Major issues with the game - by Angry Joe

Arreyanne

Thing that tickles me is that anytime someone posts a negative review about a game its always the same thing on the forums .

If you disagree who cares, if you agree who cares

reggielee

jeeezus, this thread still going on with the same pro/con people all repeating themselves ad nauseum?

fiachsidhe

I really like the game. I'm enjoying it. But Joe is right about 80-90% of his points.
Zenimax, for all their prelaunch preening, expensive CGI trailers, and wild lofty goals, half assed a huge amount of this game. and ignored so many bugs in beta. Bugs that all but destroyed the economy. Uninspired seems to be the running theme of ZoS designers.

Half ass everything and hope the modding community can save their game, like their single player RPGs.

From armor designs/models (look at those hip plates just dangling in mid air!), to textures, to voice actors (Stop talking about your mother's "eggtooth" It sounds disgusting!), the "minimalist" UI (no numbers on bars? really?), the unbelievably lazy map design and markings. ESO has a lot of good ideas executed in the most joyless and needlessly limiting ways as possible.

It has tons of potential, but I didn't pay $80+15/month for a great game in some indeterminant future

I hate going into dungeons for quests and hitting the boss once at the end of someone else's epic battle and completing it before I even begin. Or seeing the giant boss corpse piles surrounded by gold seller bots.

So many addons right now, are simply to compensate for all the corners the designers cut.
I shouldn't need to install a player made add-on that simply allows me to search the guild stores by name, or narrow down categories. It's asinine!

If this wasn't Elder Scrolls based, I honestly don't know if I'd be here. He's right, there are free to play games that put this one to shame, in terms of content, and functionality. This is a AAA game but it doesn't feel like it.

Gidorick

I 100% agree with grouping. I complained about the grouping mechanics every chance I got in the BETA surveys but it's pretty much the same. Grouping needs to be a partnership not... er... whatever purpose grouping serves now.

Sarenia

reggielee wrote: »

jeeezus, this thread still going on with the same pro/con people all repeating themselves ad nauseum?

Ruebs

ChairGraveyard wrote: »

An honest assessment of the game is exactly what WhinyJoe seems incapable of providing, given that his entire motivation is view-baiting for ad revenue.

I'm no fan of Joe. But i agree with almost everything he's said on this review, as do many of my friends, guild members and the majority of people I've spoken with.
So it IS an honest assessment of ESO. He brought up real and relevant problems with the game and it's mechanics. If his opinion differs from yours, well that's tough titties. But it's an opinion shared by a large group of people -Angry Joe fans or not-.

Loxy37

I didn't know who this guy was until yesterday, kept asking and people kept saying that I wasn't serious, everyone know Angry Joe. I think he does produce some valid points but overall I think this guy is one of the biggest idiots I have ever had the displeasure of listening too in my 43 years, his voice grates on my nerves!

Ruebs

Etchesketch wrote: »

d0e1ow wrote: »

Etchesketch wrote: »

Shimond wrote: »

Etchesketch wrote: »

Shimond wrote: »

Etchesketch wrote: »

Yeah. it's all fun and games till the guy you choose to review your game gives his honest opinion and it's not that good.

Wait, someone chose him to review the game and this is just his honest opinion? He's not like, I dunno, doing it for views and ad revenue?

What a selfless guy, truly a noble heart.

Nobody said this..

Keep it up, you continue to prove the point.

So you're incapable of reading your own posts?

Sure I can... but I never said what you said I did. I never said he didn't want views or advertising.

I'm saying, he gave his honest opinion and I agree with almost everything he said. His advertising has nothing to do with it.

But feel free to continue with the typical attacking response instead of actually telling us why you feel he was wrong on his points..

Still waiting.

He's wrong because he overstates the facts and blows them vastly out of proportion. Listening to his review, you'd think, short of the PvP, that the game was entirely broken and near non-functional. His review is trash.

