PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:Subscription
Desktop Client | System Req:
Darkfall News - Eurogamer Re-Review: 4/10
Posted by Michael Bitton on Jul 17, 2009 | 49 comments in our forums
Anyone closely following Darkfall should know of the Eurogamer vs. Tasos 2/10 review fiasco. Well, Eurogamer has since agreed to re-review the game, assigning writer Kieron Gillen to the task, and that re-review is out today. What's the new verdict? A not-so-improved, but certainly better, four out of ten.
Kierons opening comments:
There is a history here, which would be foolish to pretend doesn't exist. When Darkfall was first reviewed on Eurogamer, it scored 2/10. The developer, Aventurine, was incensed. They'd checked their logs to discover the reviewer had a total logged-in time of a couple of hours. Eurogamer pressed their reviewer, who claimed their numbers must be wrong. He gave it at least nine hours. Eurogamer offered a re-review. Aventurine declined. Eurogamer bought an account anyway. And two months later, I'm here.
A bit more:
At the moment, I don't think there are many who will put up with Darkfall's madness. I certainly won't. I hope Darkfall grows and becomes a game which can take its charms and appeal to a wider audience (EVE wasn't EVE when it launched, for example - it began with fine ideas that appealed to a niche, and as they improved the game it sold its ideas to an ever-larger niche). Darkfall's just launched in the US and its expansion has gone live, after all. But as a game, it's just not there yet, its rewards too distant and the road there too barren to recommend to fellow travellers.
Read the full Eurogamer re-review here.
hopefully Aventurine wont have a fit over this review either. Seemed like a pretty good review to me.
As for Darkfall being crap/bad. Name a single game that is all of what it promised after the first 6 months of release. AoC still hasn't reached that far, WAR isn't quite there. All the games being released fail to meet expectations and they take a while to fix. Darkfall should be a decent game come the end of the year.
Nice review, i enjoyed reading it. It's clear that the reviewer really put some time into the game, i'm wondering if Aventurine will react to this review. I think 4/10 is a fair review, 2/10 was a bit harsh.
Now I've read this a good few times now to make sure. I think the result he comes out with is pretty fair, however I dont know how he gets there. The review is basically empty, if you cut out all the wasted space talking about what he didnt do, the old review, the history etc, you have about a page of very airy empty content which barely describes what his likes and dislikes actually are, and more importantly, the WHY of it all. We all like to don our rose tinted glasses every so often but reviews these days are piss poor more often than not, and this one in particular is a great example of such a review. Its just bad journalism and it seems to be written purely to ease attention off of the even more lacklustre first review.
I didn't read the review since I've played the game myself and don't really care to, but I will say that's it's pretty unprofessional for Eurogamer to go ahead and review the game when AV told them to forget about it. Not that AV hasn't been unprofessional themselves, but two wrongs don't make a right.
And it's so professional of you to comment on something you did'nt read. They bought a copy of the game (like everyone else), so they had all the rights to review it.
And it's so professional of you to comment on something you did'nt read. They bought a copy of the game (like everyone else), so they had all the rights to review it.
He's not a professional, they are.
And it's so professional of you to comment on something you did'nt read. They bought a copy of the game (like everyone else), so they had all the rights to review it.
Seeing, as how I didn't say a single thing about the content of review, my comment is fine. And, do I look like I'm working or representing some company that requires professionalism? Honestly bro.
Hm. I found it to be quite refreshing. It was lengthy, but none of it came across as unnecessary to me. Here are the main and non biased points I picked up from reading it:
The game isn't quick to progress in.
The game was published while there were exploitable game mechanics to allow players to stay competitive.
It's beneficial to be selective about how, when, who, and where you choose to fight.
Full looting pvp is in the game, but people avoid participating by equipping nothing.
There is little penalty for having no equipment on. (I am assuming this is in comparison to equipping AI owned equipment rather than player crafted equipment.)
Looting cannot be done by a simple click, you must drag each item individually.
User interface (Specifically for combat) could provide better visual feedback to the user. This makes the game more difficult, which is not the same as being difficult because of an AI or a game hampering bug.
