Anyone that claims to love MMORPGS "must" love GW2, as "simple" as that.

GW2 is a MMORPG made with love and it shows....love to have fun! ArenaNet has made THE MMO!

a HUGE improvement from their previous game.

Cool story line,amazing art work, looong and interesting Lore, unique & very detailed Races, and a beautiful switch in quest system that trully makes up a breathing alive World to get lost in. If you have tried the Betas...you know what i´m talking about....

It deserves 90-100 in my opinion.

It´s not a perfect game and OFC it won´t be everyone´s cup of tea...no game can.

But it is trully outstanding! and perfect when MMo community specially needed those major gameplay changes.

It is a (not so) different game. Very similar to GW original in so many ways...but resolving (and improving....fss underwater combat is amazing) everything that failed then.

For me is GOTY 2012.

@Creslin321

Love Dirk's acting between :D

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by pmcubed

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by pmcubed

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by pmcubed

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by pmcubed

OP - take a lesson in social-statistics.

your scales ranges are inconsistant and the fact there is no ranges for anything below 70 notes your obvious bias.

if you want a fair and unbiased metacritic score, you have construct yout pole better.

Anyone who think that GW2 will get <70% on metacritic is being completely unrealistic.  Sorry, but the poll is fine ;).

At least make the ranges consistant.  This is the reason why China is winning.

 The poll is constructed in similar fashion to how the +/- grading scale works:

http://people.sunyit.edu/~boylank/scale.html

lol. similar.... try mirroring that.  you obvious made arbitrary scales for some reason that I can only attribute to laziness or you are trying to coerce people into choosing a score that you had a personal connecton to.  It is unethical.

 Yes I am uethical, go ahead and report me to the BBB lol. It's just a freaking poll.  It's off by ONE number from that scale.  ONE NUMBER.  And this is out of a 100 point scale.

Also, what agenda do I have here?  How am I trying to coerce people to choose something?

Over-hype~  

Not that I think GW2 will do poorly or receive anything lower than 70 - but looking at the history of over-hyped MMO's.... I think you know the harm in this.  

Guild Wars does a lot of things right and will sell a ton of copies, but are people ACTUALLY ready to separate themselves from the trinity?  Can they adapt to the skill-based 'twitchy' style of combat?  

PVP has a pretty steep learning curve which lends itself to a niche audience.  A few weekends isn't enough time to get a clear enough picture of GW2's potential longetivy and/or metascore.

Though, I'm sure you'll agree with me here.  It is pretty fun. lol

So my agenda...in making a poll that doesn't delineate scores <70 further...is to over-hype the game?

Look...

This is metacritic.  I don't think a single AAA MMORPG has EVER received <70 there.  The reasons I grouped them all into one category is because it's EXTREMELY unlikely that GW2 will get <70...and I only have 10 poll choices possible, so I have to cut something out.

If you think that this is over-hyping the game...then you must think a great many things are over-hyped.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology)

People see this and automatically assume it can't get below a 70.  All I'm saying is next time you throw a poll together, use better judgement.

If you read my last post, I brought up some issues that not all gamers will appreciate.  So, touting that GW2 is the Jesus of contemporary MMO's is over-hyping it.  Not your words - never said you did that.  

But, people get so addicted to these games by playing only 3 weekends at maximum - then see your poll which obviously primes more exitement because it is skewed at the top of the metacores.  (Im betting option two, which has a range of 4, is your choice) Thus, generates hype.

Look at SW:TOR.  No logical reason to assume it would do as badly as it did, but people were in love before it even released.  The beta for SW:TOR also had an extremely limited beta phase.  

What's to say GW2's 50+ zones aren't as fully developed as the initial zones, that are by design, supposed to be awesome to lure in players.

It will score between 80-90, but it won't deserve it.

No game deserves the critic scores on metacritic, they're all paid reviews, so it doesn't matter anyway.

It's the player score that mattes, and GW2's will be between 70-80 which it deserves.

