Jump to content
Dante Unbound: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

Dark Sector & Warframe Both Have A 66 Meta-Critic Score.


Mkilbride
 Share

Recommended Posts

Which is "paying to rush" rather than "paying to win". Purchasing convenience and/or instant gratification basically. Also legit for people with no shortage of disposable income but limited amounts of free time, ofc.

It's his definition, not mine. If his definition is the same as yours, then he shouldn't have used Blacklight as an example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, Blacklight and this game are not P2W in any respect, it's all P4Convenience.

 

Or Pay2GETERDONE as some would like to call it.

Depends on your definition. I think if it's unreasonably hard to progress in the game, it's a problem. The only example of pay2win where progression was impossible was Mabinogi during the early stages, where rebirths were bought.

Edit:That I saw.

Edited by PeripheralVisionary
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet if DE bought a huge ad campaign to run all over IGN, it would have been lauded as "the new WoW killer" by those shills...

 

The only thing more useless and biased that a journalist these days, is a games "journalist".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same thing can be said of Blacklight. You're essentially getting a time advantage in both, sans some items like heroes.

 

Which is "paying to rush" rather than "paying to win". Purchasing convenience and/or instant gratification basically. Also legit for people with no shortage of disposable income but limited amounts of free time, ofc.

 

No, its not, since in Competitive modes you can purchase end-game gear and use it right off the bat. The difference is huge if you sunk 20hrs in it like I have. Where you also CANNOT buy permanent items, taunts, emblems, armors, attachments and depot unless you buy ZCOINS or become a member. Armors giving you noticeable speed increase and gear slots, weapons become a big damage turning point, the depot gives you turrets and so on so forth. If I were to obtain them it would take 500+hours until I get the same level fairness, then again I have to RENT them. This simple advantage at the start is why its termed P2W(You can wipe out squads with a emp+turrent+EXO+High clip SMG build)

 

Warframe even in Dark Sectors you cant buy 6 forma gear, Synapse and Brakk you HAVE to earn and cosmetics like armor dont give stats. This is a PVE focused game so your P2W game is against AI? Catalysts and reactors are different but you can still earn them in game and get 50 free platinum to buy them or slots.

 

 

You shouldv'e seen the review IGN gave Destiny BEFORE THEY EVEN PLAYED THE GAME. XD So much bias, so much payed reviews.

 

I read and watch all reviews, hype plays a role too I believe, look at Battlefield 4 reviews and see that an unplayable game for 6 months is worth 8+ scores. Only games I am interested from this E3 are No Mans Sky, Witcher 3 and still Final Fantasy 15.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet if DE bought a huge ad campaign to run all over IGN, it would have been lauded as "the new WoW killer" by those shills...

 

The only thing more useless and biased that a journalist these days, is a games "journalist".

Watch Dogs got an 80 on metacritic. I played the game for less than an hour and returned it in hopes of getting some of my money back on trade in. They burned me for the last time. Never again will I pick up a game till its been out for a few weeks and real user reviews can get out there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buying currency gives you no advantage. Every player can eventually get up to the same point. Slots are a weird exception, but most people don't use much more than their favorite three frames, and 2-3 primaries.

 

This is why the P2W aspect is arguable.  On one hand getting new gear takes an incredible amount of time to the point it's easier to just buy it.  On the other hand, anything considered superior (aka the primed gear) can only be obtained by hunting for them ingame.

 

 

As to the score itself, who cares?  If they gave it a 0 you'd still play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never ever ever pay attention to critic reviews, they are some of the biggest idiots in the gaming community.  They rarely put in enough time to properly test a game out and give kneejerk reactions.  IGN is especially bad.  On metacritic the actual gamer reviews and the critic reviews are rarely the same, if you want to go there to see reviews just ignore the critic reviews because they are almost always wrong. 

 

People that do pay any attention to any sort of reviews should stop being sheep and learn to develop their own opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see a problem with reviewing a game (well, this game anyway) in open beta.

Just saying.

I see. Read the last line and forgot everything else he typed.

 

Kinda missed my point, the idea is that critics review the games just like they are AAA story driven games, and not on their own merits.

 

F2P games should be reviewed as F2P games, and if the game isn't finished, review it as an unfinished product.

 

Warframe is far from perfect but also far from being a mediocre 66 out of 100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never trust IGN since there full of bull plop and show off there been paid off to hype a game up when its a massive load of plop.

 

The Metacrit i do not trust it to easy to abuse the score should be taken lightly at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kinda missed my point, the idea is that critics review the games just like they are AAA story driven games, and not on their own merits.

 

F2P games should be reviewed as F2P games, and if the game isn't finished, review it as an unfinished product.

 

Warframe is far from perfect but also far from being a mediocre 66 out of 100.

A 66/100 sounds bout right, they just picked the wrong flaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Metacritic's biggest problem is it has a deliberately biased system. Certain outlets scores are given more weight than others, meaning they have more influence on the aggregate score.

 

And IGN is worthless. Warframe isn't perfect but it is a lot of fun. You can tell because complaint threads usually go "Well, I spent 300 hours playing this game and now it sucks!", to which people respond "You don't really get a fair judgement until you've played 1,000 hours."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say that meta critics critiqued this game when it was full of holes. 

not really. the guy reviewing it on IGN seems like he did no research what so ever into the game. not only that but he was complaining about not being a higher master rank after 4 hours. IGN is a S#&$ review team.

 

he says you "have" to buy the weapons with plat and that you'll be spending hundreds of dollars on frames ect.

 

idiot didn't even know you could farm it all in game... he didn't understand POLARITY SLOTS FFS LOL you just match up a symbol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd score it as a 78, but more than enough potential to keep with it. Repetitive but thoroughly enjoyable gameplay with high caps and RNG-based events and items are a neutral statement of events rather than a bonus or minus. Interesting selection of frames, and the mod system allows for interesting division of roles in your weapons, as well as scaling up and up that can take hours- in my opinion, this is a GOOD thing. Rewarding players that find the game rewarding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the biggest problem is frugal item: 30 plat-> 9,000 creds.  how this item exists is beyond me....

 

feel bad for anyone foolish enough to take that deal, would likely be a total noobie since the item itself connotes that credits are hard to come by; when that is simply not the case.

 

pls remove.  p2L in that case.

 

said reviewer needs a reality smack for saying p2w ofc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The score was 66 one year ago... it still is, even though a hell lot of things have changed during that time.

 

They don't know sht about warframe.

 

Most of these reviews are highly subjective. These people propably never learned how to review... yes, that's something that needs to be learnt.

 

btw:

Everytime someone calls Warframe p2w, my head hurts. a lot.

I've played a ton of f2p p2w games.... actually all f2p games I've played except TF2 and Airmech were p2w. heh... and Metin2 before being bought by GF...But it also sucked without being p2w heh.

I know what this is. And Warframe is NOT p2w.

Edited by WEREsandrock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never ever ever pay attention to critic reviews, they are some of the biggest idiots in the gaming community.  They rarely put in enough time to properly test a game out and give kneejerk reactions.  IGN is especially bad.  On metacritic the actual gamer reviews and the critic reviews are rarely the same, if you want to go there to see reviews just ignore the critic reviews because they are almost always wrong. 

 

 

That and they're pretty much blackmailed by AAA industries. "Give us less than a 9 and we'll "forget" to send out your review copy and hassle you with copyright trolls". I prefer excluding all 0s and 10s on metacritic, and then reading those, as they typically involve thought. People who put 10's and 0's are as a rule, not the best at the whole reviewing thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...