He glosses over the pros and spends the entire time bitching about what he doesn't like. I get it, the game isn't perfect, big surprise, but do we need the entire video to have that message conveyed to us? His review wasn't balanced in any sense of the word. You could hardly call it a review honestly.

What you fail to understand isn't that he is seeking views for money, but that he shapes his content to gain those views. He appeal to an audience, a specific one, to make his money. The trend for almost a year now has been to bash on ESO, and he joined the bandwagon as soon as he decided he disliked their subscription model. He's been down on the game and nitpicking it to pieces since. Him giving it a poor review was not a surprise, and his views match those of the inane rabble rousers perfectly.

"I don't like subs. This game has bugs. Game is unplayable. It sucks!" He's literally throwing a ninny-fit because console boy isn't getting Skyrim for free.

You're free to dislike subs, but keep it out of the review of the game's content as it has nothing to do with the game's content. Yes, the game has bugs, but they are not as overstated as he makes them seem. The game has a lot of good qualities that he has failed to mention or even make a respectable note of.

"Combat is fun I guess..." doesn't cut it.

His review is a joke. He's a joke. He's a turd as far as I'm concerned. Drunk or sober, the dude us a fanboy turd.

If you want to have it further illustrated to you how unbalanced and clueless he is about this genre, go watch his review of GW2. You'd think that that game was literally the second coming of Christ. Once again, he eschews balance and fairness for an over the top one-sided review, because that's what is audience wants. I'd suspect his audience are mostly very young, and young minds love that kind of over the top stuff.

"THIS GAME SUXXXXX" contrasted with the sometimes "THIS IS BEST GAME EVARR GOTYYYY" is totally the kind of hype talk that teenagers and kids use and that people selling products (Joe is selling a character!) look to appeal to.

The guys who gave fair and balanced reviews aren't getting near the attention, why? Because people like spectacles, and these reviewers didn't make a spectacle of themselves.

Ever heard the term "lowest common denominator"? Look it up.

Nothing but insults and opinion.

You didn't point to anything he said that was factually wrong. He had video proof of all his problems with the game and it matched almost point for point with my problems with the game.

Still waiting.

Exactly! Even if Joe was a bit rash, (And i don't think he was) all his issues were real and relevant problems with ESO.

I for one am not hating the game. But I'm far from loving it.

Ruebs

(Original Post deleted) PG version below.

Even as i type this, I can feel the fan boys starting to rustle in their basements.
I can hear them zip-up their fly's after a prolonged session of 'touching it' over their Imperial Edition Molag Bal statue, and waddle over to their keyboards to resume their assault on anyone who speaks a negative word about their precious game.

With that said^...

I usually don't much like Joe. But this review, i agree with 90%.
I However HATED the Zerg-fest PvP. It was completely unbalanced and very unrewarding. Especially after enduring a 5-10 min horse ride just to get to the battle. VR player's dominate, and lower levels are nothing but cannon fodder. OP abilities like 'Broken Talons', Shield Bash and a few others, make anyone who isn't using them almost useless.
You get NOTHING worth while from killing a player which equates little or no excitement and eats away the competitive feel that is imperative to PVP.

I was so excited for this game, i forked out $2100 for a new computer in preparation for ESO. Bought the Imperial Edition for $120 AUD and invested hours apon hours into theory-crafting, only to find a boring, tedious, dysfunctional game.

fiachsidhe

jimredtalon wrote: »

*cough
I am about to *** some of yall off.
Um...
Any one else get the feeling that they almost built this game to work as a F2P game, like they were getting ready from the start to make the change.
I mean the guild market, the inventory, the horses, the crafting, the treasure maps, and you know if its F2P the lock pick will become impossible to find and you will have to buy them. Hell the game is a sub game yet it already has two forms of currency already. Honestly this is the only worry i have.