The game's setting and environment causes one to believe that walking vertically along a mountain or building is unusual.
The community is very helpful and friendly overall.
Personally speaking, I don't care if the reviewer likes his coffee black, his eggs over easy, or prefers wireless mice over wired. The review doesn't put much emphasis on "This is what should be done better, according to what I prefer." The review seemed to basically state the things he noticed in the game and how they compared to other games that are out there.
I think it was very well done, and I really like his writing style.
4/10 is what I've given the game in several threads here.
Most reviews are done so on the basis of purchasing a copy and playing it for themselves. Only a handful of review sites get a free account to play on and are asked to make a review. So it's not unprofessional at all. No game company can tell you not to review a game, they can only ask that you not. They can also ask that you not put out a review, but it's really up to your company. There is no NDA or EULA that prevents them from doing so therefore nothing is unprofessional about the matter. What was unprofessional though was a executive ranting about said review when his investors should of told him to keep his mouth shut. People and companies get bad reviews all the time, but they don't retaliate because it makes them look unprofessional. So you try to spin your head around that one, eh? =) Good review by the way, but there was no reason to recant an old review.
So it went from a 2/10 to a 4/10. I hope those +2 extra points were worth it!
25% of a good review
75% of a "We're bitter we were called out for being poor reviewers"
Thats the contents of the review summed up.
I bet no one expected eurogamer to give DF any better than 4/10 because even 6/10 would of been saying "Ed Zitron does poor job"
well eurogamer sucks when it comes to reviews.. ugh really poor site imo.
About Darkfall.. I never played it and never will.. ugh I don't feel like spending 50$ (propably more since I'm from eu) for it.
-1 * -1 = +1
math proves you wrong and dorkfail ist still failing...
Hurray for Eurogamer finally someone that shows the fanbois of Darkfail where the table should stand :)
I mostly had that impression aswell when reading it. But what I also see here is the final score not matching the review itself, because while reading it I really had the impression it was going to be a 6/10 (he wrote he liked some parts, hated some parts, really just a mixed bag without anything extremely negative), but they gave it a 4/10.
Right away I thought this was only done to save Mr. Ed Zitron's ass - which I guess is fine, any company should take care of it's employee's, but knowing the history here I personally would have not given it a score and left it with only the review itself.
On a side note, I don't like Eurogamer's score system (if they even have one). They write a review and at the end they slap a number on it. There is no detailed information about how they came to such conclusion.
Given the serious complaints he listed about the gameplay, I thought a 4/10 was quite generous.
Lord of the rings online
-1 * -1 = +1
math proves you wrong and dorkfail ist still failing...
-1 + -1 = -2 , math proves you wrong!
Does anyone care by now? Seems this game quite vanished. I dont know anyone who plays it.
nope it has gone from 3/10 to 4/10 which is also on par with the other 2 or 3 reviews i have read about this game as well. Then there is another review that gave it a 7/10 or was it 8/10 and said it was a below average game. So why give it a high score, i dont know, probably not to alienate the company into handing them future reviews.
I agree, i have never played it (way too much bad publicity and player feedback in teh negative) to waste money checking it out. I do however have a friend who plays, he does like it, though he does also say the game graphically is like stepping back by 2 decades and the sounds are not brilliant, but something has to give way to allow the 200-300 player battles that can happen which are still very playable on high end machines (meaning gameplay does slow down and all, but not to unplayable standards). But for me, a game with a monthly fee of £10 has to be good in several departments and this fails in all but 1 from what i have gathered on reading.
If the game ever does come out with a free test play period of 14 days (or so) i will probably give it a try, but right now, as it stands, i wont even consider touching it without at least a trial play. Thats just me and my opinion though. I also know several others who had had it, played it, and left it after their initial first month and all do tally with a 4/10 scoreline.
Ah...you do realize that Eurogamer reviews games as a business. The pretty much makes your "unprofessional" comment laughable. They don't need permission by the developer. They did promise their readers they would do a rereview of it and they followed through.
