Originally posted by SanHor

Originally posted by Snaylor47

So you just chose to ignore any review from a major site that disagrees with your opinion?

I think it's a common sense by now that major site reviews are paid and serve as nothing more than another way for developers to promote their games.

You're kidding right?

As for the rest, No it just reminds me how burned out your people are on WoW like themepark MMOs, once again its not a bad thing.

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by SanHor

Originally posted by Snaylor47

So you just chose to ignore any review from a major site that disagrees with your opinion?

I think it's a common sense by now that major site reviews are paid and serve as nothing more than another way for developers to promote their games.

You're kidding right?

 

As for the rest, No it just reminds me how burned out your people are on WoW like themepark MMOs, once again its not a bad thing.

 

 

how do you think these sites make there money? advteristing from big companies like EA.. you really think this doesn't influence scores? go to metacritic and look up warhammer online and read the big site reviews on that one and tell me these scores aren't "bought"  ... anyway it's fine you think this is the best game ever yet no one ever brings up any video evidence to back up there claims... sort of like if I was holding an apple right up to your face telling you its an apple yet you insisted it was an orange.. now you pull out some evidence its an orange I may rethink my observation of what I'm holding.... my point is I play the game and the points he makes in are so obviously and stick out so much how can you sit there and deny them???? maybe they don't bother you very much but obviously they do bother a lot of people and some of these things are really game breaking to many people. He doesn't even cover some of the worst aspects of the game like PVP...

My two (or two hundred) cents on whether or not reviewers are bought.

I have been duped by plenty of good reviews and have often wondered why some of the worst games I have ever played were so well reviewed by the industry. I've never been one to think, "They're all paid off," and have assumed instead that it's more of a group-think mentality that so often influences the media. Having done a review now, my thinking on this issue has changed dramatically.

I was all excited when I posted my first look at swtor. I naively thought that a quality video after a lot of gameplay would be well received and I was looking forward to getting a lot of new viewers to my channel. Within the first 24 hours I had more dislikes on that video than on all others combined. It was something like 34 dislikes to 5 likes. And I was getting destroyed. The video was crushed here at mmorpg.com, as well. Looking back at the thread I see that there are a lot more positive comments than I remembered, probably because I was so astounded at the negativity. I was stupid. I was biased. I was a liar. I was an idiot for thinking I could have an opinion on a game after 10 levels. I have a terribly annoying voice. (Actually, I found this one a bit funny. My favorite was the person that called me Artie Ziff. Gave me a good, long laugh.) I had to start monitoring my youtube channel by the hour just so I could delete posts that were laced with foul language or homophobic slurs. I have nephews who actually watch my videos from time to time and they don't need to be reading that their uncle is a *****  *****.

So I totally get it now. I'm not saying that game companies have not or would not buy reviewers. I'm just saying that they don't have to. The best way to get people really upset with you is to bash a highly anticipated game before it's released. Even in the first few weeks of release you run a risk. If my job is to sell magazines or bring people to my website so I can get more money for my banner ads, why on earth would I be putting up reviews that get all my readers ticked off at me on a regular basis? Especially when there are going to be so many people that actually like the game anyway! Anyone who likes my positive review will read the next one. Anyone who dislikes my positive review might still read my next one. That isn't necessarily true the other way around.

A final thought. Review sites and magazines rely on game companies giving them access pre-launch. Let's just say that each of my videos brought in 100k views. Do you think that Bioware, after seeing my swtor review, would ever give me access to one of their games pre-launch? Not a chance. If I had a review site, how could I maintain a good readership if it consistantly took me until a week after launch just to put together a first look because companies wouldn't let me touch their game before-hand?

Bad reviews are bad business. Plain and simple.

Of course, none of this explains swtor earning game of the year awards. Really? You couldn't have dropped swtor into next year's award nominations instead? Some of these awards were granted 1 week after launch which means they were likely chosen before swtor actually was released. If that's not a decision made for the sole purpose of selling more magazines / getting more banner ad dollars I don't know what is.

