Meta Critic 67. (Wow)

  • Zoopy

    @lobofh said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @zoopy dijo en Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @lobofh said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    That's a a cheap manipulation, no, I am not saying that they should wait 10 years to review the game in its REAL final state...but c'mon, they should review the FULL content at this moment.

    Yes. They need to grind their way through dozens of hours of bland and banal content so that they can reach content that is equally meaningless and that less than 10% of players will ever see, before they can make a review?

    This isn't World of Warcraft. There isn't some magical complete revamp of the gameplay waiting in the 'endgame'. You're still going to be doing mostly the same s**t you've been doing the entire time. Stop hiding behind excuses like "muh endgame".

    Bland and banal content IN YOUR very subjective opinion. Other players have also right to think otherwise.

    Get off your high horse of universal trutch, can you?, only Pope of Rome is infallible.

    Missing the point much?

    The point isn't how much fun you find the content. It's the fact that you don't need to grind your way through repetitive content so that you can reach more of the same repetitive content (with a fancier label), before you can make a review. So stop trying to look for reasons why the reviews are not valid. You can disagree with the reviews if you like, but trying to undermine them by scraping for excuses about why they're invalid is nothing short of poisoning the well, which is a logical fallacy.

  • LoboFH
    Marauder
    Insider
    Founder

    @zoopy dijo en Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @lobofh said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @zoopy dijo en Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @lobofh said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    That's a a cheap manipulation, no, I am not saying that they should wait 10 years to review the game in its REAL final state...but c'mon, they should review the FULL content at this moment.

    Yes. They need to grind their way through dozens of hours of bland and banal content so that they can reach content that is equally meaningless and that less than 10% of players will ever see, before they can make a review?

    This isn't World of Warcraft. There isn't some magical complete revamp of the gameplay waiting in the 'endgame'. You're still going to be doing mostly the same s**t you've been doing the entire time. Stop hiding behind excuses like "muh endgame".

    Bland and banal content IN YOUR very subjective opinion. Other players have also right to think otherwise.

    Get off your high horse of universal trutch, can you?, only Pope of Rome is infallible.

    Missing the point much?

    The point isn't how much fun you find the content. It's the fact that you don't need to grind your way through repetitive content so that you can reach more of the same repetitive content (with a fancier label), before you can make a review. So stop trying to look for reasons why the reviews are not valid. You can disagree with the reviews if you like, but trying to undermine them is nothing short of poisoning the well, which is a logical fallacy.

    Again, neither you nor the reviewer knows what the hell is the final content, perhaps it's Shangri-La with the Allah's houris, we don't know.

    NO, you are missing the point, one reviewer can hate the game, you can hate the game...hell, I also can love the game, mind you. But my point is that they are not being really professionals as they didn't play important slices of the content to write a really in deep review.

    I am user in the most popular digital magazine in spanish language, they still didn't publish the review, it's impossible to understand SoT in an afternoon.

  • SN4RES

    @janusgod said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @blam320 said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @janusgod said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    They have a point. The game is pretty bare bones at the moment. MS pushed out a game that anywhere else would have been branded as Early Access, or at the very most Alpha, and made people pay full price for it.

    Do we really need to start another debate over what the game's actual goal and content is supposed to be? Because RARE has made it plenty clear.

    It doesn't matter what their plan is when their pirate game launches at full price and has a grand total of two ships. It's not okay to launch without content, even if you say "Don't worry, we'll add more down the line." Creating content should be done BEFORE the game launches, not after.

    A valid point. I remember the days when I'd buy a game and that would be it - no DLC, no 'added content' no 'patches/updates' no support. Just the game, as you got it.
    Those times are long gone.
    This is the age of DLC and expandable content.

    Sometimes I miss those days, but I also consider the fact that the game market is huge now, and highly competitive. And player bases are fickle. This game was in development for a long time, I do not know how long. but lets say for example 3 years, seems like a good ballpark figure. So after the 3 years, you have the core stuff down and the framework for the main content. Mechanics are functional and further content is planned/worked on - but not finished yet.

