don't see how that has anything to do with LotR's so we both served off topic. It obvious that that is not the case with this game.

 

I wasn't aware that 1UP re-reviewed NWN2 either. You got a link for that? Just curious. 1UP isn't just a web site, whatever they publish there also goes into their magazine (games for windows) and I sub to it and never saw a re-review. Again just wondering if I missed something. Its highly unusual to see a re-review right after a review. In fact I don't think I ever saw it. (except for this site which has like zero review credibility with gamerankings)

Original Review http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3155234

Announcement of pulling review/rereview http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154916

Anyways not trying to start a flamefest. I'm actually looking to try the game, but I just don't like seeing people overhype this game and saying its the best MMO ever. Perhaps that wasn't your original intention, but whatever, GL with your games.

Originally posted by tallshortguy

 

Original Review http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3155234

 

Announcement of pulling review http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154916

Anyways not trying to start a flamefest. I'm actually looking to try the game, but I just don't like seeing people overhype this game and saying its the best MMO ever. Perhaps that wasn't your original intention, but whatever, GL with your games.

To some people, it may be the best game ever. Most don't ike seeing opinions that disagree with thier own, but that's not "overhype". it's just thier opinion.