Originally posted by seridan

My only problem with that review was on Gameplay. I mean, only 90% is pretty low, should've been around 95%

Well, I think we'll be seeing this rating for most upcoming MMOs unless they alter the basic mechanics drastically and add some kind of constant hook, because technically we're just hitting things with weapons.  I don't expect future games to really go much higher.  As much as I love GW2 and the DE's, it's still mostly combat or right-clicking.  MMO's aren't that complex.

It seems that, when talking about graphics, he is talking about art design and how well that it runs on many machines.

As far as near perfect score; I think it depends on how literal you want to be.

Since "nothing can be perfect" it doesn't make sense to have such high scoring. So what does that really mean? Probably that, for the people this game is for, the game achieves what it set out to do in the eyes of the reviewer. That the game does what it says it does within the given parameters.

Originally posted by Sovrath

It seems that, when talking about graphics, he is talking about art design and how well that it runs on many machines.

As far as near perfect score; I think it depends on how literal you want to be.

Since "nothing can be perfect" it doesn't make sense to have such high scoring. So what does that really mean? Probably that, for the people this game is for, the game achieves what it set out to do in the eyes of the reviewer. That the game does what it says it does within the given parameters.

One can give "10/10" for various reasons. And because nothing is perfect in this world, that's why 10/10 doesn't mean perfection, but only that it's just top notch for the person doing the review.

GW2's graphics are not "perfect", yet I still give them 10/10. The work put into them shows in every little details of the game.

I personally find the Score way to high the game has just too many tricks to fool the players but i suppose if the tricks work and the players are entertained  its ok and it really comes down to a matter of preference anyway.

However Sound and GFX are way WAY too high i can understand that the art style gets a high score it is amazing after all but reviews normally do  not rater art style so why now??(well prolly cause thats the only way GW2 gets a high score for GFX)

The sound is not bad but the 7.1 is really off in TSW its spot on and the atmosphere created by the sound is just amazing GW2 is far behind that its not bad but seeing how there are games that do it much better a 97 is just ridiculous.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by bluefunk

...

.

The people on this site never cease to amaze me.

Gameplay 90% is a fair score - if you like "standard" MMO gameplay GW2 does what WoW/ToR/Rift/Tera/TSW etc. do and does it better. If you don't and prefer sandbox/EvE style gameplay, your idea of whether or not 90% is valid or not is irrelevant.

Graphics 97% is a somewhat fair score - Art/style of this game is 100% easily, but that is up to the reviewers subjective analysis of style. Technically the gfx are far lower than 97% considering DX9 and such, but for a MMO the gfx are on par if not better than everything else out there save maybe TERA and TSW in terms of raw graphical fidelity on a technical level. If it were a FPS it'd be no where near 97% but as a MMO, which it is, 100% for style/art and maybe 85% for MMO gfx would make a truly "fair" score more like 90-92%.

Sounds 97% is spot on - SPOT on. You need to play the game with headphones and stop and LISTEN for a minute, you'll agree 97% might not even by high enough.

When you use a gun, the sound the bullet casings make when they hit the floor are different based upon what material you are standing on (wood/metal/dirt etc.) and that is just ONE example of how amazing and complete and well thought out the sound in this game is (as it enhances the game play experience.) and music is phenominal / top notch Jeremy Soule.

Multiplayer 95% is also SPOT on. There is only 1 activity in the entire game that is not multiplayer, and even that CAN be multiplayer. Personal story - can be solo'd but you can also bring up to 3 friends in with you.

Value 95% is SPOT on - B2P AAA MMORPG 'nuff said. It'd be 100% if there were no cash shop for cosmetics and helper items.

Lasting Appeal 95% is questionable - but only because this is SUCH a personal / subjective measure. You cannot objectively judge lasting appeal - you can only comment on the amount and variety of content in the game and whether or not it can be predicted that said amount and variety of content will continue to expand post release - and everyone is confident in ArenaNet to do just that.

The numbers listed about don't have categories for the issues the game is experiencing which are all network related - queues, join other players on overflow, mail, login, trading post, ALL network issues not issues with the game.