Everything about this game screams:

1. Zenimax half-assed everything.
2. They knew it wasn't ready for release.
3. They already included a fully functioning cash shop.
4. They plan to go free to play as soon as subs, and IE/Box purchases no longer provide them optimal $$$

Kililin

fiachsidhe wrote: »

4. They plan to go free to play as soon as subs, and IE/Box purchases no longer provide them optimal $$$

I dont think so, that time is probably now, sad as it is.
But imho it will not happen until after console release.

rager82b14_ESO

If you don't agree with at least the bug parts of what he said. You are a blind fanboy. Enough said.

Jeremy

rager82b14_ESO wrote: »

If you don't agree with at least the bug parts of what he said. You are a blind fanboy. Enough said.

He exaggerated the bugs.

TicToc

Jeremy wrote: »

rager82b14_ESO wrote: »

If you don't agree with at least the bug parts of what he said. You are a blind fanboy. Enough said.

He exaggerated the bugs.

No, he didn't. He overly focused on the negative aspects, but the bugs he mentioned (and showed) are very real and very prevalent.

Jeremy

TicToc wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

rager82b14_ESO wrote: »

If you don't agree with at least the bug parts of what he said. You are a blind fanboy. Enough said.

He exaggerated the bugs.

No, he didn't. He overly focused on the negative aspects, but the bugs he mentioned (and showed) are very real and very prevalent.

I have never fallen through the world. Not once. Yet after watching the video you would think it was a regular part of the gameplay.

And overly-focusing on the negative aspects (as you put it) is a form of exaggeration.

jimredtalon

You know I think he was spot on with almost every thing. But almost every thing that is/was broken can be fixed and I am okay with that. BUT the phasing and grouping problems are a flaw that is inherant in the games design so that can't be fixed, or wont be for a long time to come.

So I think Britney said it best.
http://youtu.be/Hbw-GZsR_bc

TicToc

Jeremy wrote: »

I have never fallen through the world. Not once. Yet after watching the video you would think it was a regular part of the gameplay.

And overly-focusing on the negative aspects (as you put it) is a form of exaggeration.

No. Exaggerating means making a problem sound much worse than it is. That is not what he did. He just spent most of his time talking about the negative aspects without balancing it with positive aspects of the game. It doesn't take away from the severity of the bugs.

And frankly, I did not get the impression that he was trying to imply that falling through the world was a regular part of game play. He just said that the bugs were sometimes hilarious, and i think that was just added because he thought it was a funny bug. The same with the voice acting one where the voice seemed so out of place with the NPC. It is not a common occurrence, as most of the voice acting is great, as he mentioned, but that one was kind of odd and amusing.

However, most of the bugs and situations he mentioned ARE very real and frequently occurring issues. I disagree with his assessment of what it means for the future of the game, but it is the situation at this time.

Jeremy

TicToc wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

I have never fallen through the world. Not once. Yet after watching the video you would think it was a regular part of the gameplay.

And overly-focusing on the negative aspects (as you put it) is a form of exaggeration.

No. Exaggerating means making a problem sound much worse than it is. .

And he did exactly that by overly focusing on the negative.

He made small problems seem much worse than they really were by hyping them up and acting as if they were routine parts of the game.

You even admit he provided no balance. Which basically means he exaggerated the bad parts of the game, but neglected to dwell on the good.

It was a bias review that was more interested in making the game look bad and making fun of it rather than providing a balanced assessment of its pros and cons.

TicToc

Jeremy wrote: »

He made small problems seem much worse than they really were by hyping them up and acting as if they were routine parts of the game.

You even admit he provided no balance. Which basically means he exaggerated the bad parts of the game, but neglected to dwell on the good.

It was a video designed to point out the problems in the game. It doesn't have to be balanced. Should it be? Yes, but it doesn't have to be. And while the overly negative focus may make the overall game seem worse, many of the problems he mentioned are, most certainly, routine parts of the game.

Jeremy

TicToc wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

He made small problems seem much worse than they really were by hyping them up and acting as if they were routine parts of the game.

You even admit he provided no balance. Which basically means he exaggerated the bad parts of the game, but neglected to dwell on the good.