I think the reviewer did a fairly good job. Certainly fits my feelings after playing the game. The game still has a lot of rough edges. The problem with Darkfall, the pve is an afterthought. I think a good game needs to balance the pvp and the pve.
Honestly, I read the entire review. I have to say, WTF. I have played, and currently actively play this MMO. It is one of the best MMO concepts I have played since Ultima Online, and Star Wars Galaxies.
Playing on NA-1 this last week, I can say that 75% of the player base on the new NA-1 server have never played darkfall before, and actualy love the game. The comments and feedback are very positive. Players enjoy darkfall bottomline. Most players who have bought the game since NA-1 Server launched are enjoying the game.
I am part of a huge gaming community called The Exodus Syndicate. We play 8 MMOGAMES as a community, no player from the community who tried Darkfall Online has actualy dis-liked the concept, or the gameplay.
Is not the most important part of writting a review the players perspective? If players who actualy play the game, as it is now in its current form enjoy the game greatly doesn't that carry more weight the sound or graphics?
Finaly, I dare Euro-gamer to post the day 1-7 racial chat logs. By far the overwhelming majority of players just coming into the game are making positive comments about the game. Dispute what you want, over 20k players logged into 1 server at 1 time is impressive to say the least. What game besides eve online can boast higher single server peak time loads greater?
I just re-read the review all the way through.
I must be reading a different review than some here (and on another thread opened previously about it).
They spend more time talking about the first review than they do on the re-review? Someone states 75% of it is about the Zitron review... Come on. Exaggerate much?
I'd say it's more accurate that 75% of some people's *attention* is on the parts regarding the first review. But the actual re-review spends 2 "interludes" addressing the first review, and even then it's seldom directly addressing it. The 3rd "interlude" is him discussing his thoughts on how a MMO could/should be reviewed.
He's presenting certain considerations he had when approaching the re-review in light of what happened with the first one. As he said it would be ridiculous to pretend the first review, particularly all the drama around, it never happened, and it definitely casts a shadow over the re-review, no matter what.
You can completely skip those "interludes" (very do-able considering they're separated into their own sections, set off by italicized text), and you would have a good, stand-alone review that would spread across at least 2.5 pages.
Seems to me some people are just looking for something "easy" to nit-pick at.
That would be impressive if it was true, but it's far from the case. The server was built to handle up to 10k concurrent players. It's highly unlikely the EU server has ever had close to that. The largest event on records was an allegedly 2k player WAR soon after launch. Since then, numbers have dwindled and it's unlikely there are even 2k logged in at any one time. The best estimates for total overall membership for the EU server capped at 18k TOTAL players (not concurrent). That estimate is based, in large part, on the figures I gathered from the in-game clan journal, which had ~15k total clan characters as of 05/23/2009. I confirmed that the clan membership total included characters that quit the game without first leaving their clans and it included characters that were deleted without quitting their clans. As such, the ~15k total clan membership count is a maximum value, but probably much higher than the actual live clan player count.
How did myself and others arrive at the max ~18k estimate? Since Darkfall is so heavily clan-oriented, it's no big stretch to assume that most players, especially those who stay beyond their initial month, belong to clans. As such, most active players are probably clan member, which means the active players out of the ~15, number quality as "most players". Even assuming generous 25% active non-clan member count, the number is under 4k. Add that to a conservative 14k (clan members - 1k) and you arrive at an estimated ~18k total active subscriber count for EU. The exact formula is:
(~15k clan characters- invalid clan characters + non-clan characters) = total subscriber count (1 chat/account)
So, simply put, your 20k concurrent number is bullshit...
~Ripper
The review is pretty much spot on. Just be gratefull they were more generous this time around.
This review is pretty spot on with many things. Having played this game, only to be mislead about character slots and NA transfers, is enough to maintain this game at 2/10. The reviewer addresses some window-dressing that was fixed, but it's all to easy to substitute what was hot-fixed with duct-tape with a few niceties that the ametuer developers have worked on; must be Tacos birthday or something . We all know DF has prolific problems, will continue to have prolific problems, and isnt worth the effort.