    At what point do you release this to the market? When you you decide it's 'done' and ready for launch?
    Too early and you don't impress (insert numerous failed EA titles here). Too late and you missed the bandwagon entirely, or people lose interest in the game entirely so even when it IS out - nooone cares anymore (insert NMS here).

    It's a tricky thing to balance. I think the framework is pretty good and it def does what it says on the tin. We weren't fed lies about content and we were not lead-on to expect more that what the game offers in it's current state.

    I'm comparing it a lot to Elite Dangerous - another game I play with a massive world, but very repetitive and grindy gameplay. And some would say, very little content.

    It's really down to player expectation and how they judge the game based on information available to them. When I purchased Elite I knew what i was getting into, and it ticks the immersion box for me, it's a fun experience/sandbox where player interaction is the one thing that makes it interesting.

    I can't help but draw the same comparisons with SoT currently. And hell - i'm fine with that, it's honestly what I expected having followed the dev updates etc.

    On the plus side - I honestly do believe that the 'expand after release' model is a good thing. Providing the ideas stay true to the original idea and don't twist/change the game into something it was never meant to be in the first place.

    I just hope they do a good job with it. We'll see, i'm sure i'll get my monies worth of enjoyment from it.

  • Gotwhity66
    Founder

    @zoopy It's true you don't need to play a game for 50 plus hours to review it, especially here, though many of these reviewers published theirs with maybe a couple hours of game time.... Anyways they need to add more to the game so there is no debate there. Also it just hit 70 on metacritic.

  • Zoopy

    @lobofh said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    Again, neither you nor the reviewer knows what the hell is the final content, perhaps it's Shangri-La with the Allah's houris, we don't know.

    The devs have already explained what the majority of the endgame content entails. It's not going to revolutionise the gameplay.

    But hey, keep holding on to that last shred of hope if you'd like. I'm off to play other games. Games that actually have content.

  • Arangarx
    Ship Mate
    Insider

    @hudson-rl said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    Although I think it’s very much deserving of of a low review score. I do think the reviews should revisit the game a year down the line. Fingers crossed we’re still going strong.

    For what it’s worth, my experience on SoT’s last night was a 10/10 game. But not everyone will have the same experience and I may never again tbh. Potentially a great game with a lack of fun and variety.

    Exactly, and we won't be going strong in a year if Rare listens to the deluded "it's perfect as it is" crowd. Fortunately we know they do want to add more content. The question is, will they add it fast enough to avoid major attrition?

    What so many here seem to forget is that it's NOT the 10% who would elope with the game that matter it's the 50% on the fence that matter to the longevity of the game. (or whatever the real number is, I swear to god if you argue the percentages...)

    People keep saying "yer opinion doesn't matter if you haven't gotten to 50 in each faction." This crowd fails to realize that their opinion matters greatly if the majority of them are too bored out of their skulls to even get there in the first place. This argument is seriously like saying "Oh, you only played the first 50 hours of that final fantasy game, well you're opinion doesn't matter because the game is 100 hours long, g**o noob" It's absolutely silly.

    If someone thinks that this game will survive without enough players to keep the game profitable or if they think that a tiny number of players will keep it profitable on their own, they are mistaken.

  • TheSme11yMan
    Founder

    @mcdoll What's the difference between a gameplay loop in this game and destiny? Run literally the same mission/raid/strike to get a same stat weapon everyone else has? At least these quests are making you go to different places.

  • LoboFH
    Marauder
    Insider
    Founder

    @zoopy dijo en Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @lobofh said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    Again, neither you nor the reviewer knows what the hell is the final content, perhaps it's Shangri-La with the Allah's houris, we don't know.

    The devs have already explained what the majority of the endgame content entails. It's not going to revolutionise the gameplay.

    But hey, keep holding on to that last shred of hope if you'd like. I'm off to play other games. Games that actually have content.

