Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG

...

Are you kidding me?? 2m sold is a lot. $60 x 2m is $0.12 billion mate.

Have you even seen $0.12 billion before? lol "not much money"...

$0.12 billion is enough to send at least 1 rocket with satellites into space buddy.

Anet is absolutely making a killing. The ARE laughing all the way to the bank.

B2P is absolutely valid. Your assumption is invalid because you don't even have basic profit/cost figure in your assumptions.

You are missing the point.  It does not matter whether Anet have been financiall successful or not, what matters is that MMORPGs are supposed to be a home for years, not a place you visit for a few weeks then depart for the next thing.  These two games are both ranked highly on Metacritic by users (and so theoretically are both good MMORPGs), and yet both significantly lost concurrent users in the short time after release till now.

 

[As did Tera, SW:TOR etc to be fair]

 

In fact the attrition on GW2 is probably particularly telling, given even the supposed resumption of online selling has done nothing to stem this tide, and the competition of MoP has not even hit yet.

 

So what is the problem with Metacritic?  Are people simply making judgements far too early on in the life cycle of an MMORPG?  What works as a "useful" gauge of user sentiment towards other shorter life span games, may not actually be a good way to measure MMORPGs.

 

 

 

 

thats exactly what i mean. mmorpg players  want a mmo they can play for long terms (everyone i know atleast) and  this is part of the mystery why WoW is such a succes..people are comign back to it after 4-5 or even more years..it happened to me after more than 3y..actually i came back to every addon ^^

if u invest so much time in 1 game u want to stay there for a long time.

And because GW2 is b2p people always think "eh i already payed for it so i can play other mmos and maybe come back to it since IM NOT PAYING A MONTHLY FEE THAT "FORCES" ME TO PLAY "

It is weird but if i play a p2p mmo i wanna play it as much as possible since i pay for it monthly. but with gw2 once ur 80 there is nothing todo except pvp and since u dont pay for it u dont have to stick to it.

i hope ppl understand what i mean.

Originally posted by VirusDancer

Critic reviews are little more than user reviews these days.

I have to agree completely with this statement.  Not true of all critics reviews but enough to make an impact on the scores.

As an example the reviewer who has given TSW the lowest score (as of 24 Sep 12) only seems to have an issue with the broken/buggy missions in a rather bland description of the game that doesn't really criticize anything else.  Yet the same reviewer has rated GW2 a 100 with a glowing review that all but calls it the second comming.

I'm currently playing both games and enjoy them both, and have encountered very few bugs in either.  I don't believe an objective and professional reviewer could score these two games that differently; particularly when his main reason for scoring one so low appears to be buggy missions. 

It would appear that this reviewer is a TSW hater and a GW2 fanboy.  Nothing wrong with that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but should these reviews be considered as official type reviews alongside those of mainstream publications instead of just another user's review.  In my opinion they shouldn't.

Originally posted by Nitre

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG

...

Are you kidding me?? 2m sold is a lot. $60 x 2m is $0.12 billion mate.

Have you even seen $0.12 billion before? lol "not much money"...

$0.12 billion is enough to send at least 1 rocket with satellites into space buddy.

Anet is absolutely making a killing. The ARE laughing all the way to the bank.

B2P is absolutely valid. Your assumption is invalid because you don't even have basic profit/cost figure in your assumptions.

You are missing the point.  It does not matter whether Anet have been financiall successful or not, what matters is that MMORPGs are supposed to be a home for years, not a place you visit for a few weeks then depart for the next thing.  These two games are both ranked highly on Metacritic by users (and so theoretically are both good MMORPGs), and yet both significantly lost concurrent users in the short time after release till now.

 

[As did Tera, SW:TOR etc to be fair]

 

In fact the attrition on GW2 is probably particularly telling, given even the supposed resumption of online selling has done nothing to stem this tide, and the competition of MoP has not even hit yet.

 

So what is the problem with Metacritic?  Are people simply making judgements far too early on in the life cycle of an MMORPG?  What works as a "useful" gauge of user sentiment towards other shorter life span games, may not actually be a good way to measure MMORPGs.

 

 

 

 

thats exactly what i mean. mmorpg players  want a mmo they can play for long terms (everyone i know atleast) and  this is part of the mystery why WoW is such a succes..people are comign back to it after 4-5 or even more years..it happened to me after more than 3y..actually i came back to every addon ^^

if u invest so much time in 1 game u want to stay there for a long time.