IMO a 4/10 is about all you can give any game that is designed around PVP.Once you design a PVP game,you lose 50% of a games over all potential,so a PERFECT PVP game[in the MMORPG setting] would only be a 5/10.
PvP works great in a FPS...UT/quake/COD/CS/HL ect ect,because it is usually about graphics and skill.
DF tried to add weather and stuff to add to the skill of PVP,it was just done poorly,even still PVP MMO's lack map design and balance.In saying Balance i do not mean everyone heals the same and hits the same,i mean EVERY class should have it's place in PVP,they should all shine at different times.
If i was designing a PVP game, i could do it far better than all these posers,these developers have been lazy and shown to be making their games quickly to get them out the door to make a buck.What the Genre needs is some TRUE gamers with a decent budget to design a PVP game ,the way it should be.We don't need anymore WOW type games that make classes over powering to entice the little kiddies to play nor do we need to hand over mounts to cater to the simplistic minds[yay i got a cool mount,i LOVE this game mentality].
I can give a very simple example into map design......Melee would need areas like structures and large rocks to hide or take cover behind from the long range players.Ramgers would perhaps be best attacking from high top areas,Thick brush would again favor melee types.Wide open areas would favor Magic users or Ranged.Magic users would have increased advantages depending on weather like rain would benefit water based spells,hot and sunny favors fire based spells ect ect.
Armour types should play a MUCH larger role in players speed,movement and doging abilities.Shileds should play a large role in combat and directional combat should also be a major factor.
When i watch a Df video of PVP game play,it looks REAL cheap,it seems to me that the majority are more excited about massive battles,even though the actual combat structure is weak and boring,just so long as there is a lot of players they are happy :(
That's really the biggest problem with the game. It definitely has some very fun elements, but if you review the game based on several components, not just fun, it fails to get a good score. The negatives weigh down the positives so much that it makes the game--according to the eurogamer scale--average, at best.
There are so many problems with the game's design and implementation that they far outweigh the fun factor unless you're so starved for a game like this that you're willing to put up with the many, many flaws. That's why the game got a 4/10. There's just not enough good to outweigh the bad.
~Ripper
That would be impressive if it was true, but it's far from the case. The server was built to handle up to 10k concurrent players. It's highly unlikely the EU server has ever had close to that. The largest event on records was an allegedly 2k player WAR soon after launch. Since then, numbers have dwindled and it's unlikely there are even 2k logged in at any one time. The best estimates for total overall membership for the EU server capped at 18k TOTAL players (not concurrent). That estimate is based, in large part, on the figures I gathered from the in-game clan journal, which had ~15k total clan characters as of 05/23/2009. I confirmed that the clan membership total included characters that quit the game without first leaving their clans and it included characters that were deleted without quitting their clans. As such, the ~15k total clan membership count is a maximum value, but probably much higher than the actual live clan player count.
How did myself and others arrive at the max ~18k estimate? Since Darkfall is so heavily clan-oriented, it's no big stretch to assume that most players, especially those who stay beyond their initial month, belong to clans. As such, most active players are probably clan member, which means the active players out of the ~15, number quality as "most players". Even assuming generous 25% active non-clan member count, the number is under 4k. Add that to a conservative 14k (clan members - 1k) and you arrive at an estimated ~18k total active subscriber count for EU. The exact formula is:
(~15k clan characters- invalid clan characters + non-clan characters) = total subscriber count (1 chat/account)
So, simply put, your 20k concurrent number is bullshit...
~Ripper
Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.
Oh an I HIGHLY doubt all those players joined clans and quit in the first 5 days of the game.
:-) feel stupid now?
Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.
look at the date of the survey before you answer next time
I am a little worked up that Euro-gamer gave such a low review, based mostly on bugs, or game mechanics that do not exist as of the last expansion. I also bealive that euro-gamer made too much of player running around naked fighting. In Darkfall I can say from experience 1 player wearing armor, using crafted weapons is more then a match for 4-5 naked players. I will demonstrate this in the video. With a naked zerg on 1 player wearing high end gear. I am assuming he was a 10hr old character in some basic armor who got killed by a naked 3 month old toon. yea...... level 1 vs level 80 basicly there.