 

 Yeah a lot of folks on this site seem to have their own little personal grading scale that they try to apply to everything.  Like, they may have given SWTOR a 4 so a 9.4 for GW2 is just out of the question!

But what these folks fail to understand is that professional reviewers do not user their grading scale, they use their own.  And by and large, this goes by something very similar to the US school grading scale.  So by that...

SWTOR and WAR were "B" games (85, 86)

WoW was an "A" game (93)

And so far, GW2 is an "A" game (94)

I honestly don't see why that is a bad score given the scale they use.

Originally posted by Creslin321

 Yeah a lot of folks on this site seem to have their own little personal grading scale that they try to apply to everything.  Like, they may have given SWTOR a 4 so a 9.4 for GW2 is just out of the question!

But what these folks fail to understand is that professional reviewers do not user their grading scale, they use their own.  And by and large, this goes by something very similar to the US school grading scale.  So by that...

SWTOR and WAR were a "B" games (85, 86)

WoW was an "A" game (93)

And so far, GW2 is an "A" game (94)

I honestly don't see why that is a bad score given the scale they use.

This.

For what it is, GW2 is a 94% "A" game.

If you don't like what it is, then you will rate it lower - but for what it is, it is as good as these people are saying. 4 metacritic scores give the game a 94 too, and user score on metacritic is at 85 (best of any MMORPG to date) and MMORPG.com gives 9.09 thus far (entirely user scores).

94% from TTH is both fair and accurate.

If YOU don't like the game, YOU will score it lower - but arguing that their (TTH) review is a "joke" and "wrong" is just plain stupid.

*edit* and metacritic user is based off of 742 ratings, 631 positive (that's 85% positive) which matches average (8.5)

And before anyone goes making TOR comparisons and brings up their positive reviews (and critics reviews) let me state that TOR was/is great and deserving of it's score for what it is - MMO lite story heavy RPG, and certainly as a F2P TOR will deserve it's score based on the value you get from F2P model.

But retrospectively games have been released that have raised the bar post-TOR - games like GW2 in game play and TSW in story and presentation. This would thus lower the TOR score.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by bluefunk

Well TTH have a review up for GW2.  Final score 94%, while I feel GW2 is a great game well worth £40 I paid no way is it a near perfect score.  I guess I shouldn't have expected much for TTH.

Gamesplay 90%

Graphics 97% (You got to be kidding nearly the best GFX ever.... jokers)

Sound 97%

Multiplayer 95%

Value 95%

Lasting appeal 95%

No mention of the various issues plaguing GW2 game itself or Anet I guess I shouldn't expect more from them tbh.

My review 85% - great mmo/action game, awesome value.

I agree, 80-85 % is a fair score. 97% is just ridicilous and just shows how close the gaming media is to major gaming corps. 97% sound?? There is no way you can justify that.

The people on this site never cease to amaze me.

Gameplay 90% is a fair score - if you like "standard" MMO gameplay GW2 does what WoW/ToR/Rift/Tera/TSW etc. do and does it better. If you don't and prefer sandbox/EvE style gameplay, your idea of whether or not 90% is valid or not is irrelevant.

Graphics 97% is a somewhat fair score - Art/style of this game is 100% easily, but that is up to the reviewers subjective analysis of style. Technically the gfx are far lower than 97% considering DX9 and such, but for a MMO the gfx are on par if not better than everything else out there save maybe TERA and TSW in terms of raw graphical fidelity on a technical level. If it were a FPS it'd be no where near 97% but as a MMO, which it is, 100% for style/art and maybe 85% for MMO gfx would make a truly "fair" score more like 90-92%.

Sounds 97% is spot on - SPOT on. You need to play the game with headphones and stop and LISTEN for a minute, you'll agree 97% might not even by high enough.

When you use a gun, the sound the bullet casings make when they hit the floor are different based upon what material you are standing on (wood/metal/dirt etc.) and that is just ONE example of how amazing and complete and well thought out the sound in this game is (as it enhances the game play experience.) and music is phenominal / top notch Jeremy Soule.

Multiplayer 95% is also SPOT on. There is only 1 activity in the entire game that is not multiplayer, and even that CAN be multiplayer. Personal story - can be solo'd but you can also bring up to 3 friends in with you.