It was a video designed to point out the problems in the game. It doesn't have to be balanced. Should it be? Yes, but it doesn't have to be. And while the overly negative focus may make the overall game seem worse, many of the problems he mentioned are, most certainly, routine parts of the game.

I never said he had to be fair to the game. I am just pointing out that he wasn't fair and exaggerated the game's faults.

And many of the bugs he devoted small movies to I have never encountered. So at least from my perspective and in the context of my own experiences, they are not routine parts of the game.

jimredtalon

Jeremy wrote: »

TicToc wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

He made small problems seem much worse than they really were by hyping them up and acting as if they were routine parts of the game.

You even admit he provided no balance. Which basically means he exaggerated the bad parts of the game, but neglected to dwell on the good.

It was a video designed to point out the problems in the game. It doesn't have to be balanced. Should it be? Yes, but it doesn't have to be. And while the overly negative focus may make the overall game seem worse, many of the problems he mentioned are, most certainly, routine parts of the game.

I never said he had to be fair to the game. I am just pointing out that he wasn't fair and exaggerated the game's faults.

And many of the bugs he devoted small movies to I have never encountered. So at least from my perspective and in the context of my own experiences, they are not routine parts of the game.

If I may interject, He is a YouTube personality so the only thing he has to do is be entertaining to his audience. Also saying that bugs that you personally did not experience could not be common place is very narrow minded, quite similar to me saying there are only white people in Canada since they are the only ones I have met, or Washington state does not exist because I have never been there.

Jeremy

jimredtalon wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

TicToc wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

He made small problems seem much worse than they really were by hyping them up and acting as if they were routine parts of the game.

You even admit he provided no balance. Which basically means he exaggerated the bad parts of the game, but neglected to dwell on the good.

It was a video designed to point out the problems in the game. It doesn't have to be balanced. Should it be? Yes, but it doesn't have to be. And while the overly negative focus may make the overall game seem worse, many of the problems he mentioned are, most certainly, routine parts of the game.

I never said he had to be fair to the game. I am just pointing out that he wasn't fair and exaggerated the game's faults.

And many of the bugs he devoted small movies to I have never encountered. So at least from my perspective and in the context of my own experiences, they are not routine parts of the game.

If I may interject, He is a YouTube personality so the only thing he has to do is be entertaining to his audience. Also saying that bugs that you personally did not experience could not be common place is very narrow minded, quite similar to me saying there are only white people in Canada since they are the only ones I have met, or Washington state does not exist because I have never been there.

You are missing the point.

If the bugs were as prevalent as he was making out I would have experienced them. It has nothing to do with being narrow-minded. So stop trying to make this personal.

And he wasn't entertaining. So he failed at that as well. So all in all, a complete failure as a review. Just a childish rant designed to tear down the game.

But your interjection is noted ^^ And I highly doubt many people fall through the world on this game at a regular basis. I think I can safely make that claim without being narrow-minded.

Greydog

Just because you don't encounter bugs doesn't mean they don't exist. I haven't encountered any either but I certainly do believe all the reports I've seen. Video proof of it seems pretty irrefutable IMO.

Jeremy

Greydog wrote: »

Just because you don't encounter bugs doesn't mean they don't exist. I haven't encountered any either but I certainly do believe all the reports I've seen. Video proof of it seems pretty irrefutable IMO.

I never said the bugs didn't exist. I said he exaggerated them.

You are arguing with me over words I never said.

jimredtalon

Jeremy wrote: »

jimredtalon wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

TicToc wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

He made small problems seem much worse than they really were by hyping them up and acting as if they were routine parts of the game.

You even admit he provided no balance. Which basically means he exaggerated the bad parts of the game, but neglected to dwell on the good.

It was a video designed to point out the problems in the game. It doesn't have to be balanced. Should it be? Yes, but it doesn't have to be. And while the overly negative focus may make the overall game seem worse, many of the problems he mentioned are, most certainly, routine parts of the game.