Originally posted by pmcubed

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by pmcubed

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by pmcubed

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by pmcubed

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by pmcubed

OP - take a lesson in social-statistics.

your scales ranges are inconsistant and the fact there is no ranges for anything below 70 notes your obvious bias.

if you want a fair and unbiased metacritic score, you have construct yout pole better.

Anyone who think that GW2 will get <70% on metacritic is being completely unrealistic.  Sorry, but the poll is fine ;).

At least make the ranges consistant.  This is the reason why China is winning.

 The poll is constructed in similar fashion to how the +/- grading scale works:

http://people.sunyit.edu/~boylank/scale.html

lol. similar.... try mirroring that.  you obvious made arbitrary scales for some reason that I can only attribute to laziness or you are trying to coerce people into choosing a score that you had a personal connecton to.  It is unethical.

 Yes I am uethical, go ahead and report me to the BBB lol. It's just a freaking poll.  It's off by ONE number from that scale.  ONE NUMBER.  And this is out of a 100 point scale.

Also, what agenda do I have here?  How am I trying to coerce people to choose something?

Over-hype~  

Not that I think GW2 will do poorly or receive anything lower than 70 - but looking at the history of over-hyped MMO's.... I think you know the harm in this.  

Guild Wars does a lot of things right and will sell a ton of copies, but are people ACTUALLY ready to separate themselves from the trinity?  Can they adapt to the skill-based 'twitchy' style of combat?  

PVP has a pretty steep learning curve which lends itself to a niche audience.  A few weekends isn't enough time to get a clear enough picture of GW2's potential longetivy and/or metascore.

Though, I'm sure you'll agree with me here.  It is pretty fun. lol

So my agenda...in making a poll that doesn't delineate scores <70 further...is to over-hype the game?

Look...

This is metacritic.  I don't think a single AAA MMORPG has EVER received <70 there.  The reasons I grouped them all into one category is because it's EXTREMELY unlikely that GW2 will get <70...and I only have 10 poll choices possible, so I have to cut something out.

If you think that this is over-hyping the game...then you must think a great many things are over-hyped.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology)

People see this and automatically assume it can't get below a 70.  All I'm saying is next time you throw a poll together, use better judgement.

If you read my last post, I brought up some issues that not all gamers will appreciate.  So, touting that GW2 is the Jesus of contemporary MMO's is over-hyping it.  Not your words - never said you did that.  

But, people get so addicted to these games by playing only 3 weekends at maximum - then see your poll which obviously primes more exitement because it is skewed at the top of the metacores.  (Im betting option two, which has a range of 4, is your choice) Thus, generates hype.

Look at SW:TOR.  No logical reason to assume it would do as badly as it did, but people were in love before it even released.  The beta for SW:TOR also had an extremely limited beta phase.  

What's to say GW2's 50+ zones aren't as fully developed as the initial zones, that are by design, supposed to be awesome to lure in players.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_sense

Common sense is something you use when you look at metacritic ratings of previous games similar to the one in question, and then make a logical estimate of said game based on them.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/warhammer-online-age-of-reckoning

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/rift

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/tera

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic

Do you know how many of those games got below a 70 on metacrtiic?

0.

TSW was the only one that was close with a 71. 

Yes, SWTOR wound up doing poorly, but it also scored an 85 on metacritic.  That should tell you something.

Getting below a 70 on metacritic is bad.  It is typically reserved for bad games.  I have played GW2...I know it isn't a bad game.  I'm not saying it is perfect, but there is seriously no way the game is getting under a 70...no way at all.

Any rational person will agree with this...I'm sorry but it's true.  So me putting <70 on my poll has no crazy psychological effect.

If I put <90, I would understand where you are coming from...but <70...that's so low that it would be unreasonable to expect delineation there.

Originally posted by Creslin321

If I put <90, I would understand where you are coming from...but <70...that's so low that it would be unreasonable to expect delineation there.