Value 95% is SPOT on - B2P AAA MMORPG 'nuff said. It'd be 100% if there were no cash shop for cosmetics and helper items.

Lasting Appeal 95% is questionable - but only because this is SUCH a personal / subjective measure. You cannot objectively judge lasting appeal - you can only comment on the amount and variety of content in the game and whether or not it can be predicted that said amount and variety of content will continue to expand post release - and everyone is confident in ArenaNet to do just that.

The numbers listed about don't have categories for the issues the game is experiencing which are all network related - queues, join other players on overflow, mail, login, trading post, ALL network issues not issues with the game.

 

I think there is one major difference between how you seen the numbers and how I do. For you 90+ is great score, for me 80-90 is great and 90+ is amazing with close to 100 is close to perfect. No way in hell this, or any other game I played are close to perfect. That should be reserved for games that are released once in a decade, if even that.

But I can address the parts you did one by one:

First of all I dont agree with the "standard" label which you seem to equate to ThemePark. For me an MMORPG is an MMORPG and I do not disqualify games because they are sandbox or themepark (if I did I would not have bought GW 2) so my opinion is just as valid as yours.

Gameplay 90% is the one that I could somewhat agree with. I would say 85% is more fitting because the game does tend to get a bit repetetive by doing heart quest, vistas, skillquest and events over and over and they most often boil down to kill or escort (which also means kill) activities, I would prefer an occasional quest where you need to use your wits, brains and social skills as well so for me 90 is too high. PvP seems a bit pointless, like most MMORPGs, so altough fun there is no real reason to get into it (beside exp, loot and bragging rights). There is not much of territorial control to speak of, not one's that actually matters.

97% for sound is way, way of. Sound =/= music, the music is great and I would give it a score of 90% but the sound effects are average, less than 80 %. Sword swings and hits does not sound good at all and spell sounds are lacklustre and un-convincing. For me 97% would be triple A cinema class music and sound effects and that is simply not the case here.

97% for gfx is also way of. Not as much as sound because the art-style is nice but the spell effects and general combat effects (when you hit an enemy with a sword for example) are just above average. For example the connection between hitting the mob and the effect on the mob is not very convincing. Gfx in TERA is better and in the 90s but for this game I would not give it more than 85%, art style alone is not enough for 90+ score.

Multiplayer 95%, well what exactly is so multiplayer about it? Does it have any real incentive to form guilds? For what content to I need to party to complete? Dynamic events and heart quests are nice because it naturally puts you together with other people but it is very random and they are just passing strangers. Also the combo system is weak, in games like FF XI you had groups of people combining complex 3-8 step combos for massive effects, in this game all you have is a 2 step combo (from what I have seen) and the rewards are not all that great so not much need to coordinate a team to do them. Also, is there a dungeon finder or auto-match systems (except for PvP)? I have not seen any but I may be wrong because to be honest I haven't have time to explore that part yet. In any case, from what I have seen, I would not give multiplayer more than 80%. It is nice but is missing several features and the story line quest being privately instanced takes away, rather than adds, to multiplayer.

Value 95% is way to early to tell. If I play this game more than a few months then I would say it has value in the 80s and if I havent got bored in six months I would say it is in the 90s but it is way to early to tell. Lasting Appeal I feel is closely related to value so same score for that one. Also I am not sure how much I feel I need to use the cash shop, if I do that will bring down the value score.

So my score would be (so far):

GFX: 85%

Sound: 80% (Music 90% and Sound FX 70%)

Gameplay: 85%

Multiplayer: 80%

Value and lasting appeal: Too early to say.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Creslin321

 Yeah a lot of folks on this site seem to have their own little personal grading scale that they try to apply to everything.  Like, they may have given SWTOR a 4 so a 9.4 for GW2 is just out of the question!

But what these folks fail to understand is that professional reviewers do not user their grading scale, they use their own.  And by and large, this goes by something very similar to the US school grading scale.  So by that...

SWTOR and WAR were a "B" games (85, 86)

WoW was an "A" game (93)

And so far, GW2 is an "A" game (94)

I honestly don't see why that is a bad score given the scale they use.

