Eurogamer have given their review of the game and it has received a 6/10
:/ eek
www.eurogamer.net/articles/champions-online-review

In before fanboi rage. And yes, 6/10 is about right score IMO.

Originally posted by SgtFrog

Eurogamer have given their review of the game and it has received a 6/10
:/ eek
www.eurogamer.net/articles/champions-online-review

I haven't hit my break even point as to leave.. but everything in the review is right.

Eurogamer rates MMOG's off the current state of the game rather than the potential of the game like most review sites. They used to review off of potential, but after giving AoC a 9/10 and WAR a 8/10 they changed their policy. For CO a 6/10 for its one week old state is actually not bad. There are plenty of issues with the game so no big surprise. The reviewer sounds optimistic and doesn't hide that he is having a lot of fun.

Maybe in 6 months it will be worthy of a 8/10 and maybe even a 9/10 in a couple years. But for now, the 6/10 seems fine considering their scoring policy.

EDIT: I also remember them getting a lot of publicity when they gave Darkfall a 2/10. Publicity is free marketing so maybe they enjoy being the rogue review site. Most early reviews are scoring in the 8/10 range.

It seems a fair review to me, I agree with the score at present, however after the first ten levels the feeling of 'been there done that' is overwheming to the point of boredom and I also believe that a lot of the problems result directly from design descisions and a philosphy that relegates the theme to secondary or tertiary status so its potential is actually to become less engaging/involving/immersive as an experience as they add more arbitrary and unconvincing content.

Originally posted by Aganazer

Eurogamer rates MMOG's off the current state of the game rather than the potential of the game like most review sites. They used to review off of potential, but after giving AoC a 9/10 and WAR a 8/10 they changed their policy. For CO a 6/10 for its one week old state is actually not bad. There are plenty of issues with the game so no big surprise. The reviewer sounds optimistic and doesn't hide that he is having a lot of fun.

Maybe in 6 months it will be worthy of a 8/10 and maybe even a 9/10 in a couple years. But for now, the 6/10 seems fine considering their scoring policy.

EDIT: I also remember them getting a lot of publicity when they gave Darkfall a 2/10. Publicity is free marketing so maybe they enjoy being the rogue review site. Most early reviews are scoring in the 8/10 range.

hmm, yes but its a little hard to predict how a game will turn out.
thats why mmorpg should not get reviewd....every player will have a different experiance.

MC score

CO is currently at  76%

www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/championsonline

Which is not too bad got a few 86s, that said but EG review is fairly accurate. But keep in mind reviews do not save or doom an MMO i remember how heavily reviewers bashed EVE (66%) compared with AC2 or EQ2 at that time. And it currently has more subscribers than the critically aclaimed Warhammer online (86%) or AoC combined.

Originally posted by SgtFrog

Eurogamer have given their review of the game and it has received a 6/10
:/ eek
www.eurogamer.net/articles/champions-online-review

CO is one of the games I am currently playing.  Would I give it a 6?  No it seems harsh, especially after giving conan and war 8 and 9, and those games to me deserve a 6-7 as of today.  I don't think you can score mmos as of 1 week,  because then all new mmos will get a  low/avg score and it's not good for business.  

It is important to understand that superhero style mmos feel different than classic mmos, especially on how gear works and other factors.

I feel confident that the game will be fine as long as they keep polishing, adding content, and be careful with balancing.  To me it is a fun game, but it is clearly not for everyone.  All I can say to people is (if you can afford it) try it and see for yourself.  I'm the type of person that really could care less what the gaming sites score of a game, if I'm having fun that is all that matters.  All I care for is that whichever game I'm playing, the game company behind it has the funds to keep adding content and supporting the game.  That plus playing with cool guilds/friends is what makes mmos fun at the end of the day.

I agree that 6 is a bit harsh especially concideringg what they have rated other games.  However, I would not go higher than 8 in its current iteration and that would be generous.

