PC Gamer - Latest Review of ESO

Phantax

Wouldn't like to choose if this is a fair review or a sneaky attack, but either way this certainly isn't going to do ESO any favours !

http://www.pcgamer.com/uk/2014/07/03/the-state-of-elder-scrolls-online-3-months-after-launch/

Oops ! Not exactly a glowing review !
@Zenimax did you guys not give the PC Gamer guys VIP seats at Quakecon or something?
You obviously did something to upset them...rofl

Liquid_Time

Seems like an accurate review to me. Sums up a lot.

Swampster

Seems like fair comment to me...

Loco_Mofo

Don't think it's a sneaky attack at all. Seemed like a pretty honest review about where the game is at right now and I tended to agree with most of it.

Needs work.

RazielSR

The comments are the worst part...

Loco_Mofo

RazielSR wrote: »

The comments are the worst part...

Ouch... Yeah, no holding back there.

Kulthax

I wonder why the site felt the need to give a 3 month review? I am not familiar with PC Gamer, so I am not aware if this is common practice for them or not.

Seems to me to be a deliberate attempt to persuade potential buyers from purchasing the game and at the same time, attempts to talk those who have cancelled subscriptions to come back. The article is a bit contradictory in my opinion.

edit: grammar, it's late.

Tandor

While acknowledging some awkward design decisions, and with fair comments about VR difficulty levels that ZOS have now indicated they're addressing, the main thrust of the review seems pretty positive both in terms of the quality of the game and the numbers playing it. They can see it having a decent future, and I think overall it's a very balanced and positive review.

Phantax

Kulthax wrote: »

I wonder why the site felt the need to give a 3 month review? I am not familiar with PC Gamer, so I am not aware if this is common practice for them or not.

Seems to me to be a deliberate attempt to persuade potential buyers from purchasing the game and at the same time, attempts to talk those who have cancelled subscriptions to come back. The article is a bit contradictory in my opinion.

edit: grammar, it's late.

You could always see that as being fair though, they are approaching it from both sides. Even though the review is more negative than positive.

Malpherian

The Pc Gammer poster, will be happy with the new Vet changes at least.

AlexDougherty

I buy PC Gamer, they are generally impartial and fair. They don't have an axe to grind, unless the game involves sharpening axes, and compare the game against what they think are it's competetors.

This seems to be a reasonable review, it isn't dwelling on the bugs, and isn't promising more than there is. People may or mar not agree with it, but the writer was giving his honest opinion.

Kulthax

Phantax wrote: »

Kulthax wrote: »

I wonder why the site felt the need to give a 3 month review? I am not familiar with PC Gamer, so I am not aware if this is common practice for them or not.

Seems to me to be a deliberate attempt to persuade potential buyers from purchasing the game and at the same time, attempts to talk those who have cancelled subscriptions to come back. The article is a bit contradictory in my opinion.

edit: grammar, it's late.

You could always see that as being fair though, they are approaching it from both sides. Even though the review is more negative than positive.

What is fair? That the game is not good enough to purchase but good enough to pay a monthly subscription for? That seems illogical to me.

I am not disagreeing with the writer, especially on his point about Veteran leveling. I feel that there are still things to work on but I also feel that Zenimax has done an outstanding job this past month in fixing and addressing a lot of issues. It would be nice to see those talked about more.

The writer just summarized what is constantly talked about here on these forums. I do not think it needed an article when anyone searching for information on the game can find that info easily enough.

The game is definitely worth investing in I feel.

Frenkthevile

Pc gamer is no more a serius magazine. Too many $ from Ea and Blizz i suppose...just look at how they value the latest CoD/AC trash at 80 $ each year...

dcincali

This game is painfully average and you can get the same experiences in a FTP game.

Frenkthevile

And srsly why the hll they're pushing so much the latest ncsoft failed themepark...i mean Wowstar. How he could possibly think that Wowstar and Teso share the same playerbase??? It's like HBO and Pixar omg.

mutharex

PC Gamer MMO "reviews":

WAR: 86%
SW:TOR: 85%
Wildstar: 89%

Nuff said

babylon

At the same time, this frustrated endeavor gives me an odd sensation of hope—if I thought ESO wasn’t capable of staying the course, I wouldn’t have bothered at all.