The fact that the review blatently got so many game mechanics WRONG really frustrates me. The review claims dowtime in the start of the game is excessive, and that goblins are hard. I would like to show in a video 1 brand new character going out minutes after logging into the game and killing a dozen goblins before ever resting. I would also like to show the duration of resting, less then 1 minute of downtime for 5-10 minutes of constant battle. In wow you must rest for 20-30 seconds between every pull, fighting for 10 minutes before resting for 1 minute in my mind is not bad at all. Surpising this person didn't eat food either, he mentioned wow enough. In wow if you rest and don't eat it takes in some cases several minutes to regen fully. In darkfall its less without food, and even less with food. Had he used even the most basic short duration food he would never have to rest longer then 1 minute ever.
I do not bealive a proper review was done. The fact is the reviewer sounds like he was just bad at the game. If a player can not go out and kill a dozen goblins right after logging into the game before ever resting he is just plane bad. It is a twitch and player skill based MMO game after all. Goblins are like Wolves in WoW starting area, they drop so fast you can practicly kill them in your sleep, especialy since expansion.
Kieron Gillan says .....
Darkfall's just launched in the US and its expansion has gone live, after all. But as a game, it's just not there yet, its rewards too distant and the road there too barren to recommend to fellow travellers.
Yet he admits here he has not played the game in over a month. "But the actual playtime was actually a month or so back, and I've been trying to work out exactly the right angle on it since..."
This guy didn't even play the expansion. Or any of the patches in the last month. Over 90% of all bug fixes and content added to the game since launch happend in the last month. That is not oppinion it is fact. His article is filled with incorrect information. Before this review ever came out, rest duration was changed. Skilling up was changed. Players take EXTRA damage if they are naked making it suicide. All mobs where adjusted in difficulty so they have less HP making it easier.
Over 60hrs of straight questing was added, more then doubling content already in the game with the Title System.
Also he played on Euro server as a 1 day old character. Meaning he knows nothing. Of course players killed him all the time, imagine a level 1 mage attacking a level 80 mage in World of Warcraft.
Of course the mobs where hard, he has played for 1 day. How hard are the mobs you kill in WoW, EQ, WAR, on day 1 in your first 10 hours.
If they wanted to do a real re-review they would have waited for NA-1 and reviewed with the expansion, on a fresh server, where the reviewer had half a chance.
The reviewer talks extensively about how reviewers are paid by word count. Making it all too obvious why he goes off on tangents and over 50% of his article is MMO theory rather the actualy based on the game. He does not lay out criteria, scoring guidelines, point system. He just ends with a 4/10 after 4 pages of bitching how the game is too hard and "unlike wow".
He stresses that the controls are hard for over 1 page. Going into detail many times how the game is not like wow. Actualy players can auto switch weapons, cast a spell, and switch back to previous weapon with 1 key press by setting up keybindings to fit their needs. But rather then research how to do that, he says it is just hard.
I am just in shock of his review. It added a lot of fancy words, but it was filled with " unlike WoW " refrences. The reviewer did not refence any other game besides lineage 2, in passing saying it was only game he hated more then Darkfall.
He also complains extensively about running up mountains. Funny how no one mentions that much in WAR or AOC, two games given high reviews that ultimatly didn't live up to the hype. Like in AOC and WAR some mountains you can run up, and some you can't. Why a common occurance in even big budget MMO games, like terrain climbing would even mentioned is beyond me. WoW was one of the first popular MMO games to actualy place full restritions on mountains making them 100% impassible as a barrier to seperate zones. SWG, EQ, Ultima, AO..... many others. It is a very common feature. One most players actually never think much about.
Also while on subject of environment. Since he didn't play expansion he has not seen the weather system. A huge environment upgrade IMO. He makes no mention of terrain being used to hide, or wearing brown armor to blend into trees. No mention of true 3d sound, a critical element of sneaking up on enemies, or finding targets.