I never said he had to be fair to the game. I am just pointing out that he wasn't fair and exaggerated the game's faults.

And many of the bugs he devoted small movies to I have never encountered. So at least from my perspective and in the context of my own experiences, they are not routine parts of the game.

If I may interject, He is a YouTube personality so the only thing he has to do is be entertaining to his audience. Also saying that bugs that you personally did not experience could not be common place is very narrow minded, quite similar to me saying there are only white people in Canada since they are the only ones I have met, or Washington state does not exist because I have never been there.

You are missing the point.

If the bugs were as prevalent as he was making out I would have experienced them. It has nothing to do with being narrow-minded. So stop trying to make this personal.

And he wasn't entertaining. So he failed at that as well. So all in all, a complete failure as a review.

But your interjection is noted ^^ And I highly doubt many people fall through the world on this game at a regular basis. And I think I can safely make that claim without being narrow-minded.

The fact that you say a bug must be experienced by you personally for you to recognize it as a common thing is the issue. I have never had gay sex but I hear its a common thing in society and I can accept that.

Also I said entertaining to his audience which you clearly are not, pay attention.

But you have made it very clear you will just keep spouting false redirect in the hopes you will win some argument that you lost a long time ago, probably due to a need to feel superior because of a deep seeded inferiority complex. so I'm out. GL

Feel free to have the last word I will let you.

Edit* Oh almost forgot, fell thru the world 3 times in beta and twice after release so.

TicToc

OK, I can understand that if you don't PvP and don't go to Cyrodiil, you may not be familiar with the ridiculous load times that often happen and the frequent crashes. I can understand if you don't group while questing that you would not be familiar with all the bugs surrounding that. Maybe you don't go to group dungeons often and see that many times you can't complete the dungeon because they are bugged. Maybe you have never gone to a public dungeon so you have never seen the big mound of people all piled up on the boss's spawn point so that it dies almost the instant it spawns....and on and on.

I can understand not seeing some of those thing, but i would find it hard to believe that you have not seen any of them. More importantly, i would have to cry foul if you were to claim that you have not seen quest objectives, on a regular basis, that were missing, or not intractable because they are out of phase. That is something that everyone has to deal with multiple times a night, and logging out of the game and back in to try and fix has been accepted as part of the regular routine.

Individually, they are forgivable this soon after launch, but the shear volume and regularity of them are beginning to wear people down.

mutharex

jimredtalon wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

TicToc wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

He made small problems seem much worse than they really were by hyping them up and acting as if they were routine parts of the game.

You even admit he provided no balance. Which basically means he exaggerated the bad parts of the game, but neglected to dwell on the good.

It was a video designed to point out the problems in the game. It doesn't have to be balanced. Should it be? Yes, but it doesn't have to be. And while the overly negative focus may make the overall game seem worse, many of the problems he mentioned are, most certainly, routine parts of the game.

I never said he had to be fair to the game. I am just pointing out that he wasn't fair and exaggerated the game's faults.

And many of the bugs he devoted small movies to I have never encountered. So at least from my perspective and in the context of my own experiences, they are not routine parts of the game.

If I may interject, He is a YouTube personality so the only thing he has to do is be entertaining to his audience. Also saying that bugs that you personally did not experience could not be common place is very narrow minded, quite similar to me saying there are only white people in Canada since they are the only ones I have met, or Washington state does not exist because I have never been there.

Most of the bugs he mentions happen between the chair and the keyboard....
He doesn't know what he is saying or doing half of the time

Jeremy

jimredtalon wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

jimredtalon wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

TicToc wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

He made small problems seem much worse than they really were by hyping them up and acting as if they were routine parts of the game.

You even admit he provided no balance. Which basically means he exaggerated the bad parts of the game, but neglected to dwell on the good.

It was a video designed to point out the problems in the game. It doesn't have to be balanced. Should it be? Yes, but it doesn't have to be. And while the overly negative focus may make the overall game seem worse, many of the problems he mentioned are, most certainly, routine parts of the game.

