Eurogamer Warframe Review

[Tartanu]

I didn't like it the first couple of hours, but now I @(*()$ love it. People should have to play a game AT LEAST 20 hours before they review it. I mean, the game has some bugs and the tutorial isn't great, and the UI is a little weird, but it's still in beta, and bugs will be fixed, as well as UI and tutorial improvements. Also how is a parkour/hack and slash/co-op/shooter/dungeon crawler genre fusion "generic"? It's taking some of the coolest genres out there, and taking the good elements from them and putting them together in a really good game which you can play for FREE. And that last line just shows that eurogamer is still holding on to that stupid assumption that "F2P = Piece of S#&$" which is just no longer true.  Also, if the game is so "terribly generic and boring", how come it's in the raptr top 10 list?.

Most AAA titles are done from start to finish in 10-15 hours, MAX.  Your demand that reviewers play a game for more than 20 is beyond absurd, considering that people work 40 hours a week (you know, to make the real money that buys $&*^ all in this game).  If your game can't make an impression in a couple of hours, what's to stop Joe Average consumer from turning to the vast array of games on the market that do?

 

Ain't nobody's got time for that bullS#&$.

Edited December 2, 2013 by niekaa

[c_man_ninja_gun]

This is a very lazy review. Instead of giving constructive criticism and informative information about the game he just rages for a bit. He complains about microtransactions on a F2P game which need I remind you every F2P has. If this was my the first time reading about the game what did I learn, nothing the point of a review is to inform not complain.

[DHKany]

Last I checked, Europa wasn't out past the orbit of Pluto.

Last time I checked Europa was still a moon of Jupiter, hence it actually exists in our solar system and is not a 'fictional addition'. 

[Othergrunty]

Well i'm not suprised. Digital Extremes can claim this game being Beta as long as they want, but the truth is that they put it up to be reviewed by everyone and the reviews like this are bound to happen.

 

What pains me is that the correct short commings he mentiod there have been in this game SINCE MARCH and DE has done little to actively fight these problems.

 

Infact when Steve showed us that late 2012 version of the game during a livestream, it seemed to me that it was almost better, because it was mostly the same game but far more simple.

 

Before someone says it, i know a lot has improved or changed since March, i'm here since April after all, but there are still so many core issues left.

 

Sure we got a new tutorial, but that is in fact even more confusing than the old "Virtual Reality Simulation" one, since the new one tries to create lore and never follows up on it.

 

It constantly seems like they are working in the wrong direction or create new ideas half build them into the game and then drop them like the useless block system.

 

Sorry for sounding so pessimistic, but i can't ignore the issues this game has.

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm still liking this game a lot. Otherwise i wouldn't still be around.

Edited December 2, 2013 by Othergrunty

[Lunarsage]

I didn't like it the first couple of hours, but now I @(*()$ love it. People should have to play a game AT LEAST 20 hours before they review it. I mean, the game has some bugs and the tutorial isn't great, and the UI is a little weird, but it's still in beta, and bugs will be fixed, as well as UI and tutorial improvements. Also how is a parkour/hack and slash/co-op/shooter/dungeon crawler genre fusion "generic"? It's taking some of the coolest genres out there, and taking the good elements from them and putting them together in a really good game which you can play for FREE. And that last line just shows that eurogamer is still holding on to that stupid assumption that "F2P = Piece of S#&$" which is just no longer true.  Also, if the game is so "terribly generic and boring", how come it's in the raptr top 10 list?.

20 hours is still not long enough to crack Warframe open enough, which isn't too bad...when you measure it up to traditional MMORPGs. The game's combat elements are great. That's why I play. Everything else needs work, though.

 

Also, Raptr is a no-name Steam-knockoff service that Warframe managed to cling to a top list only because there are promotional items for it.