I do agree with some of the review, there is a big learning curve on the stats and thier function.  However, what the reviewer missed in the review ( and potentially the reason for the lower score ) is the NEED for these slightly incremental adjustments drops. 

These items make the crafting side of the game much more palpatable.  Yes you may get an items that is the same as what you have or only slightly better at the risk of losing a point in another stat.  What this allows is for you to choose items that you can deconstruct for crafting advancement.  If you are crafting in arms and the rewards or drops are not an arms drop, you may be able to select another reward that you can swap out with the arms item you are currently using.  This result allows you to advance your crafting quite readily.

Then your crafting you can craft items that have a more specific stat you are looking for OR you can craft healing pots or HP buffs.  Not to mention sticky grenades or bombs that REALLY are a must for some melee types.

I do agree wholeheartedly with their review of the drops that give a proc at the peril of a stat.  AND the fact that these WILL change your costume look without allowing you to change it back ( or at least I have not figured it out and NO the tailor does not work ).  I also do not like the fact that these unlock options do not cross the whole spectrum of the account and ONLY pertain to the one character that received the unlock.  Too bad on that choice IMO.

All in all it was not a bad review.  I just feel the score might be a bit low.  Not a hack or a bad review or OMG they completely missed the point.  Just a bit on the rough side...

Originally posted by NovaKayne

I agree that 6 is a bit harsh especially concideringg what they have rated other games.  However, I would not go higher than 8 in its current iteration and that would be generous.

 

I do agree with some of the review, there is a big learning curve on the stats and thier function.  However, what the reviewer missed in the review ( and potentially the reason for the lower score ) is the NEED for these slightly incremental adjustments drops. 

 

These items make the crafting side of the game much more palpatable.  Yes you may get an items that is the same as what you have or only slightly better at the risk of losing a point in another stat.  What this allows is for you to choose items that you can deconstruct for crafting advancement.  If you are crafting in arms and the rewards or drops are not an arms drop, you may be able to select another reward that you can swap out with the arms item you are currently using.  This result allows you to advance your crafting quite readily.

Then your crafting you can craft items that have a more specific stat you are looking for OR you can craft healing pots or HP buffs.  Not to mention sticky grenades or bombs that REALLY are a must for some melee types.

 

I do agree wholeheartedly with their review of the drops that give a proc at the peril of a stat.  AND the fact that these WILL change your costume look without allowing you to change it back ( or at least I have not figured it out and NO the tailor does not work ).  I also do not like the fact that these unlock options do not cross the whole spectrum of the account and ONLY pertain to the one character that received the unlock.  Too bad on that choice IMO.

 

All in all it was not a bad review.  I just feel the score might be a bit low.  Not a hack or a bad review or OMG they completely missed the point.  Just a bit on the rough side...

As it stands now, I would give it a generous 8. To me 7.5 on the low end and 8 on the high as of today.  The score to me would obviously go up with more content and performance improvements. :))

Originally posted by Darkheart00

MC score

CO is currently at  76%

www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/championsonline

 

Which is not too bad got a few 86s, that said but EG review is fairly accurate. But keep in mind reviews do not save or doom an MMO i remember how heavily reviewers bashed EVE (66%) compared with AC2 or EQ2 at that time. And it currently has more subscribers than the critically aclaimed Warhammer online (86%) or AoC combined.

Indeed,  good amount of sites gave the game mid 8-8.7 range with 1 site even a 9.  I usually look at the range of scores and remove the outliers (the extremes on both sides of the range of scores).  In this case I consider the 6 score and the 9 outliers.

Mid 8 to me is right where the score is at.

I think overall this is a fair and balanced review. There are some things I feel were left out or that I feel differently about. These are:

Leveling: While it is true that when leveling you get a rush of powers after leaving the initial tutorial zone, and that “unique” powers come more slowly as you level up the reviewer completely left out the important stat increases and the ranks and advantages.

