Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 181
02-05-2010, 07:53 PM
"Cryptic's engine proves to be a capable and pretty quarry simulator."

LOL
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 182
02-05-2010, 08:00 PM
Meh, a well written article for sure. It is just not reflective of my experience with STO and I'm sure that many here will agree and say 'See Cryptic..We were right and you were wrong.'

I don't place 100% faith in any reviewer, film/book/game/etc., and use multiple sources as a measure of whether I should try something or not, so if people are going to use this one article as some sort of proof, they should gather a few more reviews and then find the game's forum and read as many of the opinions posted there.

I do respect Eurogamer and most of the time their articles are spot on good. This one is fine and I will check out a few more before I think that they may be onto something here.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 183
02-05-2010, 08:00 PM
How awesome, the forums is saying there are 19 pages yet... click it and it takes you right back to 18.

I thought they fixed that in OB?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 184
02-05-2010, 08:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMasaki View Post
6/10.....

As in 6 months before this game is DEAD lol!
I have heard thousands of people say that about Star Wars Galaxies over the past 3 years.......I just logged in Star Wars Galaxies yesterday.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 185
02-05-2010, 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concord View Post
Not debating the ratings its how they go about reviewing games

Quote from the link I provided

"The reviewer hadn't even figured out the very basics of the game before he wrote about it. We checked the logs for the 2 accounts we gave Eurogamer and we found that one of them had around 3 minutes playtime, and the other had less than 2 hours spread out in 13 sessions."
You are aware that same idiot Tasos whose post you linked to, has disagreed with, and tried to shoot down in the same way, every reviewer that gave them a low score. Only when the majority of the readership disagree with a review should you question its validity, and one Greek halfwit does not constitute any kind of majority. Of course, Eurogamer could have paid us off to come here and agree with them, as Tasos suggested of some of the posters agreeing with their review of his game.

However, the majority in this thread believe the review of STO was reasonably accurate, so, is not possible that it really is only mediocre and deserving of 6/10. Atm, the Star Trek name is carrying some of the burden for maintaining interest in this title; if it were not for that, I suspect the server would have a far smaller population than it does, and fewer posters ready to defend it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 186
02-05-2010, 08:26 PM
I really hope that someone at Cryptic with decision-making abilities reads this thread in its entirety. They might dismiss the review, but to know that so many of their players (even those who love the game) pretty much agree with it is telling.

I do like the game, but the review is entirely fair. If this game didn't have nice little touches that make my trekkie heart glow, I would throw it in the garbage.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:43 PM.