Ign Review On Warframe

[CaptainohCaptain]

Terrible review:

The reviewer, like all reviewers, don't actually play the game in-depth enough to give a good review. They just base their review off of their first impressions and from what they hear. You can see from their terrible lack of mods and arsenal that they have very little experience with the game.

 

Little experience = little authority to make a review. IGN is just trying to get publicity for ITSELF.

Yeah, yeah, now tell me, what he will get from mods aside of hitting harder, living longer and moving faster.

[Trainer772]

Yeah, yeah, now tell me, what he will get from mods aside of hitting harder, living longer and moving faster.

Customization, variability. It makes the game more interesting.

 

Life with few mods in lower tiers is far more boring than with various mods in higher tiers.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Trainer772

[dubignou81]

The review is fair. 

 

 

Warframe is not perfect, and I wish there was some storytelling, a plot, a goal or something. Events give you a bit of that, but that's not for PS4 players.

 

I can see it's a huge issue as every shooter since half life is a series of corridor where you advance and unlock some of the plot.

 

But yeah, besides, as the reviewer mentioned, the game is fun and the core mechanics are definitely there.

 

 

Also, you can feel that the F2P paradigm is still very new to the console world.

 

The review talks about dropping $60 on that game. And I would say, this is not how it works. It's a free to play game. 

 

Actually, I would advise players that it makes no sense to drop $60 of that game up front. 

 

 

Not that $60 is the wrong amount of money. But platinum is like any other resource, get to know the game and see how you can use that resource wisely.

Edited December 5, 2013 by dubignou81

[CaptainohCaptain]

Customization, variability. It makes the game more interesting.

Yes, picking from hitting harder or living longer. Or he should show pre-nerf Rage + QT combo?

Or zorencopting?

Or phasewalking outside of the map?

If I'd like to have some sort of setups fun, I'd get myself a game of MWO.

Powers are shown, everything else is weird on the same levels as Magic: The gathering to the average everyday normal guy.

[Eremes]

(...)

 

Also, you can feel that the F2P paradigm is still very new to the console world.

 

The review talks about dropping $60 on that game. And I would say, this is not how it works. It's a free to play game. 

 

Actually, I would advise players that it makes no sense to drop $60 of that game up front. 

 

 

Not that $60 is the wrong amount of money. But platinum is like any other resource, get to know the game and see how you can use that resource wisely.

thats also a issue in game. slots are still hidden in the inventory, weapons cost over 15 USD, warframes are hidden around the starmap and PS4 users cant just wiki it out and supercharging or formaing a weapon are super secret misteries that isnt really described anywhere on what it does but the wiki.

 

i created this thread mostly to how how difficult it is for a new PS4 player to get around. its a rather daunting beginning, that shuns the player away or into money traps.

[Lunarsage]

Terrible review:

The reviewer, like all reviewers, don't actually play the game in-depth enough to give a good review. They just base their review off of their first impressions and from what they hear. You can see from their terrible lack of mods and arsenal that they have very little experience with the game.

 

Little experience = little authority to make a review. IGN is just trying to get publicity for ITSELF.

How much time would you have someone spend before allowing them to review Warframe?

[PROteinxstack]

I think 7.5 sounds about right.  Although I don't favor IGN, the reviewer had all the facts straight and called the shots like he saw them.  Everything he said was true.

[Katakuna]

Terrible review:

The reviewer, like all reviewers, don't actually play the game in-depth enough to give a good review. They just base their review off of their first impressions and from what they hear. You can see from their terrible lack of mods and arsenal that they have very little experience with the game.

 

Little experience = little authority to make a review. IGN is just trying to get publicity for ITSELF.

 

If it takes X amount of hours for the game to be fun and worth playing, that in itself is a problem.

[CaptainohCaptain]

How much time would you have someone spend before allowing them to review Warframe?

I bet enough to contract a fanboy tremor.

[shut]

For something like IGN, I was pleasantly surprised at how fair the game's review went. The reviewer obviously didn't have much experience with Warframe, so there were some good points and bad points that he missed out on, but as for the main issues that the game faces, he was darn close to spot-on. Missions seem repetitive, and there's no real depth to them. Just go in, kill everything on the way to the objective, complete objective, kill everything on the way to extraction. (Ahem... something like a stealth-based mission would help this immensely...)

 

But he was pretty bang-on about the marketplace, at least in the eyes of an inexperienced player. Us forumers know fully well that everything that affects gameplay (besides slots) can be obtained entirely for free, but inexperienced players will see nothing but paywalls, and chances are that's all they're ever going to see, since they're likely to ditch the game soon after.