This.

For what it is, GW2 is a 94% "A" game.

If you don't like what it is, then you will rate it lower - but for what it is, it is as good as these people are saying. 4 metacritic scores give the game a 94 too, and user score on metacritic is at 85 (best of any MMORPG to date) and MMORPG.com gives 9.09 thus far (entirely user scores).

94% from TTH is both fair and accurate.

If YOU don't like the game, YOU will score it lower - but arguing that their (TTH) review is a "joke" and "wrong" is just plain stupid.

*edit* and metacritic user is based off of 742 ratings, 631 positive (that's 85% positive) which matches average (8.5)

Right and that metacritic user score is with a bunch of ragers giving the game a score of 0-2, which GREATLY skews the score down.  So I think an 8.5 is pretty impressive given that.

Face it guys...it's a good game, you're going to have to get over it and learn to live with it.  And hey, maybe you will even enjoy it if you try to play it one day.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Creslin321

 Yeah a lot of folks on this site seem to have their own little personal grading scale that they try to apply to everything.  Like, they may have given SWTOR a 4 so a 9.4 for GW2 is just out of the question!

But what these folks fail to understand is that professional reviewers do not user their grading scale, they use their own.  And by and large, this goes by something very similar to the US school grading scale.  So by that...

SWTOR and WAR were a "B" games (85, 86)

WoW was an "A" game (93)

And so far, GW2 is an "A" game (94)

I honestly don't see why that is a bad score given the scale they use.

This.

For what it is, GW2 is a 94% "A" game.

If you don't like what it is, then you will rate it lower - but for what it is, it is as good as these people are saying. 4 metacritic scores give the game a 94 too, and user score on metacritic is at 85 (best of any MMORPG to date) and MMORPG.com gives 9.09 thus far (entirely user scores).

94% from TTH is both fair and accurate.

If YOU don't like the game, YOU will score it lower - but arguing that their (TTH) review is a "joke" and "wrong" is just plain stupid.

*edit* and metacritic user is based off of 742 ratings, 631 positive (that's 85% positive) which matches average (8.5)

And before anyone goes making TOR comparisons and brings up their positive reviews (and critics reviews) let me state that TOR was/is great and deserving of it's score for what it is - MMO lite story heavy RPG, and certainly as a F2P TOR will deserve it's score based on the value you get from F2P model.

But retrospectively games have been released that have raised the bar post-TOR - games like GW2 in game play and TSW in story and presentation. This would thus lower the TOR score.

This sound to being you guys opinions unless you have some spec., from these review sites, saying that 90-100 is an "A" game and so on. Scores are both relative and absolute, they are relative to other game but absolute to the scale with the top score would be the best game, ever and the lowest score being complete and utter garbage. And GW 2 is noway the best game ever, no one with an objective mind can claim that, their judgement would be far clouded with emotions if they did.

Originally posted by Creslin321

 Yeah a lot of folks on this site seem to have their own little personal grading scale that they try to apply to everything.  Like, they may have given SWTOR a 4 so a 9.4 for GW2 is just out of the question!

But what these folks fail to understand is that professional reviewers do not user their grading scale, they use their own.  And by and large, this goes by something very similar to the US school grading scale.  So by that...

SWTOR and WAR were "B" games (85, 86)

WoW was an "A" game (93)

And so far, GW2 is an "A" game (94)

 

I honestly don't see why that is a bad score given the scale they use.

 

Every person has their own little personal grading scale including the reviewers. It isn't like they're using some special secret code. So really don't see your point.

The irony is most of these folks remarking on these reviews still say it is an overall great game. Yet you guys get bent out of shape that god forbid they think some reviews are too high. Like they almost always have been. A comment I have also ironically seen made by some of the very same posters in relation to other games that now seem to think  a 94 or 100 especially considering the game just came out is right on. Rather amusing to see the 180 some have done.

Originally posted by Yamota

This sound to being you guys opinions unless you have some spec., from these review sites, saying that 90-100 is an "A" game and so on. Scores are both relative and absolute, they are relative to other game but absolute to the scale with the top score would be the best game, ever and the lowest score being complete and utter garbage. And GW 2 is noway the best game ever, no one with an objective mind can claim that, their judgement would be far clouded with emotions if they did.