*sorry for the wall of text! :)

edit for clarity

Originally posted by iamflymolo
...

A final thought. Review sites and magazines rely on game companies giving them access pre-launch. Let's just say that each of my videos brought in 100k views. Do you think that Bioware, after seeing my swtor review, would ever give me access to one of their games pre-launch? Not a chance. If I had a review site, how could I maintain a good readership if it consistantly took me until a week after launch just to put together a first look because companies wouldn't let me touch their game before-hand?

Bad reviews are bad business. Plain and simple.

There is actually some controversy over some reviewers being put on some kind of reviewers blacklist, so that certain game companies know not to give them free early copies of their games. I only heard from this video regarding Duke Nukem, and decided to look into it further.

Originally posted by Master10K

Originally posted by iamflymolo
...

A final thought. Review sites and magazines rely on game companies giving them access pre-launch. Let's just say that each of my videos brought in 100k views. Do you think that Bioware, after seeing my swtor review, would ever give me access to one of their games pre-launch? Not a chance. If I had a review site, how could I maintain a good readership if it consistantly took me until a week after launch just to put together a first look because companies wouldn't let me touch their game before-hand?

Bad reviews are bad business. Plain and simple.

There is actually some controversy over some reviewers being put on some kind of reviewers blacklist, so that certain game companies know not to give them free early copies of their games. I only heard from this video regarding Duke Nukem, and decided to look into it further.

Is this a controversy? Why would Bioware, or any company, not black-list a reviewer that had a history of giving them bad reviews? Why would they want their game subject to a good trashing before launch, especially if that trashing was sent out to 100k readers? If a movie studio thinks its movie will get panned it won't be screened for film critics. That's just the way it works.

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by vesavius

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by vesavius

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by vesavius

 As soon as they charge money for access it is fair to judge it.

My answer before actually does addres your second question. I obviously recognise the source as valid (independant in this case), it's agenda (to clearly inform), and consider it educated (based on real extended play and not just <10 hours plus an EA press release).

 

There is no agenda behind professional reviews and thats where you... /snip

 

ok, this is where we should leave this I think. It's obvious that we have a very different understanding of how this industry works and are very unlikely to agree.

You can have the last word :)

So you just chose to ignore any review from a major site that disagrees with your opinion?

 

TBH, personally I don't actually pay that much attention to reviews from anyone but my friends when it comes to actually buying a game.

Forgive me if I consider this complete BS after reading some of your history. 

 So aggressive.... :/

You seem to have made up your mind about SWTOR a long time ago, long as in Months prior to realease.

Yep, I was in extended beta for the game. I played for over a month.

This was why I was labelled 'hater' and 'troll' a lot on the SWTOR forum prior tolaunch... because I stated what pretty much everyone else is stating now.

Its fine IMO that you do not like the game. But its idiotic to say that reviews are only "honest" and "itellegent" if they come from your friend or some random guy on the internet.

Calling others idiotic when you seem to have failed to understand whats being said... :/

'Or some random guy on the internet'? I actually said just my friends. The rest I pay attention to just because I like watching how this stuff is hyped and shilled. Just morbid facination really.

And did I say my friends were necessarily honest or intelligent? lol no.. there are times they can be neither, just like the rest of us, but I have known them for years and I know where they are coming from with their tastes and views and can weigh what they say accordingly. I have friends that loves some games I hate and so if he recommends one I usually avoid it until I get back up, as an example.

Originally posted by iamflymolo
...

A final thought. Review sites and magazines rely on game companies giving them access pre-launch. Let's just say that each of my videos brought in 100k views. Do you think that Bioware, after seeing my swtor review, would ever give me access to one of their games pre-launch? Not a chance. If I had a review site, how could I maintain a good readership if it consistantly took me until a week after launch just to put together a first look because companies wouldn't let me touch their game before-hand?

Bad reviews are bad business. Plain and simple.

If anything the reviews like Duke Nukem prove you 100% wrong.