I never said he had to be fair to the game. I am just pointing out that he wasn't fair and exaggerated the game's faults.

And many of the bugs he devoted small movies to I have never encountered. So at least from my perspective and in the context of my own experiences, they are not routine parts of the game.

If I may interject, He is a YouTube personality so the only thing he has to do is be entertaining to his audience. Also saying that bugs that you personally did not experience could not be common place is very narrow minded, quite similar to me saying there are only white people in Canada since they are the only ones I have met, or Washington state does not exist because I have never been there.

You are missing the point.

If the bugs were as prevalent as he was making out I would have experienced them. It has nothing to do with being narrow-minded. So stop trying to make this personal.

And he wasn't entertaining. So he failed at that as well. So all in all, a complete failure as a review.

But your interjection is noted ^^ And I highly doubt many people fall through the world on this game at a regular basis. And I think I can safely make that claim without being narrow-minded.

The fact that you say a bug must be experienced by you personally for you to recognize it as a common thing is the issue.

I never said that. In fact I was very careful to limit what I said to my own experiences. But apparently that effort was lost on you.

But am I suppose to assume it's a serious bug because Angry Joe rants about it?

No thanks.

I prefer to play the game myself to decide rather a bug is serious or not. And it's a good thing too. Because if I had taken Angry Joe's review to heart, I would have never bought the game because I would be afraid I would constantly be falling into the earth and dying.

That is the real issue here. It's not me or my personality. It's the false impression this dishonest reviewer gives about the game. He portrays it as being a buggy unplayable mess. And it's not.

And falling through the world twice is in 3 weeks is hardly what I would consider common and routine. Big deal.

Knootewoot

Just like he hated Aliens Colonial Marines which was also great. Yeah yeah it was nothing like the E3 demo movie. But c'mon. 4 player co-op, many versus modes which are great and aliens. I have 160+ hours in it and had my share of fun.
AJ is just disappointed from what he expected. He is not a mmo players, he was just expecting Skyrim 2 the online game. Well i knew what was to be expected. Also i have not encountered the issues he mentioned except some. And like all mmo they will get fixed. Of course we want a perfect game right from the start. But i have played many mmo's and only a few where perfect. And some where perfect from the start until you got of the noob island (AoC).

Don't follow Joe. Yes i love his reviews, but more the way he acts. Make up your own mind. Many could play beta and i was happy with it=pre-ordered.

luckyjoemcb14_ESO

I really did not want to even bother commenting on this whole thing but after reading through 20 pages ( really? 20 pages of this?) I feel like I would like to chime in here.

WARNING! Wall of text incoming!

Things Angry Joe had a valid point about .
1. Bugs, Yup this game has some, he also says that that is pretty much expected from a new launched game. ( this was probably missed by most since it was a 5 sec blurb in his rant) Bugs get fixed.

2. Grouping , While I personally have never had a problem with this ( Group up, use go to player Violla) I also tend to play solo beacuse I like to explore, read and just generally be immersed. I dont have much experience in the pro's or Con's but it is a common complaint I hear so I will cede the point.

3.Misplaced Voice actors. Yeah that tree needs voice coaching lessons, though If we had not been indoctrinated to think all trees that can speak should have some deep earthy tone, this would be less of a problem ( Respect for soft voiced tree peeeps!)

4. The bots in the bottom of public dungeons. This one annoys me to no end. But I also know that Zeni is working on it and doing sweeping bot bans, it is just difficult to keep up. Also I have noticed that there are manned "bots" now. Multi boxed farmers with one person controlling 5 characters. Same names, same MO but they wander the dungeon, and will respond with gibberish if you whisper them.

Things Angry Joe kind of had a point about but probably exagerated.
1. Horses are expensive. Yup they are, They are much less expensive if you quest , stick with just a couple professions, and sell stuff. by level 20 ish I could afford to buy a new horse. If JOE had actually made it higher than lvl 15 and been doing quests and saving gold he would have likely figured this out rather than that completely absurd argument about mobs dropping 1-2 gold. Are you kidding me? its a freakin skeleton you are lucky it even had that much on it.