This is critical to your character development. Do I take super strength (+13 STR) or Super Endurance? Do I take something balanced that gives +8 EGO and +8 Recovery for my mentalist? Then there are ranks and advantages gained at certain levels as well. For example, you have a Gadgeteer with his energy builder power being and experimental blaster. At certain levels you can buy ranks and advantages for your powers, you have five total points in this area to spend over the entire life of the power. You will need to make choices because you cannot buy everything for that power for five total points. You can increase the powers rank (there are 3 total ranks) that increase the damage, range, percentage of special effect, etc), or, using the Gadgeeter experimental blaster, you can take and advantage that turns the beam into a cone that will hit multiple enemies. Most of the advantages are purely unique to the power. Even Travel powers gain these advantages.

Costumes, items and customization: While this is again a fair assessment it leaves some things out. The items are not useless. Some are pretty darn cool. For instance you can earn through quests or craft weapons. Not only do these have special properties but once bound to your character it will permanently open up the costume change. The neat thing is at intervals in leveling you can create multiple versions of your costume at the tailor. I have a Martial arts character who has a standard version of his costume for the city, a Camouflage version for the desert, and a version with a heavy parka and ski mask for the snowy Canadian wilderness.
With the same gadgeteer he has a new, cool looking gun that he uses that looks very different from others and unlocked the UNTIL cape that sets him further apart from others.

Missions: During beta, leveling and XP was much more freely given so I won’t use that as a comparison but I have a couple of characters closing in on 30the level now and while there is plenty of content I am seeing some gaps. Mostly, because I cannot solo some of the missions (not the ones that recommend a team) very well with certain characters. Let’s face it, Martial arts was nerfed and an Unarmed MA character got the brunt of it. Playing this MA character against an Ice power character makes ya feel pretty weak and he freezes several henchmen and kills them in seconds while you kick and punch away at one or two of them.
I have had to do some grinding at mid 20s but not much as it is hard because XP for individual creatures is so low.
So, I wanted to point out those few things. Not entirely in agreement with the assessment of getting powers in the review but the review overall is pretty close.
 

I mostly agree with their review. Score sounds fair to me.

Originally posted by tyanya

It seems a fair review to me, I agree with the score at present, however after the first ten levels the feeling of 'been there done that' is overwheming to the point of boredom and I also believe that a lot of the problems result directly from design descisions and a philosphy that relegates the theme to secondary or tertiary status so its potential is actually to become less engaging/involving/immersive as an experience as they add more arbitrary and unconvincing content.

Ye right now I'm stuck at a lvl 19 stand still of apathy, combined with a redundant attitude towards my reroll (thats where my "been there done that" comes into play).  Do I keep leveling my 19?  I don't really want to..  Do I reroll?  Its the same exact content as before.. and I've made/deleted quite a few chars and they all have the same feel.

Doesn't look good for this toon's future I can say that.

Originally posted by Sabradin

Originally posted by tyanya

It seems a fair review to me, I agree with the score at present, however after the first ten levels the feeling of 'been there done that' is overwheming to the point of boredom and I also believe that a lot of the problems result directly from design descisions and a philosphy that relegates the theme to secondary or tertiary status so its potential is actually to become less engaging/involving/immersive as an experience as they add more arbitrary and unconvincing content.

 

Ye right now I'm stuck at a lvl 19 stand still of apathy, combined with a redundant attitude towards my reroll (thats where my "been there done that" comes into play).  Do I keep leveling my 19?  I don't really want to..  Do I reroll?  Its the same exact content as before.. and I've made/deleted quite a few chars and they all have the same feel.

Doesn't look good for this toon's future I can say that.

Yep, encountered that during beta.  For some reason I don't have the same issue in CoX though.
 

On the whole, I'd say a 6 is about right.  Not sure what made CoX so special, but its community is a bit friendlier too.

Originally posted by therain93

Originally posted by Sabradin

Originally posted by tyanya

It seems a fair review to me, I agree with the score at present, however after the first ten levels the feeling of 'been there done that' is overwheming to the point of boredom and I also believe that a lot of the problems result directly from design descisions and a philosphy that relegates the theme to secondary or tertiary status so its potential is actually to become less engaging/involving/immersive as an experience as they add more arbitrary and unconvincing content.