Graphicly, the game looks better then WAR lets be honest, It actualy looks better then war and has a farther view distance for characters then WAR and AOC two newer MMO games.
Overall, this is one pathetic review. It is written more like a forum " I am rage quiting x game because" post on a forum.
Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.
Oh an I HIGHLY doubt all those players joined clans and quit in the first 5 days of the game.
:-) feel stupid now?
No, why would he feel stupid? The servers weren't built to house 20k players online at one time yet... So, him calling you a liar for saying one server had 20k people online at one time ( concurrent users ), is exactly as he called it. Bullshit.
Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.
Oh an I HIGHLY doubt all those players joined clans and quit in the first 5 days of the game.
:-) feel stupid now?
No, why would he feel stupid? The servers weren't built to house 20k players online at one time yet... So, him calling you a liar for saying one server had 20k people online at one time ( concurrent users ), is exactly as he called it. Bullshit.
Yeah, I was going to refute the 20k concurrent players comment as well, but Rhinok did a fine job of it.
However, couldn't help but notice how perfectly Jeffrey has fallen into the rabid DF fan way of "debate". Rhinok specifically calls him out on the 20k concurrent users statement, and then provides information to prove why it's BS, such as how the servers were only set up to support up to 10k players - per AV themselves (whatever that's worth).
As only a rabid DF fan can, Jeffrey completely ignores that and focuses instead on the percentage of clanned players on NA-1. That, of course has nothing to do with what rhinok posted, nor why he posted it (which was in support of refuting the 20k concurrent players statement).
Still, I'm certain Tasos, Darth and javac will be proud to have another member in their little Propaganda Brigade.
Originally posted by kishe
there are easy monsters near every city...i suggest moving away from the starter areas, i did so and ive only got pked twice this week
You can see where your guildies are by the green G's moving around the map
Every brand new player is supposed to instinctively know that, right? Aventurine needs to do something to dramatically improve the new player experience. As an example, I created a brand new character last night. Since I'm not going to re-sub, I have no vested interest in the character I've been playing the last few weeks, so it was easy to just delete him and start over. I got my starter quests and headed to the nearest goblin spawn:
So, within my first 1/2 hour on my new character, I got PKed twice, wasn't able to gain any skill points and wasn't able to loot anything. Only the fact that I had any experience with the game (knew to look for goblins near town, knew they had huge aggro range and that I'd have to be careful since no other players were around to draw aggro) at all made it even slightly enjoyable, otherwise, I would have been even more frustrated with it than I already was. All-in-all, as a new player experience, it sucked.
After healing up, I decided to leave town in a different direction and find another spawn. I did, and it was close to town, but it was a much harder spawn due to their being goblin fighters and shamans, not just scouts. Once again, there weren't any other players there (at first), so I had to pull, hide, etc.., painstakingly slow, one at a time, run back, rest to heal, run out to loot, etc... It was doable, but tedious. Another player did come in after a while, but he tried to crouch inside my melee range while I was swinging at goblins, so I just let him get killed. I'd completed one of my two starter missions, but still had yet to see a single goblin axe for my second. It wasn't until a couple of hours later (yes, hours) that other players came and I was able to fight more openly, loot a staff, start training mana missile and heal self before I finally found my four axes and could complete both quests.
Eventually, I was able to loot some gear, get about 100 gold coins, level up some skills and complete my two quests, but it took several hours, total, two PKs and reliance upon other players being in the area to draw aggro in order to do so. I'm ok with FFA Loot, PvP, and PK'ing, but should the new player experience be this hard, even for an experienced player? New players should be encouraged to play further, not repelled.
So, back when I played the game (May,2009, the third month of release), the mobs weren't particularly easy and downtime was plentiful if there weren't enough other players around to mitigate aggro. My rest skill DID go up quite a bit until I was able to get better weapons, skill up, etc... When there are other players around, all killing goblins, it's pretty easy to snag a spare goblin and kill him, but not so easy when you're on your own and being hit by 3 or 4 of them. On top of that, until you can loot a non-starter weapon, you can't skill up.