I'm not saying it's the best game ever, but I'm saying it's one of the best games I've ever played.

Originally posted by Creslin321

Right and that metacritic user score is with a bunch of ragers giving the game a score of 0-2, which GREATLY skews the score down.  So I think an 8.5 is pretty impressive given that.

Face it guys...it's a good game, you're going to have to get over it and learn to live with it.  And hey, maybe you will even enjoy it if you try to play it one day.

Same here on MMORPG.COM. And despite those "0-0-0-0-0-0-0" haters, and despite the few launch related bugs, the game still gets 9.09.

'nuff said.

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Creslin321

 Yeah a lot of folks on this site seem to have their own little personal grading scale that they try to apply to everything.  Like, they may have given SWTOR a 4 so a 9.4 for GW2 is just out of the question!

But what these folks fail to understand is that professional reviewers do not user their grading scale, they use their own.  And by and large, this goes by something very similar to the US school grading scale.  So by that...

SWTOR and WAR were a "B" games (85, 86)

WoW was an "A" game (93)

And so far, GW2 is an "A" game (94)

I honestly don't see why that is a bad score given the scale they use.

This.

For what it is, GW2 is a 94% "A" game.

If you don't like what it is, then you will rate it lower - but for what it is, it is as good as these people are saying. 4 metacritic scores give the game a 94 too, and user score on metacritic is at 85 (best of any MMORPG to date) and MMORPG.com gives 9.09 thus far (entirely user scores).

94% from TTH is both fair and accurate.

If YOU don't like the game, YOU will score it lower - but arguing that their (TTH) review is a "joke" and "wrong" is just plain stupid.

*edit* and metacritic user is based off of 742 ratings, 631 positive (that's 85% positive) which matches average (8.5)

Right and that metacritic user score is with a bunch of ragers giving the game a score of 0-2, which GREATLY skews the score down.  So I think an 8.5 is pretty impressive given that.

Face it guys...it's a good game, you're going to have to get over it and learn to live with it.  And hey, maybe you will even enjoy it if you try to play it one day.

Excuse me but who says it is not a good game? It is a great game in fact but not an amazing, jaw-dropping once in a decade game, which a 97% score should be reserved for.

Originally posted by Yamota

I think there is one major difference between how you seen the numbers and how I do. For you 90+ is great score, for me 80-90 is great and 90+ is amazing with close to 100 is close to perfect. No way in hell this, or any other game I played are close to perfect. That should be reserved for games that are released once in a decade, if even that.

But I can address the parts you did one by one:

First of all I dont agree with the "standard" label which you seem to equate to ThemePark. For me an MMORPG is an MMORPG and I do not disqualify games because they are sandbox or themepark (if I did I would not have bought GW 2) so my opinion is just as valid as yours.

Couple of points - thanks for the great reply!

1. I think GW2 has (thus far) been one of those "once in a decade" releases - well, almost a decade - not since 2004 and WoW has a MMO like this been released and thusly deserves the "amazing" range with many of it's features. And that is not just me and "fanboy-ism" it's felt on every gaming site throughout the entirity of the MMO community - these thoughts are industry wide.

2. There is a very clear difference in design and format and general gameplay that makes themepark and sandbox MMORPG's so incredibly different at their very core level, you really do have to seperate them out - I don't think you can say a MMORPG is a MMORPG when you compare a game like.. TSW or TOR to EvE or SWG.

3. The rest is all highly subjective - I have no idea where your complaints on sound come from - they are 100% professional studio quality sound recordings for everything in the game - Anet released a couple of videos from their sound department - and the music is top notch as well when compared to Hollywood - Jeremy Soule is on the same level as many of the "modern" composers for movies.

4. You and I disagree fully on how much Art style and theme play into the graphics score, which is fine - I think Art style and theme is everything - without it even the most graphically impressive game on a technical level is "souless" and bland.