[Apostus]

Wait.. What...? People still take Eurogamer seriously? ó_ò

[Raanaar]

Seems like someone got his &#! kicked by Captain Vor and ragequit

[FlyDungas]

     I can't even stop thinking about this. Reviews have the inherent problem that they attempt to judge the quality of something that is totally subjective. No matter what the opinion of the writer is, there will be people who feel exactly the same way, people who feel the opposite and everything in between. A good reviewer (I don't know if that's even a word but I'm going to use it anyway) should have an open mind and try to describe objective aspects of the work as thoroughly as he/she can so that people can use that information to decide whether or not it appeals to them before buying, downloading, etc.. Most of the people I've encountered do not understand the concept of subjectivity and most of the reviews I read reflect that as well. A great deal of them are highly opinionated and often one sided, sometimes because of bribes. To me that alone makes a poor review.

     The only way to make it worse is to show a complete disregard for the creator(s) of what you are reviewing, which is exactly what this is in my opinion.  I mean even if you agree with every point made, there is no reason to be that rude. You know damn well that DE are going to read it, and have the audacity to write it like this? I mean he even insults the other games they have made.. Man video games are art, created by artists. That's someones baby you are crucifying. Any artist knows how terrible this can feel. When you channel your imagination into reality a work of art is born and it becomes an extension of you. That's enough of that, now I'll be able to sleep.

Edited December 2, 2013 by FlyDungas

[Renan.Ruivo]

Here we go, a proper review

 

Eurogamer should learn how to employ people that will write things for them. This Dan guy obviously does not know his own craft.

[Nnazqul]

Warframe combines 3 things that I absolutely love.Ninjas . guns and sci-fi.That means , I absolutely love Warframe.But if you're not enthusiastic about these things , this game has absolutely no appeal.

 

This is a completly fair review . comming from someone who enjoys this game.

Good luck trying to dismiss fact

Edited December 2, 2013 by [DE]Drew
Removed content that violates the Community Rules

[DHKany]

Warframe combines 3 things that I absolutely love.Ninjas . guns and sci-fi.That means , I absolutely love Warframe.But if you're not enthusiastic about these things , this game has absolutely no appeal.

This is a completly fair review . comming from someone who enjoys this game.

[Othergrunty]

Here we go, a proper review

 

Eurogamer should learn how to employ people that will write things for them. This Dan guy obviously does not know his own craft.

 

Well he still strikes a few good points. While the gameinformer review is certainly more fair and better written, the eurogamer review represents the more impulsive view of someone starting out in the game and therefor carries some value aswell.

[MyHeroPatrickSwayze]

Those of you endlessly singing Warframe's praises should ask yourselves if you really support a development scheme with few real long-term innovative prospects. DESteve said it himself - "I don't believe in design documents". They are playing it by ear, patch to patch, and lack the grand vision and ambition that the reviewer is invoking. Having played since CB I can tell you that most of the updates have been more about rebranding pre-existing features rather than introducing really innovative stuff. The mod card system is merely the CB-era upgrade tree system with extra farming. Damage 2.0 is of course refreshing, but that is the exception, not the case. What exists past the regular missions/solar system? Void runs feel exactly the same as regular missions, just hidden behind a key-farming wall and a shiny coat of paint. Ditto with vault runs. New boss battles are old boss battles extended by invulnerability phases. There has been such a deficit in new experiences that the newest pokemon snap minigame feels like a godsend. To me, this game has the replayability of a single player game, artificially extended by occasional new weapons and warframe releases - "hey do the same things you've been doing the first 299 hours, but with new X and Y!". The only thing staving off utter boredom is the occasional leaderboard event and fun times goofing off with Warbros.

[Nnazqul]

This is a great example of what I meant. What you said is not a fact, its just your opinion. I like this game and I am not enthusiastic about any of those things.

The fact is not what I am enthusiastic about or you.The fact is what the review portraits.

This game is entirely based on building weapons and shoothing things on a more or less relevant platform.If you're into something else this game falls short.Which makes it an all around mediocre game.