I've walked away from tons of games, but this is the one I believe could be so good. Despite all the terrible decisions and bad design ideas...if they start doing some of the things we've all been pointing at the game would be gold. Make it so ZOS.

Phantax

dcincali wrote: »

This game is painfully average and you can get the same experiences in a FTP game.

I'd say ESO is a little more than average. However (as to your other point) if something like GW2 had the same graphics/aesthetics as ESO then things would be very different !

steveb16_ESO46

Phantax wrote: »

Wouldn't like to choose if this is a review or a sneaky attack, but either way this certainly isn't going to do ESO any favours !

http://www.pcgamer.com/uk/2014/07/03/the-state-of-elder-scrolls-online-3-months-after-launch/

Oops ! Not exactly a glowing review !
@Zenimax did you guys not give the PC Gamer guys VIP seats at Quakecon or something?
You obviously did something to upset them...rofl

It's an extremely balanced and well-considered review informed by 400+ hours playing time.

tino.antoninieb17_ESO

That review is totally ok and ZOS should be pleased with the tone and content of such.

Enkil

This review is spot on...

fromtesonlineb16_ESO

mutharex wrote: »

PC Gamer MMO "reviews":

WAR: 86%
SW:TOR: 85%
Wildstar: 89%

Nuff said

Nothing said.

Those were initial reviews and I think it safe to say that they were valid given the lack of time the 'reviewer' spent .. and certainly the ESO score at that state was valid too.

This 3-month-later review is pretty objective, but I can see the ZOS fanboys won't like it because anything that isn't fawning over ESO is to be ignored.

mutharex

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

mutharex wrote: »

PC Gamer MMO "reviews":

WAR: 86%
SW:TOR: 85%
Wildstar: 89%

Nuff said

Nothing said.

Those were initial reviews and I think it safe to say that they were valid given the lack of time the 'reviewer' spent .. and certainly the ESO score at that state was valid too.

This 3-month-later review is pretty objective, but I can see the ZOS fanboys won't like it because anything that isn't fawning over ESO is to be ignored.

No, we just tend to ignore hysterical posts and people calling 'fanboi' anyone who doesn't act like that .....

badmojo

Malpherian wrote: »

The Pc Gammer poster, will be happy with the new Vet changes at least.

Not exactly, he even thinks 1-50 should have been more difficult.

That's not to say that the challenge isn't welcome—it encourages player interaction in a way the 1-50 experience seldom did—but it's the kind of thing that should have been in place from the beginning.

Flynch

Seems more like a reasonable review of ESO end-game after 3 months, rather than ESO in its entirety after 3 months.

Malpherian

dcincali wrote: »

This game is painfully average and you can get the same experiences in a FTP game.

Eh I'd say ESO has the best game concept. However Tera Online is Definitely the winner when it comes to armor design and rendering environments.

VagabondAngel

Fair article on the whole.

I think you should have to do an IQ test and personality profile before being allowed to post comments though.

Ser Lobo

It seems like a very fair review, all around. Liked it.

Comments, though, are the same as they always are: hateful anonymous internet trash. You aren't going to get any different from that. It's just part of the system.

Ser Lobo

Malpherian wrote: »

dcincali wrote: »

This game is painfully average and you can get the same experiences in a FTP game.

Eh I'd say ESO has the best game concept. However Tera Online is Definitely the winner when it comes to armor design and rendering environments.

I would definitely argue. Of course, I don't like anime-styled games, either. I much prefer ESO's graphic style, armor design (actual armor being worn, not two shoulder pieces and a bra for chicks), and environments.

Winnower

The author, like many other people, appears to continue to labor under the misapprehension that this is a gear driven game, which leads to me to question the author's interpretation of anything he talks about in the review.

sevcik.miroslaveb17_ESO

It was actualy the best review so far. Just look at the end ot the review. I acted just like him. I did plan not to have any alt, but I am just too tired with veteran content that I rather craft OP gear for my alt and level it slowly. Blue gear with purple daggers level 10 were overkill for whole auridon. NB class :-)