So yeah, we are arguing subjective rational, which is fruitless :)

Originally posted by The_Korrigan

Originally posted by Creslin321

Right and that metacritic user score is with a bunch of ragers giving the game a score of 0-2, which GREATLY skews the score down.  So I think an 8.5 is pretty impressive given that.

Face it guys...it's a good game, you're going to have to get over it and learn to live with it.  And hey, maybe you will even enjoy it if you try to play it one day.

Same here on MMORPG.COM. And despite those "0-0-0-0-0-0-0" haters, and despite the few launch related bugs, the game still gets 9.09.

'nuff said.

Wow talk about seeing only one side of the coin. The complete opposite would be true as well with fanboys giving it a perfect 10 score and user scores always drop over time. Right now it is like the honeymoon but in 3-4 months when everyone has hit 80, with more than one class, and done WvWvW and all that, the score will drop to a more realistic one. I guarantee you that.

Originally posted by Yamota

Excuse me but who says it is not a good game? It is a great game in fact but not an amazing, jaw-dropping once in a decade game, which a 97% score should be reserved for.

Maybe not for you... for me it is. And I'm definitely not the only one :)

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by bluefunk

...

.

But what these folks fail to understand is that professional reviewers do not user their grading scale, they use their own.  And by and large, this goes by something very similar to the US school grading scale.  So by that...

SWTOR and WAR were "B" games (85, 86)

WoW was an "A" game (93)

And so far, GW2 is an "A" game (94)

 

I honestly don't see why that is a bad score given the scale they use.

 

So, Rift is an A+ game since it got 95?

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Creslin321

 Yeah a lot of folks on this site seem to have their own little personal grading scale that they try to apply to everything.  Like, they may have given SWTOR a 4 so a 9.4 for GW2 is just out of the question!

But what these folks fail to understand is that professional reviewers do not user their grading scale, they use their own.  And by and large, this goes by something very similar to the US school grading scale.  So by that...

SWTOR and WAR were a "B" games (85, 86)

WoW was an "A" game (93)

And so far, GW2 is an "A" game (94)

I honestly don't see why that is a bad score given the scale they use.

This.

For what it is, GW2 is a 94% "A" game.

If you don't like what it is, then you will rate it lower - but for what it is, it is as good as these people are saying. 4 metacritic scores give the game a 94 too, and user score on metacritic is at 85 (best of any MMORPG to date) and MMORPG.com gives 9.09 thus far (entirely user scores).

94% from TTH is both fair and accurate.

If YOU don't like the game, YOU will score it lower - but arguing that their (TTH) review is a "joke" and "wrong" is just plain stupid.

*edit* and metacritic user is based off of 742 ratings, 631 positive (that's 85% positive) which matches average (8.5)

And before anyone goes making TOR comparisons and brings up their positive reviews (and critics reviews) let me state that TOR was/is great and deserving of it's score for what it is - MMO lite story heavy RPG, and certainly as a F2P TOR will deserve it's score based on the value you get from F2P model.

But retrospectively games have been released that have raised the bar post-TOR - games like GW2 in game play and TSW in story and presentation. This would thus lower the TOR score.

This sound to being you guys opinions unless you have some spec., from these review sites, saying that 90-100 is an "A" game and so on. Scores are both relative and absolute, they are relative to other game but absolute to the scale with the top score would be the best game, ever and the lowest score being complete and utter garbage. And GW 2 is noway the best game ever, no one with an objective mind can claim that, their judgement would be far clouded with emotions if they did.

Not necessarily...

Like The Korrigan said earlier, a 10/10 does not necessarily mean "best ever" to every reviewer.  It may simply mean excellent or without apparent flaw.

Like if I score a 100% on a statistics final exam, that does not mean I am the best statistician ever, it just means I did really , really well.

Same principle can apply with video game scores.  If you rate a game and you literally can't find any flaw with the sound design, then a 10/10 may be an appropriate score.  This doesn't mean nothing can ever top it though, it just means it was amazing.

The point is that there is no absolute "valuation" for review scores.  You can never apply your personal scale valuation to another reviewer and then make arguments because your scale may simply not apply.

The best you can do is look at the general trends of all reviewers and try to go by that.  And the general trends I see is that people typically use the US grading scale as a valuation reference.