One person might say:"There's a steep learning curve, which makes the experience more worthwhile as you learn the tricks of the trade as you go along. It's a welcome change of pace from all the easy dumbed down shooters that plague the fps genre. So I give it a 9/10."
The other might say:"There's a steep learning curve, which makes the experience more painful, as you get your butt kicked by more experienced players time and time again. And I find getting killed by higher skilled players to be very frustrating. So I give it a 6/10."
Review is accurate. Be thankful they didn't take away points for performance (like a lot of reviews don't seem to have done).
I'm willing to bet that most reviewers are probably playing on an above average station so they won't notice the performance problems that the average user does, or at least not to the same extent.
6/10 for ns2 is fair to me ( i would rate it 6.5 however)
if i had low standards then i would expect 9/10 for ns2
i think there in lies the problem, Low standards has become the norm. For me, a 9/10 game means theres next to no room for improvement as the game is almost perfect.
Theres a laundry list of things that can be done to make NS2 better, and the devs have shown they have committed themselves to chipping away at that laundry list.
Gearbox could easily improve ACM if they wanted to, they could clear out all the bugs, replace the bad textures that snuck into the game, improve the AI, improve the alien animations. They could easily turn that 2/10 score into a 6/10. Will they do that however ? of course not .... because they are in it for the money, they are not in it to create great games.
I have the same complaint as everyone else, but I don't think he mentioned the performance at all. The performance unfortunately knocks it down a few pegs for the average gamer. I thought I had a pretty decent machine (3.8ghz) and I'm still choking down below 30fps on a 20 slot server on some maps. The complexity thing makes me facepalm. I suppose he should be clear about it, but subtracting points seems unnecessary. Do we really want CoD kids running around in here? They wouldn't even enjoy the game.
The guy is entitled to his opinion, yea the game was pretty hard to get into a first when I was getting owned all the time. But as I got better and started being able to actually contribute and understand it's gotten really good. I wouldn't say this is nearly the most complex game I've ever played, that distinction goes to Battle Cruiser Millennium or X3 which are probably the most confusing games I've ever played.
I think the number is less important than the opinion. He wasn't actually that harsh, compared to what he could have been. I've seen some reviews (for other games of course) that literally savaged the title.
He has raised the Achilles heel of NS2 though, the lack of a trainer. It's valid criticism.
I think the number is less important than the opinion. He wasn't actually that harsh, compared to what he could have been. I've seen some reviews (for other games of course) that literally savaged the title.
He has raised the Achilles heel of NS2 though, the lack of a trainer. It's valid criticism.
There are rookie servers though and most of the time people are happy to help you out in the game if you ask for help and are willing to learn.
Pretty funny how you all treat constructive criticism. The reviewer was nothing short of glowing about everything in the game except pointing out something that all of you, as veterans, are glossing over, and that's the incredibly bad new player experience.
He has raised the Achilles heel of NS2 though, the lack of a trainer. It's valid criticism.
There are rookie servers though and most of the time people are happy to help you out in the game if you ask for help and are willing to learn.
I don't disagree, even though I have seen people get treated pretty badly on rookie servers because they made a 'rookie mistake'.
However, despite that, a trainer would have made a huge difference imho. Yeah I know they didn't have the resources for it, so I'm not 'blaming' anyone for the lack of it in NS2. All I'm saying is that the lack of a trainer is a valid criticism. It's a weakness in NS2.
Still, I don't think that the game needs a trainer but just a better way to spread basic information. I think it's a no-go that you don't have any in-game information about the function of buildings, power nodes and so on. Either you have to ask another player or leave the game, read wikis or watch youtube videos - honestly, I think none of these options is much fun. I still remember me first playing time NS1 back than and one of the things that puzzled me most was first of all to find out what I'm supposed to do and secondly to find out what all the the buildings are good for. Unless you command, and a rookie just won't do that unless he accidentally hops into the hive/command chair, you won't be able to figure out what several buildings are good for as there is no tool-tip at all.
You might figure out that a crag heals you and you get ammunition at the armoury but then again, most of the stuff will be remain obscure like some sort of arcane knowledge you have to learn about in articles. I do not think that it is that time consuming to include some sort of tool-tips that plopp up if you hover with your mouse over a building, a cyst, a power node, another player, giving you basic information and some tips. I guess the game seriously needs more on-the-fly information in-game.