[HellishWind]

the review is quite fair imo 

 

 

cause the crafting system does take far too long for new players 12 hours for new stuff is a joke and should be changed too zero i dont know even 1 game wich also has this that is f2p  its just a cheap money grab then  indeed DE pricing list is kinda greedy imo just look at prime access bundle and the grand master i bought both cause i got  the money but i can imagine that people who arent that well off  are getting  quite  run over by thoes prices 

 

and essentialy this game is P2P   cause u cant have everything for free everything is locked between paywalls   just my 2 cents but i do agree a 4 is kinda hard is think a 6 is more appropiate cause the gameplay is fluid and no cover system ? .... this isnt gears of war  lal

[LordAsmolicious]

And yet, the tutorial fails to teach mechanics such as walljumping or helicoptering, either of which is needed to negotiate that one gorge in the Corpus Outpost, I assume the reviewer found further down in his review.

Zorencoptering isnt really needed. I dont do it i dont know HOW to do it. I just wall launch myself. -Shrug-  Didnt read the review.  Meh i dont trust reviews anymore these days.  the BEST review ever! is when you go and check it out yourself.  EDIT:  but yeah. the Tut is lacking in those aspects. Imho they need to add a second one. The Lore one we have now needs to stay. But for your first real mission. they should make another tutorial like area. Where you need to learn wall running and such to proceed to the objective. and to get out

Edited December 2, 2013 by Marabunta5

[f3llyn]

Those of you endlessly singing Warframe's praises should ask yourselves if you really support a development scheme with few real long-term innovative prospects. DESteve said it himself - "I don't believe in design documents". They are playing it by ear, patch to patch, and lack the grand vision and ambition that the reviewer is invoking. Having played since CB I can tell you that most of the updates have been more about rebranding pre-existing features rather than introducing really innovative stuff. The mod card system is merely the CB-era upgrade tree system with extra farming. Damage 2.0 is of course refreshing, but that is the exception, not the case. What exists past the regular missions/solar system? Void runs feel exactly the same as regular missions, just hidden behind a key-farming wall and a shiny coat of paint. Ditto with vault runs. New boss battles are old boss battles extended by invulnerability phases. There has been such a deficit in new experiences that the newest pokemon snap minigame feels like a godsend. To me, this game has the replayability of a single player game, artificially extended by occasional new weapons and warframe releases - "hey do the same things you've been doing the first 299 hours, but with new X and Y!". The only thing staving off utter boredom is the occasional leaderboard event and fun times goofing off with Warbros.

 

I agree with this. Except for the Warbros part. Gameplay has more or less stayed the same in the last year with little variance. Damage 2.0 doesn't even change it up that much.

 

Actually thinking on it. They've actually managed to make the grind worse in several ways. Grind 3 layers deep might possible be an innovation...but probably not one any game would ever actually want.

Edited December 2, 2013 by f3llyn

[Avrose]

I shudder in horror as a budding game dev thinking about what reviewers will one day say about me. I'm afraid mostly about people missing the point of what I'm trying to present vs what they see which maybe (for the sake of argument ) a linear game. Yes its linear but did you have fun? Was it a good linear game and did you enjoy the story/feel invested?

 

Sometimes I think reviewers spend so much time looking for something 'new' and fresh that they often miss the mark that something been done but been done well, made with love is a good game.

 

Otherwise why is Nintendo selling mario 3/mario world remakes every year? No insulted intended but there's some staples we take for granted.

 

That being said I don't like euro gamers reviews. They feel like a art critic always looking for that new thing as I mentioned before that I think they lost touch with that fact that there are still games, good games of older types that's are totally worth peoples times.

 

I'm not going to lie, war-frame isn't new or fresh. There has been plenty of games in the last few years about hoard mode co-op games with leveling equipment.  One of my personal favorites is Killing Floor.

 

The only thing warframe has done different is take your classic hoard-mode co-op and added level objectives, over arching plot, crafting and third person hack and slash.