    I love the actual gameplay so your alleged con is a pro in my book.

    Sure, this is a free world, you don't need to feel pain in a game you hate, but do it, play those other games because at this moment some of the criticism is blatant trolling, hateful attacks and vendetta time around old grudges with other users (not you, in general...holly molly, anglosaxons, you need to separate singular and plural)

    Lots of wonderful games out there, be happy with them, bitterness in the forum of a game you chose to hate is not good, neither for you nor for the community, the constructive criticism and the future of the game.

  • Zoopy

    @thesme11yman Are you kidding? Destiny doesn't make you go to a mission so that you can shoot a single enemy for no reason other than that it's there. There's a story attached to each mission. There's a variety of enemies from different factions, each with their own complex lore, stories and tactics. There's dozens of different types of content you can do at your leisure. There's plenty of reason to explore the open world.

    None of that exists in Sea of Thieves. Destiny has plenty of problems, but you can't compare the gameplay loop to Sea of Thieves at all. You must be scraping very deep near the bottom of that barrel if this is your defense of the content.

  • CapnLimbless

    @zoopy said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @thesme11yman Are you kidding? Destiny doesn't make you go to a mission so that you can shoot a single enemy for no reason other than that it's there. There's a story attached to each mission. There's a variety of enemies from different factions, each with their own complex lore, stories and tactics. There's dozens of different types of content you can do at your leisure. There's plenty of reason to explore the open world.

    None of that exists in Sea of Thieves. Destiny has plenty of problems, but you can't compare the gameplay loop to Sea of Thieves at all. You must be scraping very deep near the bottom of that barrel if this is your defense of the content.

    It is true that there's a story in Destiny. It's also true that story is lifted from Brandon Sanderson's Stormlight Archives. The same as the plot of Halo is lifted from Rendezvous with Rama, Ender's Game and Armor.

  • LoboFH
    Marauder
    Insider
    Founder

    @zoopy dijo en Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @thesme11yman Are you kidding? Destiny doesn't make you go to a mission so that you can shoot a single enemy for no reason other than that it's there. There's a story attached to each mission. There's a variety of enemies from different factions, each with their own complex lore and different ways to deal with them. There's dozens of different types of content you can do at your leisure. There's plenty of reason to explore the open world.

    None of that exists in Sea of Thieves. Destiny has plenty of problems, but you can't compare the gameplay loop to Sea of Thieves at all. You must be scraping very deep near the bottom of that barrel if this is your defense of the content.

    I loved Destiny 1, Played to death with my PS4 buddies. In the end the strenght of Destiny was not the lore or the simplistic storyline...it was the emergent, fun, gameplay in a wondefully crafted (semi) open world and the comradery with your buddies in really challenging endgame activities...

    = SoT.

  • Zoopy

    @lobofh Discussing the game's shortcomings is part of the process of constructive feedback. Don't for a second think the devs aren't seeing it.

    You're not interested in the health of the community. You're interested in not seeing opinions you disagree with. In which case I don't understand why you don't just avoid these discussions instead. Last time I checked, these forums weren't only for people who love the game.

    And stop making assumptions, you barnacle. I've already said I liked the game, but have exhausted my enjoyment on the current content. Stop assuming anyone who criticises the game hates it.

  • Zoopy

    @capnlimbless And what does that have to do with the amount of content the game provides? You need to stop shifting the goalposts. At this point you're just scraping for anything to disagree with, regardless of whether it makes sense in the context of the discussion.

    @lobofh said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @zoopy dijo en Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @thesme11yman Are you kidding? Destiny doesn't make you go to a mission so that you can shoot a single enemy for no reason other than that it's there. There's a story attached to each mission. There's a variety of enemies from different factions, each with their own complex lore and different ways to deal with them. There's dozens of different types of content you can do at your leisure. There's plenty of reason to explore the open world.