And because GW2 is b2p people always think "eh i already payed for it so i can play other mmos and maybe come back to it since IM NOT PAYING A MONTHLY FEE THAT "FORCES" ME TO PLAY "

It is weird but if i play a p2p mmo i wanna play it as much as possible since i pay for it monthly. but with gw2 once ur 80 there is nothing todo except pvp and since u dont pay for it u dont have to stick to it.

 

i hope ppl understand what i mean.

yes we do,

But it sounds like you like being forced to pay to play  :x

I don't mind paying a sub per-say, but good god, after playing GW2 and the amount of content that game has released with i wonder if i'll ever pay a sub again. GW2 is a great game and it can last me for MONTHS. WoW turned into a lobby game long ago where you just log in to raid. GW2 is anything BUT that and for that i thank ANET.

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Well both scores look silly when you take into account the ridiculously high scores given to swtor and d3

If you just pve, tsw probably is that close to gw2.

Thing is gw2 offers you more choices, tournaments, WvW as a guild, de chains and bosses as a guild, crafting meaningful gear etc..

Tsw has better lore And dungeons though

I agree with you on gw2 having a more robust pvp system and TSW having better story/lore delivery and dungeons. As far as DE chains, TSW has lairs. Open world spots with super tough mobs desinged for 5 people along with world bosses.

I feel the crafting is more meaningful in TSW aswell, due to the fact it allows you craft exactly what you need to match any build combination out of the 525 abilities i.g. A mage tank that uses self healing instead of mitigation. 

It's really interesting to look at these scores. One game sells 2 million the other 200k. TSW spent the vast majority of thier budget on PvE content. GW2 spent a lot of there budget on PvP. 

I have a feeling a lot of the lowered score is due to D3 and TOR, people put the score and later realized they were far too generous.

Same reason that game reviewers generally seems to play the game longer now than before, making a fair review after just playing "Tortage" never really worked and people have finally realized that.

I wouldnt call TSWs lore "better" but a ripp off from the RPG "Delta green" feels rather fresh to the genre.

Originally posted by VirusDancer

Originally posted by dariuszp

Originally posted by bcbully

GW2 8.4 1330 reviews

TSW 8.3 955 reviews

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/guild-wars-2

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

 

 

So ? 

GW2: 90 / 100

TSW: 75 / 100

A) When game is highly recomended by people and crytics, you know you have something good in your hands (GW2, EVE, DAOC, EQ etc...)

B) If game is highly recomended only by people, you know that it's just poor game filled with fanboys (TSW)

C) When game is highly recomended by crytics but not people, you know that it's a poor game made by someone well known (TOR)

D) When game is not recomended by both crytics and people, you know to stay away (others).

 

Questions ?

No questions... just a point.  While obviously it is just your opinion, it is not a very logical one.  You ignore your own "facts" while separating the various groups.

Your A ignores the influence of B and C.  So the fanbois from B have no influence on A?  So the well known critics from C have no influence on A?

Your B ignores the opposite of C, as in it could be a well made game by somebody not well known.

Your C ignores that the game may simply not be well known.

Your D again ignores C.

Like I said, it's not very logical in the least... but hey, people are free to offer their opinions.

Show me MMO that had very good critics review (around 8-10) and bad user reviews WHILE it was made by someone unknown (indie perhaps ?). Few examples please.

Fanbois and trolls have always an influence. But when game is bad, at some point even trolls leave and only fanboys stay. This is why user scores go up while critic score go down. In good game you usually have both parties with more fanboys (if game is really good).

D don't ignore anything. When everyone thinks that game is bad - game is bad.

Originally posted by Wraithone

The games afoot!!... Waits for the usual flame wars as hysterical fan kiddies and Haters pile on. 

GW2 is an entertaining game at this point. Since I wasn't looking for the One True Game(tm), I can't say I'm disappointed in it.  The combat system isn't as dynamic as Tera's, but its enjoyable.  The graphics are really nice.  I've enjoyed the story line sequence so far.  The events are fun (at least the first few times). 

You mean a new Ultima Online? :P

By the way, I would really prefer the B group if I found any game like that. Would be really nice playing without trolls and only with folks who like the game same way I do.

Originally posted by kalrhael

MOP cinematic is basically the movie version of this thread.

 

The Orc is basically GW2

The Human is basically TSW

 

Chen (the panda)... is WOW

 

In the end, even their combined forces is no match for pandaland. 