~Ripper
No, why would he feel stupid? The servers weren't built to house 20k players online at one time yet... So, him calling you a liar for saying one server had 20k people online at one time ( concurrent users ), is exactly as he called it. Bullshit.
Yeah, I was going to refute the 20k concurrent players comment as well, but Rhinok did a fine job of it.
However, couldn't help but notice how perfectly Jeffrey has fallen into the rabid DF fan way of "debate". Rhinok specifically calls him out on the 20k concurrent users statement, and then provides information to prove why it's BS, such as how the servers were only set up to support up to 10k players - per AV themselves (whatever that's worth).
As only a rabid DF fan can, Jeffrey completely ignores that and focuses instead on the percentage of clanned players on NA-1. That, of course has nothing to do with what rhinok posted, nor why he posted it (which was in support of refuting the 20k concurrent players statement).
Still, I'm certain Tasos, Darth and javac will be proud to have another member in their little Propaganda Brigade.
For somebody so incensed about the "facts" in the review, Jeffrey.h isn't particularly concerned with his own unsupportable figures. Even Javac agreed with me on many points in the "An objective look into Darkfall" thread. He also backed down from his 40k player estimate to 20k, based primarily on my groundwork, and then even lower to 18k when he referenced a post from the official boards.
~Ripper
All i got to ask you ripper........ why do you care so much about putting down a game you don't play?
I understand you had a bad expeirane, ok I get it. But the game is way better then EU-1 launch now.
Yes they did fix some low level mobs. IE goblins.
Maybe my estimates are overly optimistic, but yours are surely the other end of the spectrum. Lets be honest since NA launched, several thousand new players have started the game. To bealive 18k or even 28k, is a little under-rated. It is simply not possible, with the level of activity on NA-1 server. Population wise NA-1 is way more populated then I ever saw the EU server.
As for the review, it was written before perhaps, but it was posted 14 days after an expansion came out. Who posts a re-review of a game 14days after and expansion and major changes to a game without playing it. That is just crazy.
Obviosly if it scored a 4 before the expansion even a simple minded person like the reviewer for euro-gamer would have had to give a higher score if he played on NA-1 for a NA launch, with the new expansion. It is a different play experience starting new on a server then piddling around with a newb character on a server fulll of advanced characters.
But the quistion remains. Why are you so concerned with defending euro gamer and this review?
One last thing ripper, NA server has so many people at goblins now its pretty insane. Plus the goblins HP reduced. So yes the main gribe with your play experience is fixed, you can kill goblins and loot them now. So no one really has any problems killing them.
I am not a fanboy of DF persay, but I do like the game. I do not troll DF forums because it is filled with trolls who do not even have accounts. I play AOC and WAR casualy, I also play a few free to play MMO games. Darkfall is the most fun for me right now. I intend to play SWTOR when it comes out, and try aion.
Bottom line you had a shitty new player experience so you are turning people away from what is a great game. I read comments like yours for 2.5 months before trying Darkfall. I tried it and loved it. Yes playing on EU, high ping, hard goblins, being ganked and all. I still liked it regardless.
Darkfall provides something other MMO's in the genre do not. If you don't like it fine, don't play it. But why turn people away from it when you, yourself never actualy gave the game a chance.
All i got to ask you ripper........ why do you care so much about putting down a game you don't play?
I understand you had a bad expeirane, ok I get it. But the game is way better then EU-1 launch now.
Yes they did fix some low level mobs. IE goblins.
Maybe my estimates are overly optimistic, but yours are surely the other end of the spectrum. Lets be honest since NA launched, several thousand new players have started the game. To bealive 18k or even 28k, is a little under-rated. It is simply not possible, with the level of activity on NA-1 server. Population wise NA-1 is way more populated then I ever saw the EU server.
As for the review, it was written before perhaps, but it was posted 14 days after an expansion came out. Who posts a re-review of a game 14days after and expansion and major changes to a game without playing it. That is just crazy.
