Exactly. From the video footage I saw, it looks like they didn't even read the combat tooltips (lack of interrupts, bad use of blocking, constantly trying to kite things a la WoW and losing health for it). Really sub-par work overall.

And PC Gamer told us that Dragon Age II would be RPG of the decade ... As I recall, based largely on the reviewer's fascination with Isabella's briasts.

I disagree with them about ESO, as well.

I've noticed a common theme with many of these reviews is that the beginning areas aren't getting them hooked. I'd say that's a valid piece of criticism--it doesn't matter how awesome the game gets at Lv. 10+, if most players lose interest before then, we're in trouble.

The only authority is yourself. We saw disaster products that got great positive reviews before the release and vice-versa. You can decide for your own when the time comes..

exactly, couple of reviwers actually said, that they were a bit bogged down at early levels but when they reached 15-18 levels they had their eyes opened up and were happy as the game started for them at that point.

i think Zenimax if they want to show the world, about this aspect, they should imo.

like all the reviwers will compare ESO to existing MMOs, but here is the problem, ESO is not like the rest, it actually has walls, but those are not paywalls the walls will hit some people hard, those who just have comed from WoW and expect button smash to win it for them.... o my, how sad the day will be for them when those walls appear and they actually have to think and invest more to the actual class they are playing.

in a nutshell you actually have to work for advancement at some point. In other MMOs you just faceroll all the content thru. (HC raids 1st weeks not included in this)

many MMOs make the content easier, when players complain how hard it is. and trust me, when ESO launches the devs have a problem, do they cave in for the button smashers and make some of the content trivial and ruin it for the rest as then the game is too easy.

will be interesting to see.

If you only played the first few hours of WoW, you would never have predicted the game's future success. And playing it now is like putting yourself into a meat grinder for pleasure and profit.

The first few hours of play are meant to be a learning experience, and with the new combat and skill system, that makes a lot of sense. What doesn't make sense is a group of professional reviewers (they're paid for this) cutting off their gameplay after experiencing less than a third of the content available during beta.

Not gonna lie, watched about half and hoped these two would not have been total tools, but they are.

That wasn't a review, that was an opinion.

A review outlines what the game has to offer, with pros and cons. They were just saying, "well, that doesn't feel like Skyrim or Oblivion", without giving any insight as to what the game is about. They're not the only one's either. Most of the official (pre)reviews on the game, were just drawing on comparisons from previous games, without any information for the people that didn't get into the beta.

Nothing in any review I've watched or read, gives the game any weight, just some half-arsed comparable. How reviewers can talk for 15 minutes, without actually saying anything at all, is beyond me.

I'm not really trying to defend the reviewers. I think it's absurd that they're squandering this opportunity by not taking the time to see what the game really offers. But WOW launched in a different time, when there were fewer options (and certainly no major free options). I think turning a blind eye to this issue would be foolish on ZOS's part.

(For the record, I never made it past Lv. 15 in WoW because I was bored out of my wits--this was back before the Lich King expansion, so the new user experience is probably improved now. I can't go into detail about ESO without breaking NDA, but let's just say it was a better experience.)

I'm speaking as a huge fan of this game, not a detractor.

so another review saying "this is not the single player game i have been playing"

PCGamer? I used to love the magazine when I was overseas ten-ish years ago, but now? They gave Total War Rome 2 an 85/100. I think that about sums it up...

this +100

i actually think some of the reviewers shot themselves to the leg as giving silly reviews based on their low time investment to a game and thus giving false opinions is in my opinion not professional working.

I have to piggyback on this.. You want something that really grips you. That prison and starting island is a joke

Rolling in the back of a wagon to be executed (sky rim) or washing up onto a beach trapped in a fishing net after have being dropped from the sky by a giant red hand into the ocean and then seeing a beheading at the docks does it for me (Ultima 8 Pagan)

they were paid marketing money to do so. clear as day, as like the devs said, they had more money to invest to total war rome 2 but like we now know, the money went to marketing instead of making a good game.

So after watching the whole vid, it can be summed up as "This isn't skyrim 2.0"

They even complain that there was some minor server lag. Really? An online game has server lag?

Yes, we get it. It isn't Skyrim 2.0.

And please tell me they played on hours outside of the actual stress test. Because complaining about server lag during is a stress test is beyond idiotic (and really the stress test went extremely well)

Although if you're not hooked because you clicked through the dialogue that's kind of on you, particularly as a journalist who should be looking to see what's there. Text may not be your thing, but a professional should be able to set aside that sort of personal preference to see if a game is good of its kind. Of course their latest issue featured Wildstar as one of their must-play games of 2014 so they may not have been too eager to like ESO.

Well seeing the video they put up, in 3rd person yes it looks like a generic MMO. But the point about Elder Scrolls games is to play in first person. I will be more than happy if I can play 1st person. What worries me I read a review which says the game works better in 3rd person. Which got me worried because considering they initially didn't plan the first person view..I hope it wasn;t put in as an afterthought!!

its part of a bigger storyline, only seeing the very start+tutorial and then giving judgement is a bit silly.

Know what that entire review sounded like to me? "I want a single player game waaaaaah!"

This is an MMO. And one of the best I have EVER seen.

As much as I like my first-person view in the single-player games, I certainly don't find it to be the defining characteristic of an Elder Scrolls game. And the gameplay doesn't magically change when you switch views. It's entirely an aesthetic choice.

the elder scrolls games are fun in 3rd or first person.

And this is why we all cant have nice things...

You should be naturally intrigued by a combo of visual and situational context ..not have text and lore crammed down your throat

In the right setting you'll follow that anyway and feel vested in the game

I don't think that's necessarily the problem, though. Some reviewers obviously clicked through the text, but others seem to have played through those starting quests and thought they were ho-hum. I think there's a major factor behind that, but since I can't break NDA to explain it, I'll quote someone who can:


Well, I can't break NDA, but I suppose I could just quote someone who can:


From the http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/126250-elder-scrolls-online-playtest-the-good-the-bad-the-awesome.html (emphasis mine).

While I certainly wouldn't assert that the quests are more engaging in some alliances' starting areas than others, one might guess that based on the above quote. I think that many reviewers' opinions often came down to which alliance they happened to play.

This video is more informative than PC Gamer's review on ESO;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrBj3u5dPgM

Enjoy.