I've got some bad news for you sunshine...

Originally posted by Quirhid
Oh wow, that user score for Diablo has seen quite a lot of trolling...

Trolling? Maybe, but I consider D3 a bad game. So I would give it a low score myself.  Deffo not 0-3, but deffo not high.

4-5-6 I think max.

Originally posted by Nitre

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG

...

Are you kidding me?? 2m sold is a lot. $60 x 2m is $0.12 billion mate.

Have you even seen $0.12 billion before? lol "not much money"...

$0.12 billion is enough to send at least 1 rocket with satellites into space buddy.

Anet is absolutely making a killing. The ARE laughing all the way to the bank.

B2P is absolutely valid. Your assumption is invalid because you don't even have basic profit/cost figure in your assumptions.

You are missing the point.  It does not matter whether Anet have been financiall successful or not, what matters is that MMORPGs are supposed to be a home for years, not a place you visit for a few weeks then depart for the next thing.  These two games are both ranked highly on Metacritic by users (and so theoretically are both good MMORPGs), and yet both significantly lost concurrent users in the short time after release till now.

 

[As did Tera, SW:TOR etc to be fair]

 

In fact the attrition on GW2 is probably particularly telling, given even the supposed resumption of online selling has done nothing to stem this tide, and the competition of MoP has not even hit yet.

 

So what is the problem with Metacritic?  Are people simply making judgements far too early on in the life cycle of an MMORPG?  What works as a "useful" gauge of user sentiment towards other shorter life span games, may not actually be a good way to measure MMORPGs.

 

 

 

 

thats exactly what i mean. mmorpg players  want a mmo they can play for long terms (everyone i know atleast) and  this is part of the mystery why WoW is such a succes..people are comign back to it after 4-5 or even more years..it happened to me after more than 3y..actually i came back to every addon ^^

if u invest so much time in 1 game u want to stay there for a long time.

And because GW2 is b2p people always think "eh i already payed for it so i can play other mmos and maybe come back to it since IM NOT PAYING A MONTHLY FEE THAT "FORCES" ME TO PLAY "

It is weird but if i play a p2p mmo i wanna play it as much as possible since i pay for it monthly. but with gw2 once ur 80 there is nothing todo except pvp and since u dont pay for it u dont have to stick to it.

 

i hope ppl understand what i mean.

I think the problem with that rationale is P2P (sub fees) makes/forces people to play. When I was subbing to Rift, I got totally bored with the game, but I still played because I payed for it. This game doesn't force that issue.

One can make arguments for both business models.

The atomic number of zinc is 30.

GW2 is a fantastic game, however limiting loot and punishing power gamers in a game that has more grind than any standard mmo is just foolish and a kneejerk response..

Devs are not living up to their manifesto.

Decieve me once shame on me..

Decieve me twice and you become my next funcom..

Originally posted by dageeza

GW2 is a fantastic game, however limiting loot and punishing power gamers in a game that has more grind than any standard mmo is just foolish and a kneejerk response..

Devs are not living up to their manifesto.

Decieve me once shame on me..

Decieve me twice and you become my next funcom..

Someday people will realize that being a "power gamer" is a self-imposed punishment.

Originally posted by Purutzil
Those scores aren't really very useful. Granted I didn't like TSW, I still feel its a good game. Its a bit clunky with combat but truthfully it feels identicle to GW2 combat though it has a more inspired story and feel about it for me. As much as I can't stand to play it, I hold respect for the game in its attempt. Is it as good as its marked? No, but its probably one of the best games to release. GW2... I play it, yes, but I honestly feel that it isn't as good as TSW and over-all is a decent game but it seems that PvE is a sever after thought. Its fine to support pvp but its to the point where I really think they just threw in that dungeon grind last minute in hopes it was enough to distract PvE players. Then again, some people consider TSW pvp weak so eh, its really an opinion.

so you say tws and gw2 combat is identicle, yet one game lets you dodge which completely changes the dynamics of combat compared to the other game that doesn't let you dodge, really?

Originally posted by Volkon

Originally posted by dageeza

GW2 is a fantastic game, however limiting loot and punishing power gamers in a game that has more grind than any standard mmo is just foolish and a kneejerk response..

Devs are not living up to their manifesto.

Decieve me once shame on me..

Decieve me twice and you become my next funcom..

Someday people will realize that being a "power gamer" is a self-imposed punishment.

This^ +1 for Epic truth =)