As far as advertising goes Bioware/EA would have more to lose if they lost the ad spots to some major gaming websites then those websites have to gain.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/ign.com

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/mmorpg.com

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/gamespy.com

It can't in no way shape or form be about money because and here is the shocker, TOR isn't the only game out right now thats new and needs advertisement.

I also find that the only negative thing that one can say about this game is the broken (yet stil present none the less) endgame content and a few bugs. And I believe many, like myself over look theses things because they are generally fixed if the game, like TOR, doesn't have too many game dystroying bugs or large amounts of missing content.

i r approve.

+1

Originally posted by vesavius

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by vesavius

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by vesavius

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by vesavius

 As soon as they charge money for access it is fair to judge it.

My answer before actually does addres your second question. I obviously recognise the source as valid (independant in this case), it's agenda (to clearly inform), and consider it educated (based on real extended play and not just <10 hours plus an EA press release).

 

There is no agenda behind professional reviews and thats where you... /snip

 

ok, this is where we should leave this I think. It's obvious that we have a very different understanding of how this industry works and are very unlikely to agree.

You can have the last word :)

So you just chose to ignore any review from a major site that disagrees with your opinion?

 

TBH, personally I don't actually pay that much attention to reviews from anyone but my friends when it comes to actually buying a game.

Forgive me if I consider this complete BS after reading some of your history. 

 So aggressive.... :/

You seem to have made up your mind about SWTOR a long time ago, long as in Months prior to realease.

Yep, I was in extended beta for the game. I played for over a month.

This was why I was labelled 'hater' and 'troll' a lot on the SWTOR forum prior tolaunch... because I stated what pretty much everyone else is stating now.

 

So you're saying the games great but could use a few bug fixes and content updates? You know like everyone else.

Its fine IMO that you do not like the game. But its idiotic to say that reviews are only "honest" and "itellegent" if they come from your friend or some random guy on the internet.

Calling others idiotic when you seem to have failed to understand whats being said... :/

'Or some random guy on the internet'? I actually said just my friends. The rest I pay attention to just because I like watching how this stuff is hyped and shilled. Just morbid facination really.

And yet you called this review honest. And unless your friends were in beta you came to your own conclution about the game long ago. And dissing shows you don't watch (So to speak) makes you come off as a bit of a hater. I really hate using the term but it seems that when ever there is a negative thread or review on SWTOR you seem to always be right there agreeing with it.  

 

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by iamflymolo
...

A final thought. Review sites and magazines rely on game companies giving them access pre-launch. Let's just say that each of my videos brought in 100k views. Do you think that Bioware, after seeing my swtor review, would ever give me access to one of their games pre-launch? Not a chance. If I had a review site, how could I maintain a good readership if it consistantly took me until a week after launch just to put together a first look because companies wouldn't let me touch their game before-hand?

Bad reviews are bad business. Plain and simple.

If anything the reviews like Duke Nukem prove you 100% wrong.

 

As far as advertising goes Bioware/EA would have more to lose if they lost the ad spots to some major gaming websites then those websites have to gain.

 

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/ign.com

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/mmorpg.com

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/gamespy.com

It can't in no way shape or form be about money because and here is the shocker, TOR isn't the only game out right now thats new and needs advertisement.

 

I also find that the only negative thing that one can say about this game is the broken (yet stil present none the less) endgame content and a few bugs. And I believe many, like myself over look theses things because they are generally fixed if the game, like TOR, doesn't have too many game dystroying bugs or large amounts of missing content.

ok so explain to me how warhammer online got pretty much same overall score as TOR also how can you only say the only issues this game has is endgame issues... I mean wow did you even watch this review? I can't see how peopel can defend the class system its horrible.. the talent trees are a joke there's no customization at all you are basically stuck going down one tree and putting a couple leftover points in first tier of the other trees. They have the stupid stances and ammo types and such in half the talents in the trees making it pointless to hybrid for the most part... then you only get 2-3 actual skills from the trees which makes cusomization even worse... honestly to me this is the worst part of the game by far.