 

Its not new but its the package that its the presented in. Its fun and I really think eurogamer is blind. I'm not saying war-frame is perfect, it does need a lot more polish but its a nice game.

 

why? except for controls this review is pretty much accurate.

No its not. Its short sighted and non-constructively critical.

 

lol, masters and grand masters siding with this review. That jaded, eh?

Well after spending money any threat to an investments makes the investors squirm. Assuming that this artical sways people away from warframe many players who have put considerable money into the game don't want to play it alone.

 

Not saying the feelings are justified but fear is a horrid monster to have on your back.

 

This....a lot of points are valid yes, but they put all theat emphasis on the negatives and didn't really put anything into the positives.
Or do people believe there are no positives in Warframe?

 

See my points about reviewers spending all their time looking for that new fresh thing.

Edited December 2, 2013 by Avrose

[Ganpot]

While Warframe is far from perfect, the reviewer seemed to level some pretty unfair complaints against it. 

 

- Warframe's lore and backstory are only really generic at first glance (although, granted, that might just be because we don't have enough details for it to be insanely generic).  I doubt the reviewer bothered to dig very deep. 

- What modern games don't have insultingly obvious tutorials?  At least Warframe's is finished up in under 10 minutes. 

- About half the boss fights are actually interesting from a design standpoint.  Most of the low-level ones are pretty boring. 

- Fair enough, enemy AI is pretty terrible (as is friendly AI). 

- The melee system has several options you can enable to make it more enjoyable on TV.  I don't know if they are enabled by default on PS4 (they probably should be), but at least the option is there. 

- Wait, what?  The different tile-sets are most definitely NOT palette swaps, and are actually quite unique.  Granted, there is repetition in individual tile-sets (that is inevitable with procedural generation), and at the end of the day, you're just running through disguised corridors. 

- The lack of a cover system is a good thing.  You're an agile ninja, not a soldier in WW1.  Furthermore, crouching isn't nearly as important as sliding, sprinting, and jumping. 

- Survival is supposed to be chaotic (it's a constant fight for your life, after all).  Granted, a new player's first survival match will likely be a shock after the other Mercury missions.  In DE's credit, they did have the foresight to make the Mercury survival mission optional. 

- The UI criticisms are pretty spot-on.  The chat box and font size can be increased, but that is not enabled for PS4 by default (as far as I know).  Most of the UI is not well-explained for new players (it devolved into trial and error). 

- Advanced movement maneuvers are unfortunately never explained (which is a terrible flaw, considering they make the game much more interesting). 

- The comment about not seeing any improvement upon leveling up makes me think he never discovered mods.... 

- 50 Platinum does buy some very useful stuff (actually, it should be used to buy THE most useful stuff, aka potatoes and slots), but again, this is never explained to players. 

- Fair point about not being able to see base stats on items before buying them.  Even that probably wouldn't be enough to really get a handle on them though.  There should really be some weapon testing range or something. 

- Why is the reviewer complaining that the micro-transactions AREN'T necessary to progress through the game??? 

- No mention of the (fairly impressive) graphics quality? 

- The closing comment really comes across as unnecessary and vindictive.  Plenty of people pay to play worse games than Warframe. 

 

Personally, I'd give Warframe a 6.7 out of 10.  As a veteran player, here are my thoughts:

 

Pros:

- Micro-transactions are basically never required (I do wish free players could somehow obtain a limited number of more slots without messing with trading). 