Obviosly if it scored a 4 before the expansion even a simple minded person like the reviewer for euro-gamer would have had to give a higher score if he played on NA-1 for a NA launch, with the new expansion. It is a different play experience starting new on a server then piddling around with a newb character on a server fulll of advanced characters.
But the quistion remains. Why are you so concerned with defending euro gamer and this review?
Again... he isn't talking about total population, but the amount of people logged in at one time on a single server is nowhere near 20k. Why do you keep ignoring this? You tried to pitch the idea to people in this thread that there were 20k concurrent users, which would mean people logged into the same server at the same time. DarkFall Developers told us that the servers are aimed to handle 10k at once so you tried to spin the total number of players for a server and make that out to be the amount of people logged in playing the game at the same time. Then when you get proven wrong you just ignore that and start going on about other things. And no, we can't just throw out the rereview. The game could have been a 4/10 before the expansion to them and still been a 4/10 after. If you have played most MMORPGs during expansions you would understand that while some things get fixed, at the same time other things get broken.
Again... he isn't talking about total population, but the amount of people logged in at one time on a single server is nowhere near 20k. Why do you keep ignoring this? You tried to pitch the idea to people in this thread that there were 20k concurrent users, which would mean people logged into the same server at the same time. DarkFall Developers told us that the servers are aimed to handle 10k at once so you tried to spin the total number of players for a server and make that out to be the amount of people logged in playing the game at the same time. Then when you get proven wrong you just ignore that and start going on about other things. And no, we can't just throw out the rereview. The game could have been a 4/10 before the expansion to them and still been a 4/10 after. If you have played most MMORPGs during expansions you would understand that while some things get fixed, at the same time other things get broken.
I concede the point. Will you read the rest of my comments. Second the 10k is on the EU server. To bealive NA is not over 10k or that EU was not upgraded is silly. But fine. You win. Now read the rest of my comments and respond to them.
Why come back to a single point over and over said in error? If your biggest defense of attacking darkfall is a mis-interpretation on my part then thats pretty sad.
so EVE is a complete failure that shouild be getting under 5/10 reviews?
What world do you live in? Do you think every movie given a shit rating by Siskel & Ebert ( may they both R.I.P. ) was reviewed at the request pf the movie's directors/producers/studios?
Do you thinkomost of the games out there, both singleplayer, multiplayer, or mmo that were given shit ratings were reviewed at the request of the devs or publishers?
The answer is no, usually because the makers knew they were shit and how the reviews would turn out.
It is not a "professional requirement" to need a developers blessing or permission before you review their game.
And since we're on the topic of reviews, when the hell is mmorpg.com going to finally do a review of this POS? Are you guys waiting for Tasos to "pre-approve" you as well?
~Ripper
The worst part about MMO reviews is that reviewers treat all MMOs as being part of the same genre - but the simple fact is, they aren't ; there are many different genres within the MMO genre that cater towards different players and different playstyles, similar to how there are many different games within the category of Sports Games, and not all are equally appealing.
The fact of the matter is, you can't accurately review a sandbox MMO, or a PVP MMO from the perspective of someone who doesn't enjoy sandbox MMOs or PVP mmos.
While I think there's some truth to that , how is it relevant, since the reviewer seems to revel in the PvP within Darkfall? Not only does he like it, but he wants it even deadlier, as he puts it.
~Ripper
so EVE is a complete failure that shouild be getting under 5/10 reviews?
Eve is a a bit different in the sense that it should be reviewed in two parts:
Eve: 9/10
Eve Players: 2/10
Eve is a a bit different in the sense that it should be reviewed in two parts:
Eve: 9/10
Eve Players: 2/10
lol couldn't agree more, EvE is a great game, but its community fails. Most of the players are out to scam you. #1 rule of EvE online don't trust anyone!
I thought the review was well-written. Better than the first, and MUCH better than that laughable nowgamer review.
Its a fair review.
i always thought 2/10 was slightly unfair . i ve never played darkfall . but for a game to only be given 20 percent i would suggest it would have to be almost totally unplayable . i would say at 40 percent a game proberbly has something to offer but is nt a paticulary good game . i think darkfalls destined to be a free to play microtransaction game .