Originally posted by sanosukex

 

ok so explain to me how warhammer online got pretty much same overall score as TOR also how can you only say the only issues this game has is endgame issues... I mean wow did you even watch this review?

WAR was a fun game, but the lack of entire classes and other content tend to bog it down.

TORs content is bugged not missing IMO.

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

 

ok so explain to me how warhammer online got pretty much same overall score as TOR also how can you only say the only issues this game has is endgame issues... I mean wow did you even watch this review?

WAR was a fun game, but the lack of entire classes and other content tend to bog it down.

 

TORs content is bugged not missing IMO.

so you agree then TOR and Warhammer are on equal footing and deserve equal reviews from all these big name game review sites? also I edited my last post adding couple more comments

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

 

ok so explain to me how warhammer online got pretty much same overall score as TOR also how can you only say the only issues this game has is endgame issues... I mean wow did you even watch this review?

WAR was a fun game, but the lack of entire classes and other content tend to bog it down.

 

TORs content is bugged not missing IMO.

so you agree then TOR and Warhammer are on equal footing and deserve equal reviews from all these big name game review sites? also I edited my last post adding couple more comments

I think Bioware did a far better job over all with bugs and content then Mythic did.

Mythics biggiest blunder was class balance (Bright wizards anyone?) and well missing classes bugs and miss management of other things. WAR on paper and a little bit into practice was a great game.

TOR avoids the bugs that matter to me at least, and unlike WAR the Story gave me a refreshing break from the go collect x quest and made the story important, while at least in TOR the endgame content is acceptable.

Can't really argue with an opinion for the other comments you made. They aren't umblanaced or anything and it seem that you just don't like it.

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

 

ok so explain to me how warhammer online got pretty much same overall score as TOR also how can you only say the only issues this game has is endgame issues... I mean wow did you even watch this review?

WAR was a fun game, but the lack of entire classes and other content tend to bog it down.

 

TORs content is bugged not missing IMO.

so you agree then TOR and Warhammer are on equal footing and deserve equal reviews from all these big name game review sites? also I edited my last post adding couple more comments

I think Bioware did a far better job over all with bugs and content then Mythic did.

Mythics biggiest blunder was class balance (Bright wizards anyone?) and well missing classes bugs and miss management of other things. WAR on paper and a little bit into practice was a great game.

TOR avoids the bugs that matter to me at least, and unlike WAR the Story gave me a refreshing break from the go collect x quest and made the story important, while at least in TOR the endgame content is acceptable.

 

Can't really argue with an opinion for the other comments you made. They aren't umblanaced or anything and it seem that you just don't like it.

lol they ARE umbalanced you obviously haven't played high level PVP its a joke.. and considering how few classes there are its amazing they couldn't actually balance the game. Go to the official forums and look at the pvp forums and see how happy people are about class balance non-stealth melee is at a HUGE disadvantage compared to ranged classes. Also I still find it amazing everyone who defends this game can never give an reasons or examples other that "well it's my opinion it's just awsome" and that's it can't give examples or anything.. yet people who talk negative can give examples can give video and can actually have discussion about this stuff and how they feel it could be better. Yet people who see NOTHING wrong with this game somehow can never say anything but "to me it's great". It's fine if you feel you don't need ot defend your reasons why you love the game but why criticise other people who don't feel this is the best game ever and don't just say that,  they actually spend the time to come up with video and actual arguments to why they feel this way.

 

Originally posted by iamflymolo

My review is posted on youtube after a month in the game!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnPxP9Xsc94

Wrong about the SI story at the 18 minute mark, the weather on Dromund Kaas which was changed in beta, the space combat rewards, completely wrong about ambient sound, and partly wrong about the quests.You further state that you have to kill every mob on the way back from a quest, but make no mention of fast travel, which I always use to skip the trip back entirely.

Nice beta footage. 

Don't get me wrong, I agree with a lot of the complaints:  regurgitated dialogue being chief among them.  I never noticed the "clone" issue before though, lol.

PS:  Also completely wrong about changing companions.