 

Ye right now I'm stuck at a lvl 19 stand still of apathy, combined with a redundant attitude towards my reroll (thats where my "been there done that" comes into play).  Do I keep leveling my 19?  I don't really want to..  Do I reroll?  Its the same exact content as before.. and I've made/deleted quite a few chars and they all have the same feel.

Doesn't look good for this toon's future I can say that.

Yep, encountered that during beta.  For some reason I don't have the same issue in CoX though.
 

On the whole, I'd say a 6 is about right.  Not sure what made CoX so special, but its community is a bit friendlier too.

See, this is the odd thing.  I got sick of the redundant attitude in CoX faster than I have here.  Wich is weird that you feel the opposite.

I guess I see the character options being so different that I like seeing how each handle similar content.  It is the same content but, to me it is a different ball game.  Where as with CoX I felt the content was similar and the powers were too limited.  I do not know how to define it.  Makes no sense when I try to write it down..  ;)

I see this game as a Sandbox character in a Themepark world rather than a Themepark character in a Sandbox world.  Does that make sense?  I mean, I know 4 people that are based on munitions and are NOTHING alike.  Where as in CoX a Fire Fire was the same no matter what.

It is strange that mmos are always supposed to score 8-9 out of ten for some people.

If I read this statement I don't think it sounds like a six, more like a four or three:

"But right now, it's just not quite enough. Technically rough (it doesn't run smoothly, in terms of graphics or lag) with lumpy character progression, shallow combat, a narrow world and thinly-stretched - albeit entertaining - content, Champions Online is off to a scrappy and threadbare start. As it stands, it's hard to recommend. But it's not hard to like - for the customisation, and for offering a genuinely different flavour in MMOs: a bit of poppy, disposable bubblegum in a world of nutritious gruel.

6/10"

..

I normally ignore the score itself and read the review instead.

In this case, I found the review to be spot on.

Game Reviews are generally so annoying. I would encourage everyone to be as skeptical of them if not more skeptical than they would be of a jaded movie reveiwer.

Movie reviewers see hundreds of films and compare them to their models of ideals, its hard for them to remain objective and tell you if this is a good date flick, a laugh out loud, a beer and pretzel action flick or a waste of your cash on any level because they often become so entrenched in it, they forget that their audience is really looking for the down-and-dirty about whether to go plink down the coin to see this movie for a little entertainment/diversion.

Same is true, but magnified I think in the game reviewers approach.

As an example on the G4 show X-Play. If it fits Adam Sesslers ideal, which is either his Mario N64 obsession or Sly Cooper, he will devote gobs of time to it and lavish it with praise.

If its PC and its "Hard" then he will whine its too hard.

If its PC and its "Easy" then he will whine its too simple.

If its turn based forget it, you will get about zilch time devoted to it. They don't have that kind of attention span. I watch curious about games like Empire Total war, but have to wade through dozens and dozens of reviews of shooters "Oh in this one you can shoot lightning from your fingers...". Wow, and I ask "How is this different from the dozen others you showed us where you do that?"

I'd love for them to devote more time to a more detailed look at PC games and cut all the "Infotainment" and sarcastic in-jokes of canadian hockey players and what not.

I was reading a review of Champions Online on Gamespy and I just shook my head. The guy spend the first part of the article deriding Weeaboos, Furries and people who create exact replicas of Ironman, batman or other published characters.

He then pointed out how implausible it is to fire a single ironclad bullet into the sky and end the invasion, and basically ended it with some generic ambiguous crap about the game.

I don't really need his review of CO, I've been playing the game and I have my own opinion about it, but what it says to me is that Gamespys direction is towards 'infotainment' and to be very skeptical of what they say.

The review seemed fair but not sure i would give it a low score like that. maybe for long term appeal yeah. And if I included limited pvp.... Hm, I dont know now haha. Well I enjoyed the review