 Actually, if you had weighted it so that there was a 10% range per the 10 answers, that would have made the poll practically meaningless, severely weighted towards the top two answers.

At least with the way you divided it, you get a bit more meaningful of a spread. :)  ... you had to make the split SOMEWHERE, and <70% is pretty reasonable, given the history of Metacritic and MMORPGs.

Originally posted by Denambren

I'm gonna run with 77-79 as my guess.

 

I expect the amateur writing and abysmal voice acting will turn off a lot of reviewers (and it should), but there will be a lot of good fun and pvp action to be had for people who can look past the terribad story.

I think a lot of reviewers will see the potential behind the game for those who make their own way, giving the game a "decent" score, but they'll also recognize that the embarassing attempt at a personal story will scare off a good chunk of players.

 

Geez... it's not THAT bad. It's not TSW quality, no, but I don't think it really needs to be. The core of the game is fantastic. I can't see a reason to take off 20% just because of it. I wouldn't really call that fair

I'm going to say 85-95

65+% think that the Metacritic average is going to be 90% or above.

Which will make GW2 one of the best reviewed MMORPGs of all time.

Interesting, because the two other MMORPGs in the same ratings range are WoW and TOR - one is the biggest MMO in NA/EU and the other #2 by all counts, even though it is going F2P this fall.

Interesting...

Originally posted by Valua

It will score between 80-90, but it won't deserve it.

 

No game deserves the critic scores on metacritic, they're all paid reviews, so it doesn't matter anyway.

 

It's the player score that mattes, and GW2's will be between 70-80 which it deserves.

Player scores matter after they pass the first few thousand. Also, removing the 10s and the 1-3s is essential to get a better score. Fanboys tend to vote for 10s on their favorite games, haters vote 1-3, although no game deserves a 10 and few deserve 1-3. The rest is what matters....

I'd go for somewhere between 92 and 95. It has been recieving pretty much universal praise, and the only thing that could let it down is performance. Put it this way: It's the first MMO in years and years i'm actually thinking Yahtzee may give a recommendation for as it deals with many complaints he has had with the MMO genre. It's that good.

92-95 means a fair few sites give it 9/10, with while a good 1/3rd 10/10.

Originally posted by Creslin321
93%!

 So far...I'm winning :D!

Thought it would be fun to see how accurate this is turning out to be.  Obviously, the score may change since it's still earliy...but we've got six reviews now, so that's something.

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by Creslin321
93%!

 So far...I'm winning :D!

Thought it would be fun to see how accurate this is turning out to be.  Obviously, the score may change since it's still earliy...but we've got six reviews now, so that's something.

id give it at least another 10 reviews to get a better baseline on it.. overall I don't take much stock in site reviews good or bad though.. but I'm sure many do and will see this game getting very good marks accross the board so it will bring more to the game. 

Originally posted by jpnole
If you want a more accurate "user" score check out Gamespot. You don't get a lot of "0" scores there like on metacritic.

 Yeah...I agree. There are some users over there that put out some good reviews. Hell of a lot better than most sites.

Sure it will be in the 90s. Not that most of those sites are worth anything for reviews anymore anyways.

Well considering that crap games like SW:TOR got 85 then GW 2 should get around 95.

But for me user score is far better where SW:TOR got like 56, which is what it deserves, where as genuinely good games, like Skyrim, got 81. So with that in mind the user score should settle at around 75-80.

I'm going to say 85%, which is the current user score times 10.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Let's see...

Highest Metacritic scores for MMOs are...

SWTOR: Critc - 93 User 8.9

WoW (cata): Critic - 90 User 5.2

 

Recent Metacritic scores for MMOs...

TERA: Critic 77 User 7.1

TSW: Critic 71 User 8.4

 

So what will GW2 get?

GW2: Critic 94 user 9.0

 

 It's final metascore, not highest ever.

SWTOR: critic 93? User 8.9?

I just look it up and SWTOR is at critic 85, user 5.6.