 

 

I think the review was accurate. It doesn't reflect how us forumers feel about the game, but I'd imagine that it's absolutely dead-on regarding how a new PS4 player would feel about the game as it is. Regarding everything from the learning curve to the marketplace and its importance, this game simply is not new-player-friendly at all.

Edited December 5, 2013 by SortaRandom

[Letter13]

If a game can make me dump hundreds of hours into it, it's clearly doing something right.

[direcyphre]

If it takes X amount of hours for the game to be fun and worth playing, that in itself is a problem.

Like all online multiplayer games? It would be like playing Planetside 2 for a couple hours and proclaiming something about their cash shop usage, because they didn't play long enough to get enough cert points to upgrade skills or weapons. Same applies to all MMOs really. It's not a consumable AAA title like most singleplayer games are, which end and can be completed within a certain obvious period of time (8-20 hours). You don't play the game a handful of hours and consider yourself an expert or have had the full experience.

 

This of course becomes blatantly obvious for any reviewer who has not even picked up a different weapon or frame, because they haven't waited any period of time for something to be completed in the Foundry. Don't know anything about how the game works? There is always asking, and I know I've helped quite a few in Region chat to know that it does work.

[Sixty5]

Sure a lower review number might put some users off, but to be fair, someone who plays games based on what ign says will only end up playing AAA titles from the big studios that can make up lost points with large "donations"

That said I form most of my opinions on games I haven't played based on what people who know what they are talking about say.

From that avenue I have heard that Warframe isn't like ME3 MP enough and needs more indication of progression, which I can see being true, or at least was at the Time.

The game has been good enough for me to spend 1000 steam hours and a large amount of money on.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Sixty5

[Brimir]

I wouldn't be a Founder with 3000+ posts if I didn't love the game :)

[TennoSimons]

Terrible review:

The reviewer, like all reviewers, don't actually play the game in-depth enough to give a good review. They just base their review off of their first impressions and from what they hear. You can see from their terrible lack of mods and arsenal that they have very little experience with the game.

 

Little experience = little authority to make a review. IGN is just trying to get publicity for ITSELF.

 

The review is not terrible for what it is, but it does lack depth (the review, that is). As you and others have noted, spending a few hours on warframe is not enough to gain a proper appreciation of it because of the kind of game that WF is. Can you imagine someone giving World of Warcraft a fair review after only having spend a few hours on it and complaining that in two hours, he was only able to play as one class? 

 

Warframe is a game that keeps evolving, and that it this so well is part of its appeal and part of its ingenuity. I am normally an action game gamer myself and not even Bayonetta has kept me as interested and happy-to-be-still playing as long as Warframe. Now I'm not saying that Warframe is a better action game than Bayonetta, but I am saying that it is a very good action game and, unlike Bayonetta, the game itself keeps getting updated and keeps getting better. 

 

And Warframe may well be the best action game of this ongoing-universe ilk. Certainly is the funnest I've played. 

 

So, in sum:

 

7.5 is definitely too low. Yet the reviewers points are valid (and despite earnest efforts, newcomer accessibility problems remain in the game - people new to it have difficulties understanding how to go about doing things and how to set out an investment strategy in the game - which is evinced in how the reviewer guy went about trying to acquire stuff). This to me points to the inadequacy of rote, established review models to certain types of games.  

[TennoSimons]

Like all online multiplayer games? It would be like playing Planetside 2 for a couple hours and proclaiming something about their cash shop usage, because they didn't play long enough to get enough cert points to upgrade skills or weapons. Same applies to all MMOs really. It's not a consumable AAA title like most singleplayer games are, which end and can be completed within a certain obvious period of time (8-20 hours). You don't play the game a handful of hours and consider yourself an expert or have had the full experience.

 

This of course becomes blatantly obvious for any reviewer who has not even picked up a different weapon or frame, because they haven't waited any period of time for something to be completed in the Foundry. Don't know anything about how the game works? There is always asking, and I know I've helped quite a few in Region chat to know that it does work.

 

Also, what this guy said. 

[Archistopheles]

For a review from someone who hasn't put 200 hours in, and knows everything about the game, they did a pretty good job.

 

We obviously know how to make up for the flaws they pointed out, but to a new player, this is almost exactly what they experience.

 

New players don't know they can build warframes from parts, or weapons from resources.

 

New players don't know what mods are, or why some fit, and some don't.

 

New players don't know how guns operate, and may regret purchases like the Vulkar with it's horrible scope.