2. The Economy , I love how much of a hot button topic this one is. The more I think of it the more I wonder why people want it. Most MMO's I have seen The "Economy" Boils down to this, Over inflated prices on materials and services , people could just as easily get for themselves with a small amount of effort. The prices are high enough to more than make up for time spent, but low enough to encourage laziness amongst the population in regards to mat farming. To me I could care less that people who want to shill lazy folks cannot make money as easily. Also the fact that found gear is often inferior to crafed gear makes most of this argument moot, as I can easily craft a blue set myself and be happy. Besides the only thing to realy spend money on is improving my horse, or repairs. So this one could go above since for some people it is important but for me and many like me , Who Freakin cares?

3. NPC's and lack of immersion. This one is kind of...a dark tunnel filled with invisible bear traps. Firstly you have the NPS's that fight each other. His complaint being they dont help you , and greet you etc. Ok I get greeting you in combat is bad, but they are likely reused resources and are scripted to greet you when you enter a certain perimeter. I say reused since when you complete the combat area phase they are then placed in a non combat area phase so them greeting you should be expected. One of the complaints is that the npc's dont help you fight, and that would be valid argument if, there were not so many complaints about mobs dying in one hit. This complaint I saw a lot in beta and my guess is that they removed any ability for friendly npc's to do damage so that once the rush to VR is over you dont enter an area just to find all of the mobs slaughtered by the npc's. There is far more to this "issue" than that but when you take into account he was pretty obviously drunk ( which he tried to play off as being drained of enthusiasm) And was not following the story of the quests ( The boss was just a bear that turned into a daedra blah blah blah. That daedra was actually just the source of the corruption, not every enemy should be a plot device.) It is not hard to see why he was not immersed.

Things that were pretty much just Joe screaming his own opinion about.

Damn near everything else. It is pretty obvious Joe is like a mass of people now days who expect to be able to enjoy their hobby for free. It may be because I am older, or maybe just because my parents raised me differently but I believe that I get what I pay for. I believe that if I want a top shelf gaming experience I am going to have to pay for it, and that if I am going to be provided a service , if I want that service to be at least reasonably decent that I am going to have to compensate the people providing this service. Now some will detract me here and say Zeni's CS is deplorable etc etc. For me that has not been the case, so I will continue to pay a fee for what I consider decent/good customer service for a game that I feel warrants my 15$ every month as long as I feel that it keeps up the expectations I have for it, including regular maintenance, new content , bug fixes, etc. Which right now I feel ESO does.

Imperial edition ....are you freaking kidding me? Just because you arent handed the same toys as someone who ponied up the $$ does not mean its some secret conspiracy to screw you. It means you get what you pay for. The ability to play in any faction as any race was a pre order bonus for those who were willing to support Zeni before the game even released. Like most pre order bonuses it is more in the realm of a thank you for taking a chance on us here is a little something extra. Likewise the imperial race and horse etc, is another thank you for taking your hard earned money and going above and beyond to show your support of this game. Is there some magic advantage to having the imperial race? Nope. Is there an advantage to having a 1g horse? sure, you can get around 15% faster a few levels earlier. I could rant more but in the end that is just what it is..a rant and both sides are guilty of it so Im going to let it drop.

I know I missed some things like his almost slavish devotion to pvp, and his skewed view about the world, and his bewildering opinion about the ui ( since he wines about immersion , Damage numbers are not as necessary as everyone thinks they are.) But Im bored with this now.

TLDR: Joe made a couple valid points then whined and cried and greatly exaggerated everything else. Also this is an opinion piece, a critique of a critic as it were. As always damn near everything above is my opinion which I am entitled to, as you are to yours. If after reading this review you suffer an errection lasting more than four hours call your doctor immediately after calling all of your friends and bragiing about it for at least another hour.