    None of that exists in Sea of Thieves. Destiny has plenty of problems, but you can't compare the gameplay loop to Sea of Thieves at all. You must be scraping very deep near the bottom of that barrel if this is your defense of the content.

    I loved Destiny 1, Played to death with my PS4 buddies. In the end the strenght of Destiny was not the lore or the simplistic storyline...it was the emergent, fun, gameplay in a wondefully crafted (semi) open world and the comradery with your buddies in really challenging endgame activities...

    = SoT.

    Keep telling yourself that then. Destiny also got flak for being too sparse in content on release, so clearly the rest of the community didn't agree with you there either. Even so, vanilla Destiny had tons more content than Sea of Thieves.

    There are dozens of sandbox games where I can enjoy "the comradery with your buddies in really challenging endgame activities" out there. Pretty much all of them have more content than Sea of Thieves. Sea of Thieves isn't some special miracle game that's offering anything that other games haven't offered before.

  • CapnLimbless

    @zoopy I think you might have responded to the wrong person. I'm the guy that referenced a humor song about the pope and mocked Bungie's "writing" ability. I'm not one of the people complaining about lack of content.

  • TheRealDadBeard

    @sg-riverdan How is anyone surprised? Lol. 3 1/2 Years making the water and then rushing the rest. People throwing their money at those games are the issue companies can pump those out because theres always people who will pay for half a***d games lulz.

    Get a chest, ship some pigs and get a skull. After that you fight the kraken and raid a skull fort. Done. That was the whole game.

    This game should be 30€ max with a season pass, dlc or something. I will enjoy the 2 weeks with Xbox pass and then probably forget the game until something drops months later xD

  • LoboFH
    Marauder
    Insider
    Founder

    @zoopy dijo en Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @capnlimbless And what does that have to do with the amount of content the game provides? You need to stop shifting the goalposts. At this point you're just scraping for anything to disagree with, regardless of whether it makes sense in the context of the discussion.

    @lobofh said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @zoopy dijo en Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @thesme11yman Are you kidding? Destiny doesn't make you go to a mission so that you can shoot a single enemy for no reason other than that it's there. There's a story attached to each mission. There's a variety of enemies from different factions, each with their own complex lore and different ways to deal with them. There's dozens of different types of content you can do at your leisure. There's plenty of reason to explore the open world.

    None of that exists in Sea of Thieves. Destiny has plenty of problems, but you can't compare the gameplay loop to Sea of Thieves at all. You must be scraping very deep near the bottom of that barrel if this is your defense of the content.

    I loved Destiny 1, Played to death with my PS4 buddies. In the end the strenght of Destiny was not the lore or the simplistic storyline...it was the emergent, fun, gameplay in a wondefully crafted (semi) open world and the comradery with your buddies in really challenging endgame activities...

    = SoT.

    Keep telling yourself that then. Destiny also got flak for being too sparse in content on release, so clearly the rest of the community didn't agree with you there either. Even so, vanilla Destiny had tons more content than Sea of Thieves.

    There are dozens of sandbox games where I can enjoy "the comradery with your buddies in really challenging endgame activities" out there. Pretty much all of them have more content than Sea of Thieves. Sea of Thieves isn't some special miracle game that's offering anything that other games haven't offered before.

    You and your made up statistics, Destiny had millions of happy players for years, despite the hate campaign of some part of the community.

    I am done with players that chose to hate games when they don't suit their exact taste and pester other players in the forums that dare to enjoy them, not only SoT, Steam forums are filled with such kind of ballasts for this hobby.

    You said you were leaving to play way better games, you can't even hold a so simple promise. Constructive criticism?, you would not understand the meaning of constructive even if it's sculpted as the fifth president at Mount Rushmore.

  • TheSme11yMan
    Founder

    @Zoopy Destiny - Collect weapons, kill raid boss, grind till RNG gets you weapon you want, collect skins. rinse and repeat.