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

 

ok so explain to me how warhammer online got pretty much same overall score as TOR also how can you only say the only issues this game has is endgame issues... I mean wow did you even watch this review?

WAR was a fun game, but the lack of entire classes and other content tend to bog it down.

 

TORs content is bugged not missing IMO.

so you agree then TOR and Warhammer are on equal footing and deserve equal reviews from all these big name game review sites? also I edited my last post adding couple more comments

I think Bioware did a far better job over all with bugs and content then Mythic did.

Mythics biggiest blunder was class balance (Bright wizards anyone?) and well missing classes bugs and miss management of other things. WAR on paper and a little bit into practice was a great game.

TOR avoids the bugs that matter to me at least, and unlike WAR the Story gave me a refreshing break from the go collect x quest and made the story important, while at least in TOR the endgame content is acceptable.

 

Can't really argue with an opinion for the other comments you made. They aren't umblanaced or anything and it seem that you just don't like it.

Also I still find it amazing everyone who defends this game can never give an reasons or examples other that "well it's my opinion it's just awsome" and that's it can't give examples or anything.. yet people who talk negative can give examples can give video and can actually have discussion about this stuff and how they feel it could be better. 

The Willfully Blind: Yes, these exist in Hate Dumb too. Similar to the willfully blind in Fan Dumb, the Hate Dumb variety will refuse to acknowledge any potential strengths or possibly even anything that was done correctly. The willfully blind may also try and convince everyone else to Hand Wave the strengths because they do not exist. They are prone to Accentuate the Negative arguments or reviews. Sometimes, they may have a single issue about the work and hate it solely because of that — usually because they stopped watching afterwards. Expect even in-depth reviews written by this hater to discuss only the parts they know and can't stand. Even if the production staff ran every decision by them, they would complain about how they "weren't asked enough". No matter what, the willfully blind will fixate on a single flaw or any weaknesses.

Tv Tropes aplies to everything.

I can list off a ton of things I think this game (Story, world design, classes ect) is doing right and I could also list off a lot of things that it does wrong (No dungeon finder a few endgames bugs ect). 

Originally posted by Snaylor47

 

I can list off a ton of things I think this game (Story, world design, classes ect) is doing right and I could also list off a lot of things that it does wrong (No dungeon finder a few endgames bugs ect). 

wait thought you said only issues this game had were endgame?.. again my point is why be critical when the evidence is sitting right in fornt of your face. You can see the clones you can see how lazy the character customization is I just don't see how people can in anyway defend this stuff... I play this game because I enjoy the story since I'm a star wars nut.. If I wasn't no way in hell would I stick around and pay for this game..  classes are a joke compared to most MMOs no creativity no thought no variety just same basic rehash we have gotten forever.. but again like I said there's plenty of stuff to back up my claims(just take a peak over at the official forums or any MMO forum or youtube) wether you personally agree or not obviously many people feel like this so why come and criticize people here when obviously many many replies here agree with the review yet what just two or 3 that disagree and offered nothing ot really back up there arguments other that "i like a and i like b"...

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

 

ok so explain to me how warhammer online got pretty much same overall score as TOR also how can you only say the only issues this game has is endgame issues... I mean wow did you even watch this review?

WAR was a fun game, but the lack of entire classes and other content tend to bog it down.

 

TORs content is bugged not missing IMO.

so you agree then TOR and Warhammer are on equal footing and deserve equal reviews from all these big name game review sites? also I edited my last post adding couple more comments

I think Bioware did a far better job over all with bugs and content then Mythic did.

Mythics biggiest blunder was class balance (Bright wizards anyone?) and well missing classes bugs and miss management of other things. WAR on paper and a little bit into practice was a great game.

TOR avoids the bugs that matter to me at least, and unlike WAR the Story gave me a refreshing break from the go collect x quest and made the story important, while at least in TOR the endgame content is acceptable.

 

Can't really argue with an opinion for the other comments you made. They aren't umblanaced or anything and it seem that you just don't like it.