- Unique art style and great graphical fidelity

- Well-done voice-acting and sound effects

- Large amount of customization

- Tons of weapons and classes, most of which (excluding some melee weapons) feel different from each other

- Combat is fast-paced and entertaining

- Nice platforming elements (although I hope for more in the future)

- Decent clan interaction (base building is always a plus)

- Missions can usually be played without much set-up and are usually completed within 20 minutes, allowing players to quickly jump into a mission or two in their free time

- Excellent and varied use of gore (which can be turned off)

 

Cons:

- Balance is pretty much non-existent on all fronts

- Maps often feel too linear (either have more branching paths, or a truly interconnected grid)

- Stun-lock mechanics can easily lead to unavoidable deaths

- Melee combat lacks depth, is ineffective without 2 specific classes, and doesn't feel particularly skillful

- Terrible new player experience (little is explained)

- Frequent matchmaking issues (strict NAT, various errors, lag)

- Stealth gameplay is extremely bare-bones 

- Progression is based largely on luck (RNG loot drops)

- Some UI elements aren't well-implemented (chat, for one)

- Most items cost an excessive amount of real money if players wish to use platinum (exceptions are slots, potatoes, and some cosmetics)

- Increasing levels of grind (largely caused by the RNG)

 

All in all, my thoughts remain the same as when I first played the game in March.  The game has a lot of potential, but it remains to be seen if it will ever fulfill it.  It's a good game, but right now it's not a truly great one. 

[nightrunner_ks]

"Bosses are bullet sponges"
 

Captain Vor 3.0 when? 

[JustAnotherRougeAI]

Couldn't help but laugh while reading this, to be honest. The reviewer constantly contradicts himself, stating that the tutorials are pointless, yet he then goes on to say that the game needed more tutorials. Huh.

 

One line in particular made me chuckle: "Micro-payments are both expensive and inessential." So, if something's expensive, but isn't necessary, is it really a problem? Yeah, Frost costs about $30 worth of Plat to buy straight up, so someone who doesn't want to spend much money on the game definetely won't go for it, but a grandmaster who doesn't want to farm Kril might jump on the option. I don't see how that's a negative.

 

Many of the gripes that the reviewer had with the game are problems that are only encountered on the PS4, despite the review being for both the PS4 and PC versions of the game.

 

It is painfully obvious that the reviewer spent no more than a few hours playing the game, never so much as mentioning the mod system once and complaining that you can't see a weapon's stats.

 

Sure, some of the points made are very valid; AI issues, UI complexity, Repetitiveness, they're all very prevalent problems in Warframe currently, but the reviewer allows his incredible bitterness to get the better of him and make him forget that this game is still in a beta state, and shows no sign of coming out of beta for quite some time.

[CorrTerek]

The reviewer constantly contradicts himself, stating that the tutorials are pointless, yet he then goes on to say that the game needed more tutorials.

 

That's...not really a contradiction. The current tutorial spends an inordinate amount of time teaching you things that could be covered much quicker since they're standard for almost every TPS or FPS, and then does absolutely nothing to prepare you for more advanced stuff like wallrunning, modding, damage types, etc. 

[Coyskurk]

This game isn't even finished yet.  Why are people reviewing it?  

[CeePee]

This game isn't even finished yet.  Why are people reviewing it?  

 

It kinda got marketed as a PS4 launch title, albeit still in open beta

[Hououza]

I think that this is a very difficult subject, I accept that the reviewer has made some valid points, specifically the lack of introduction to the game's systems such as wall running, stealth, mission types, etc.

 

The game would benefit significantly from a series of tutorial levels that could be played optionally to help new players become familiar with all the different aspects of the game.

 

However, the aggressive and negative attitude displayed toward the game was grossly unwarranted and showed a significant level of bias which I consider unprofessional in someone whose job is to review games in an impartial manner.

 

With no real talk about multiplayer and how much fun the game can be when running through levels with a group of friends it feels as if the reviewer played the game solo throughout, missing much of the point of the game.

 

No, it's not Call of Duty, and nor should it be. Go back to the Dreamcast days and look at Phantasy Star Online. Four levels and a lot of grind, but a simple and addictive play style that kept you coming back. Warframe captures that same style in many ways, and while PSO could only evolve through new version, Warframe continues to grow and improve.

 

Personally, I'm willing to believe that there is much more good to come in Warframe.