[DJ_Redwire]

There were good an bad portions of the review IMO. For instance, he brought up the issue of a lack of information for new players, which is a very real issue and his comments on its problems were equally true. But on the flip side, he mentions that you have to sink a lot of cash into the game to make it somewhat fun, which if you understand the game, is not the case. I guarantee that if most new players new exactly how to obtain the items they want without spending a lot of money, or even any at all with a little patience, and were aware that if you work hard it's not difficult to earn all those weapons and frames without forking over $60 or more. But yet again, that circles back to the lack of knowledge available for new players, which is something DE should really make an effort to address if they want to support their overall business model. Otherwise new guys like this reviewer will keep shouting for platinum cost reduction and eventually DE will have no choice but to do so.

[Eremes]

If a game can make me dump hundreds of hours into it, it's clearly doing something right.

i clocked 1200 hours on steam and 600 in game, alike most of warbros i do belive in warframe but i dont like where the ship is headed.

 

we had just joked that IGN believed warframe to be good because he paid plat to skip the initial grind, and i found it to be a horrible idea, its borderline P2W. the only reason id indicate this game to friends of mine is if i could help them, but it looks unlikely i will ever do this if they want to play on PS4.

 

id wish that the game had a softer starter for the newbies. could link the wiki and getting started guides on the patching screen, would make things a lot easier. do PS4 users have something like that?

[CatScratch]

Agree with the review on all accounts except when they say the game is pay to win. I played few truly p2w games and believe me warframe isn't one of them. Everything in this game except accessories that only change looks is obtainable trough gameplay.

Friend of mine  started playing  wf 2weeks ago for starting plat he bought few frame slots, I traded him few mods which he sold and bought him self sentinel accessories and syndana. So he's a "free" player and he easily got himself everything he wanted without paying. That's not a p2w model.

[(PSN)fingernageldreck]

When i received my ps4 i bought CoD, and it was horrible... For me it turned into a tactic shooter but without gadgets to play with. So all you can do is get a team together and camp the enemy to the ground.

Then i bought battlefield. Looks better than CoD to me but i wasnt happy with it ether.

And i only saw in these playstation live videos someone playing warframe never heard or seen it before, but its great so far. I could have saved the money for battlefield and CoD...

Sure warframe is not perfect BUT for me its a way better game than call of duty!

[FoxyKabam]

pretty fair review 7.5 is a bit high imo but close to where I'd score it

nice to see him looking at the positives

[Letter13]

id wish that the game had a softer starter for the newbies. could link the wiki and getting started guides on the patching screen, would make things a lot easier. do PS4 users have something like that?

Yeah, it would be nice if the game had a more in depth tutorial, maybe one that walks you through an entire mission as well as teaches some of the more advanced moves (like the various melee attacks, etc). Also a tutorial that introduces them to how the damage system works, mods, etc.

And sadly, no, PS4 users basically have the stock U10 experience, with some of the U11 UI (i.e. chat/social menus).

Game has a very long way to go. It has a lot of potential, but DE really needs to realize it. IMO I think they need to pause all of the content/weapon/boss releases and do a thorough rework of the tutorial--maybe even design a set of solo "VR" missions (a la Metal Gear Solid) in a similar fashion to Mastery rank tests, as well as a Shooting Range for players to test out weapon builds against various enemy types, etc. Basically you could have a series of missions like Basic Combat I, II, III, Advanced Combat I, II, III, Basic Agility, Advanced Agility (wallrunning, etc), etc etc etc.

Personally if I were to rate this game based on potential alone, it's get maybe a 9.5 from me, but if I were to rate it as if it were released/final, I'd give it a 5.5. But because rating it as a final product when there are potentially significant changes in the work is negligent and rating it for its pure potential is lofty, I'd give it a 7.5, the middle ground.

[dubignou81]

7.5 is definitely too low. Yet the reviewers points are valid (and despite earnest efforts, newcomer accessibility problems remain in the game - people new to it have difficulties understanding how to go about doing things and how to set out an investment strategy in the game - which is evinced in how the reviewer guy went about trying to acquire stuff). This to me points to the inadequacy of rote, established review models to certain types of games.  

 

Take into account that Warframe is compared to products that have many months polishing with teams twice as big. OTOH, Warframe has seen major changes, new content and new items even if they are not (yet) totally OK.

 

The game experience is a bit lowered by that, you can't deny it. I.e.: you may find yourself with a sniper gun that has a buggy scope.

Edited December 5, 2013 by dubignou81

[Dante130666]

Hi. Many of you may have seen this review and get pissed about it ill just put it in details.

 

Those f*&^#%g idiots in IGN dont even know how to review a game. This review isnt the only case.

 

Thay miss a lot of good stuff and dont even know how the game is played or pay module is.

 

Guys I just want for everyone to know this game better and i would like to check the comments of this review.

 

I hope in future, generally IGN will get more info before reviewing a game. 

 

Feel free to leave your comments.