    SoT - collect chests, kill kraken, beat forts, grind gold, collect skins. rinse and repeat.

    those are the cores to both games. I played both with my friends for the same reason, to mess around and have fun. Don't need a story or anything we can just do what we want and have fun. That's the enjoyment they are going for with this game. We don't need a bigger number weapon to feel better about ourselves. Making ourselves look goofy as we jump on someone's ship and blow them up is enjoyment enough.

  • Porrage
    Seafarer

    67 seems about right. Had fun playing Sea of Thieves with my friends, but I can already feel that it's going to get old very quickly. In fact, all my friends are on the free trial and they have confirmed that they aren't going to drop the full $60 to keep playing.

  • CRUSADER ZORRO
    Captain
    Insider
    Founder

    I had four people try the game and rate it, surprisingly, they gave it a 6/10 and said it would get stale without new content and some said that the games pvp mechanics are not crisp at all.

  • SG RiverDan
    Marauder
    Insider

    Up to 71.

  • LIFEWCOKE
    Commander
    Boatswain
    Founder

    @sg-riverdan said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    Up to 71.

    That is just about what my average english grade was back in high school. Not good but still passing.

  • SG RiverDan
    Marauder
    Insider

    @lifewcoke said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @sg-riverdan said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    Up to 71.

    That is just about what my average english grade was back in high school. Not good but still passing.

    HAHAHAHA

  • GrogAndBooty

    This game WILL be losing money. With so many of the current players on Game Pass, (and not likely to buy the full game, not anymore), there's no way Rare has made the sales to support a 200 employee staff. 200 employees is Skyrim content. I get the game is supposed to be minimalist, but even expecting that... I was like.. That's it? Not even a parrot?

  • R3B3lSpy
    Captain
    Insider
    Founder

    @janusgod What about if this is the exact game that they wanted to release?

  • shaggiedo
    Founder

    @dimwitmegalodon said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @sg-riverdan

    The core problem is the gap between expectations and reality. Some games launch with similar light content, and are "make your own fun" in the same way.

    But this title wasn't all that clear in the marketing, I think. Hence the audience expectation gap.

    I don't think Rare did all that good a job at explaining that this is basically a single map (albeit large), with one core PvE progression loop (do quests, earn cosmetic gear), all in a non-consensual PvP mix.

    One might even say they were being secretive, or evasive, or god forbid - maybe a tad untruthful.

  • shaggiedo
    Founder

    @grogandbooty said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    This game WILL be losing money. With so many of the current players on Game Pass, (and not likely to buy the full game, not anymore), there's no way Rare has made the sales to support a 200 employee staff. 200 employees is Skyrim content. I get the game is supposed to be minimalist, but even expecting that... I was like.. That's it? Not even a parrot?

    Sure there be parrots, but its gunna cost you real money.

  • Hot Juicy Pie
    Founder

    @goblobsters L**o there are no tiers.

  • Padd
    Castaway
    Founder

    @sg-riverdan SoT is a lot of fun if you have friends.
    Also, (((metacritic)))

  • isukun

    @padd And if you don't or can't convince your friends to buy a critically panned game, it's pretty boring. So far my experience online has been join a crew with a bunch of deaf mutes, get dragged around on boring fetch quests you have no say in and maybe get attacked by some foul mouthed 13-year-old who thinks the game is COD. Every time I've played with other people the experience has been mind numbing monotony mixed with the occasional moment of aggravation.

  • Sorenthaz
    Captain
    Insider
    Founder

    @janusgod said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    They have a point. The game is pretty bare bones at the moment. MS pushed out a game that anywhere else would have been branded as Early Access, or at the very most Alpha, and made people pay full price for it. I thought the content in the Beta was just a tiny portion of the total, you know, for testing purposes. But nope, that was basically all of it.

    Yeah and I feel like the first people to start reaching Pirate Legend and giving news about it will probably lead to more backlash and criticism because it's hard to imagine that Pirate Legend offers anything super new/compelling beyond more fetch quests and cosmetic grinds.

