1. UO - Greifing and pixels?  Let me at it.

2. EvE - Most boring game I've ever tried

3. AC - Rubberbanding and graphics that were a generation behind EQ, despite releasing 8 months after EQ.

Originally posted by Thunderballs

I think you copu;d very easily return conan to the retailer you bought it from in your subscription period at least - and say the game isnt as described.

Purely on the DX10 issue alone but certainly on other aspects too.

 

And for any misguided yanks out there youll find that most EU countries have better/equal consumer protection laws than the USA, and we do customer service better than you too !

Unless you're at a restaraunt, then you'd better bring your own snacks to tide you over.

There's three things that really bothered me.

1. The animations.  They definelty need to be tightened up as others have mentioned.  It doesn't have to be 'mostion capture' that's sort of a buzzword for idiots, just make them more realistic.

2. The particle effects - spells and blood spatter were quite bad.  They would probably do better just lowering the particle count and maybe even taking out the blood entirely.

3. The jumping - It looks like everyone was Bobafet flying around with a jet pack.  Oh yeah, you can't swim in metal armor.

All in all though it really looked good.  It's moved up to my #1 list of games I am looking forward to playing (not counting the unspecified ones from 38 Studios, Bioware and Stray Bullett).

Now let's do the same thing to World of Warcraft

1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund.

Check

2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.

Oops.

3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game's release.

Oops.

4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.

ok

5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will adequately play on that computer.

Check

6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won't install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their express consent.

Oops, I think.

7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.

ok

8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.

Oops.

9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.

ok

10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.

ok.

Overall Blizzard is in violation of the Gamer's Bill of Rights.
 

Every MMO game I am aware of bans players for exploiting and gold selling, and they're all missing content at release. As a matter of fact, #2 and #3 are almost contradictory.

or how about:

1. Make gold non-transferable

Originally posted by ProfRed

If you have played the game, and you can tell me one reason why you would EVER need to buy gold in this game then I will call you a liar.

The only problem I can see is powerleveling but the game is more fun than any other MMO from the start to finish and missing out on that would just be stupid.

No, you're not a fanboy,

But, is there gold in the game?  What do you do with it?  Obviously if you make everything 'bind on pickup', and only let the players buy things from vendors with their RVR points, then it would limit gold sellers.

The game companies really don't mind gold sellers. What they mind is the spammers.

It MMORPG terms Zerging means:

1. Throwing a lot of bodies at a raid boss to kill him

2. Throwing a lot of bodies at a PVP goal to acheive it.

It's typically considerered an insult to accuse another side or guild of 'zerging'.  It's implied that they have no skill they just throw numbers at something until it dies.

Originally posted by Bodeus

Originally posted by vladww

Though i respect this review, i disagree 100% with what the OP writes.

Many play VG because it's sandboxy & non linear. Making VG linear & spoon fed would completly destroy the game imo.

 

Your "many" is not that many. Making VG  a little more linear and "spoon fed" as you put it might ruin it for your tiny "many" but imo would attract many more times your "many" than they would lose.

Of course as a wise man once said-

"Opinions are like a$$holes, we all have them and they all stink"

Let me fix this for you. 

Your 'many' is not that many.  Making SWG a little more linear and "spoon fed", as you put it, might ruin it for your tiny "many" but in my opinion would attract many more times your "many" than they would lose.

You would, of course, be wrong.

Even if your theory is true, you've got over 800k beta requests right now. Statistics show that typically 80%+ of beta applicants purchase the game. Being conservative, That's nearly 600K boxes just from closed beta apps. We aren't even mentioning the Warhammer IP, which is huge worldwide.

What statistics show that?  The same statistics that show that 82% of all statistics are made up?

1,499,999

How about "WoW, this sucks! Who's ready for WAR?"

In all the beta videos the tank classes are using shields, though.  So either, every beta tester is stupid, or the descrepancy between two-handed weapons and one handed weapons with a shield is in the favor of the shield.  I would have to think the latter is more likely than the former.

I did watch a video of a sword and board dwarf take out two Chaos characters - a herder and a ... forget what they're called, Marauder. 

Come on, don't do this "AGAIN"!

It's completely insane to allow a tank class to use two-handed weapons  and the also give this class comprable defence to a shield wearing class, and then to give the shield wearing class only a minor boost to defense.

Two-handed weapon users should only have a base defence from the armor they have on, and a higher delay on their swings, plus a  they should miss more frequently.

The shields, should definitely comprise 50% of defensive rating, and besides that  their damage should be lower than their Two-handed counterparts, but in the long run they should do a lot more damge, if the can stand on their feet becuse of the higher hit rating.
 

It still doesn't make any sense, since damage and hit rating are intrinsically linked, but I think you can understand what he's saying now.

It says that Warhammer will be one of the lowest rated games, is that what you're saying?

Before they releasesd they were both 7.4.  Conan released had a high initial score and now it's game score is down to 7.4.  Therefore Warhammer will release, have a high initial score and then go down to 7.4.

I think they should do the 'hype' differnetly they just recording people's 1-10 scores.  Maybe by measuring story and forum hits, or something.

That's a pretty big laundry list with three weeks to go.  The 'new client' thing sounds a lot like what Funcom said following their preview weekend.

Sounds like another game better left alone until two months after release.

I am looking forward to giving it a try.

You have no way of know if XFire is a representative sample of the player base for LOTRO, AoC or EVE.   It could be that XFire users (and I suspect that this is true) tend to be early adopters, who burn out on games more quickly than the general public.

That being said, I would expect them to be under reprsented by LOTRO fans, who may be a bit behind the curve when it comes to trying new things.

As of today, it breaks down as roughly 53.7% Chaos and 46.3% Order, which could lead to some problems on some servers, but it shouldn't be a crippling population balance issue overall for the game.

Originally posted by ProfRed

No you never believe trolls.  You are mixing up what a troll and someone who is critical.  What even defines a fanboi?  I have a ton of fun in the game so I relay that information here.  Prior to trying beta I even posted about how I cancelled my pre order.  So because I had a blast in game and I relay that information in a positive tone am I a fanboy? 

The terms are thrown around way too loosely. 

Troll = someone who only says negative things about the game

Fanboi = Someone who only says positive things about the game

It's a pretty simple definition.  Sometimes they get tricky and slide in an occasional backhanded compliment or minor issue to make it look like they'r being objective.  That's how I read you, ProfRed.

Housing ruined UO.  It didn't ruin Horizons because there weren't enough people to do it.

There's nothing worse than logging into a virtual world and having to walk past leagues of player owned houses that all look the same.  Talk about 'Trailer Park' UO, had it.

Oh my mistake.  The only way to attract 15 year olds to your game is to have  a troll swinging corpses.  I stand corrected.  Also that fact that the game's total population won't consist of '15-18 year olds' doesn't make a difference.  There is no way to make certain classes more popular, I mean we have 10 years of evidence to the contrary, but once a troll swings a corpse, every single person playing that game is going to want to play that class/race.   It's amazing WoW is still in business, all you have to do is make a class with a troll swinging a corpse, and all the World of Warcraft players will leave to play your game.

Thanks, I feel enlightned.

Also, if you're going to be a game developer, you should probably get some clue about your target demographics.  http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/gateway_demographics.html