Also I still find it amazing everyone who defends this game can never give an reasons or examples other that "well it's my opinion it's just awsome" and that's it can't give examples or anything.. yet people who talk negative can give examples can give video and can actually have discussion about this stuff and how they feel it could be better. 

The Willfully Blind: Yes, these exist in Hate Dumb too. Similar to the willfully blind in Fan Dumb, the Hate Dumb variety will refuse to acknowledge any potential strengths or possibly even anything that was done correctly. The willfully blind may also try and convince everyone else to Hand Wave the strengths because they do not exist. They are prone to Accentuate the Negative arguments or reviews. Sometimes, they may have a single issue about the work and hate it solely because of that — usually because they stopped watching afterwards. Expect even in-depth reviews written by this hater to discuss only the parts they know and can't stand. Even if the production staff ran every decision by them, they would complain about how they "weren't asked enough". No matter what, the willfully blind will fixate on a single flaw or any weaknesses.

 

Tv Tropes aplies to everything.

 

I can list off a ton of things I think this game (Story, world design, classes ect) is doing right and I could also list off a lot of things that it does wrong (No dungeon finder a few endgames bugs ect). 

I bought the game. Unsubbed b4 free month was over. Figured if I wanted to play wow, Id be playing wow. But I'm not playing that either.

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

 

I can list off a ton of things I think this game (Story, world design, classes ect) is doing right and I could also list off a lot of things that it does wrong (No dungeon finder a few endgames bugs ect). 

 again my point is why be critical when the evidence is sitting right in fornt of your face

Because at the end of the day too me the positives outweigh the negatives by a long shot.

I can wait for the few endgame bugs to be fixed or for them to add a better LFG system like they are in 1.2. You seem to not be able too.

My suggestion to you would be to unsubb and wait a few months.

Originally posted by Epicent

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Snaylor47

Originally posted by sanosukex

 

ok so explain to me how warhammer online got pretty much same overall score as TOR also how can you only say the only issues this game has is endgame issues... I mean wow did you even watch this review?

WAR was a fun game, but the lack of entire classes and other content tend to bog it down.

 

TORs content is bugged not missing IMO.

so you agree then TOR and Warhammer are on equal footing and deserve equal reviews from all these big name game review sites? also I edited my last post adding couple more comments

I think Bioware did a far better job over all with bugs and content then Mythic did.

Mythics biggiest blunder was class balance (Bright wizards anyone?) and well missing classes bugs and miss management of other things. WAR on paper and a little bit into practice was a great game.

TOR avoids the bugs that matter to me at least, and unlike WAR the Story gave me a refreshing break from the go collect x quest and made the story important, while at least in TOR the endgame content is acceptable.

 

Can't really argue with an opinion for the other comments you made. They aren't umblanaced or anything and it seem that you just don't like it.

Also I still find it amazing everyone who defends this game can never give an reasons or examples other that "well it's my opinion it's just awsome" and that's it can't give examples or anything.. yet people who talk negative can give examples can give video and can actually have discussion about this stuff and how they feel it could be better. 

The Willfully Blind: Yes, these exist in Hate Dumb too. Similar to the willfully blind in Fan Dumb, the Hate Dumb variety will refuse to acknowledge any potential strengths or possibly even anything that was done correctly. The willfully blind may also try and convince everyone else to Hand Wave the strengths because they do not exist. They are prone to Accentuate the Negative arguments or reviews. Sometimes, they may have a single issue about the work and hate it solely because of that — usually because they stopped watching afterwards. Expect even in-depth reviews written by this hater to discuss only the parts they know and can't stand. Even if the production staff ran every decision by them, they would complain about how they "weren't asked enough". No matter what, the willfully blind will fixate on a single flaw or any weaknesses.

 

Tv Tropes aplies to everything.

 

I can list off a ton of things I think this game (Story, world design, classes ect) is doing right and I could also list off a lot of things that it does wrong (No dungeon finder a few endgames bugs ect). 

I bought the game. Unsubbed b4 free month was over. Figured if I wanted to play wow, Id be playing wow. But I'm not playing that either.