    Ultimately this game feels like it was released a year too early at a price point that isn't easily justified. The one thing though that should be given a nod to is the fact that this game wasn't bundled with a "deluxe" edition for $80 or a "gold edition" for $100. There's only a $60 version and that's it.

    Now obviously there's going to be microtransactions later down the line and it will be judged at that point. But Rare sounds like they're committed to fleshing this game out and continuing to add more ways to play and so on... so hopefully they will deliver in a timely fashion.

    I feel though like everyone who bought into this game shouldn't have been surprised by the lack of depth. We had plenty of big Twitch streamers and folks on Reddit/these forums questioning where the content would be, and if you cut through the fluffy PR hype talk from Rare's dev videos and such it wasn't hard to pinpoint what the actual substance was (three factions + Pirate Legend and some side distractions).

    Still, the Metacritic score might be a bit lower than what I'd give SoT (probably a solid 70-75) but it's accurate IMO. Game is a disappointment for lots of folks and while it has some great strengths it also has some massive problems that threaten the game's longevity and player retention.

  • shaggiedo
    Founder

    @isukun said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @padd And if you don't or can't convince your friends to buy a critically panned game, it's pretty boring. So far my experience online has been join a crew with a bunch of deaf mutes, get dragged around on boring fetch quests you have no say in and maybe get attacked by some foul mouthed 13-year-old who thinks the game is COD. Every time I've played with other people the experience has been mind numbing monotony mixed with the occasional moment of aggravation.

    Great post man best summary yet of SoT.

  • nemesis464
    Ship Mate

    @goblobsters said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @sg-riverdan Meh I dont really care for those reviews. As the reviewers have obviously not had a chance to get to the higher tiers of the game.

    Sorry, what?

    The early stages of the game are likely to get the best reviews. The initial few hours where you step into the gorgeous world, everything is new, exploring islands for the first time... that is much more likely to be favorably reviewed than 20-30 in. Even people I know who have got bored with the game already have said those first few hours were amazing.

    I'm level 32 in gold hoarders and a similar rank in order of souls, and the missions I'm getting now are basically the same as the level 1 missions, just you get 3/4 maps instead of 1, and the occasional riddle is thrown in. Leveling up the factions barely changes the quest content.

    If a reviewer is giving the game mixed reviews after 5-10 hours of playtime, if anything, the grind after that would elicit an even less favourable review.

    I'm enjoying the game currently, but what I'm saying is you can't go 'oh they haven't played enough to review it properly' because in the first few hours, you encounter most of what the game has to offer anyway.

  • Goblobsters

    @nemesis464 said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @goblobsters said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @sg-riverdan Meh I dont really care for those reviews. As the reviewers have obviously not had a chance to get to the higher tiers of the game.

    Sorry, what?

    The early stages of the game are likely to get the best reviews. The initial few hours where you step into the gorgeous world, everything is new, exploring islands for the first time... that is much more likely to be favorably reviewed than 20-30 in. Even people I know who have got bored with the game already have said those first few hours were amazing.

    I'm level 32 in gold hoarders and a similar rank in order of souls, and the missions I'm getting now are basically the same as the level 1 missions, just you get 3/4 maps instead of 1, and the occasional riddle is thrown in. Leveling up the factions barely changes the quest content.

    If a reviewer is giving the game mixed reviews after 5-10 hours of playtime, if anything, the grind after that would elicit an even less favourable review.

    I'm enjoying the game currently, but what I'm saying is you can't go 'oh they haven't played enough to review it properly' because in the first few hours, you encounter most of what the game has to offer anyway.

    I sure can say that. In fact I did.

  • Goblobsters

    @hot-juicy-pie said in Meta Critic 67. (Wow):

    @goblobsters L**o there are no tiers.

    all three factions have tiered ranks, in which the offer more complicated quests and different items. Thats tiers. Better go look for what you laughed off, you may need it one day.

Login To Reply
144
Posts
118.5k
Views
131 out of 144