I do not agree with the 6/10 but I do agree with the basic criticism. For a game as unusual as NS2 it does not anything to explain itself to new players. If you want to learn NS2 by playing it you will have a very rough time. I think the game needs no trainer, it just needs to unfold and explain itself while you play it and not on wiki-pages and youtube videos. That means tool-tips, tips when you first encounter something new and if you get killed maybe some sort pop-up that tells you what has killed you, its strenghes and weaknesses. I can't imagine that it takes that much time to include some inserts like that but it would be a great help for sure.
To figure out new things yourself is great, no doubt about that. The point is, that there is no chance that you can figure out certain aspects in the game on your own while you play it. If you, just like most players would do it, want to learn the game by simply playing it there is no chance that you will ever find out what the strange cube (arms lab) is good for. To find that out, you have to ask another player but then it's a player telling you how to play the game, it's not the game. Second, you could go commander and would eventually get flamed by the whole team. Third, you could just quit and spent to rest of the day in some sort of clinic environment (explore mode) or watch videos how to play the game instead of just playing it. If you want players to learn a game on their own you have to make sure that this is actually possible - speaking of NS2, that's simply not the case. It might be fun to simply play around with game elements in a single player game but it is something completly different to do it in a multiplayer game where it is very likely that you get flamed, yelled at for simply having no clue what's going in.
Comments
The other might say:"There's a steep learning curve, which makes the experience more painful, as you get your butt kicked by more experienced players time and time again. And I find getting killed by higher skilled players to be very frustrating. So I give it a 6/10."
Perspectives... opinions...
I'm willing to bet that most reviewers are probably playing on an above average station so they won't notice the performance problems that the average user does, or at least not to the same extent.
not at their worst.
if i had low standards then i would expect 9/10 for ns2
i think there in lies the problem, Low standards has become the norm. For me, a 9/10 game means theres next to no room for improvement as the game is almost perfect.
Theres a laundry list of things that can be done to make NS2 better, and the devs have shown they have committed themselves to chipping away at that laundry list.
Gearbox could easily improve ACM if they wanted to, they could clear out all the bugs, replace the bad textures that snuck into the game, improve the AI, improve the alien animations. They could easily turn that 2/10 score into a 6/10. Will they do that however ? of course not .... because they are in it for the money, they are not in it to create great games.
He has raised the Achilles heel of NS2 though, the lack of a trainer. It's valid criticism.
There are rookie servers though and most of the time people are happy to help you out in the game if you ask for help and are willing to learn.
However, despite that, a trainer would have made a huge difference imho. Yeah I know they didn't have the resources for it, so I'm not 'blaming' anyone for the lack of it in NS2. All I'm saying is that the lack of a trainer is a valid criticism. It's a weakness in NS2.
You might figure out that a crag heals you and you get ammunition at the armoury but then again, most of the stuff will be remain obscure like some sort of arcane knowledge you have to learn about in articles. I do not think that it is that time consuming to include some sort of tool-tips that plopp up if you hover with your mouse over a building, a cyst, a power node, another player, giving you basic information and some tips. I guess the game seriously needs more on-the-fly information in-game.
I do not agree with the 6/10 but I do agree with the basic criticism. For a game as unusual as NS2 it does not anything to explain itself to new players. If you want to learn NS2 by playing it you will have a very rough time. I think the game needs no trainer, it just needs to unfold and explain itself while you play it and not on wiki-pages and youtube videos. That means tool-tips, tips when you first encounter something new and if you get killed maybe some sort pop-up that tells you what has killed you, its strenghes and weaknesses. I can't imagine that it takes that much time to include some inserts like that but it would be a great help for sure.
To figure out new things yourself is great, no doubt about that. The point is, that there is no chance that you can figure out certain aspects in the game on your own while you play it. If you, just like most players would do it, want to learn the game by simply playing it there is no chance that you will ever find out what the strange cube (arms lab) is good for. To find that out, you have to ask another player but then it's a player telling you how to play the game, it's not the game. Second, you could go commander and would eventually get flamed by the whole team. Third, you could just quit and spent to rest of the day in some sort of clinic environment (explore mode) or watch videos how to play the game instead of just playing it. If you want players to learn a game on their own you have to make sure that this is actually possible - speaking of NS2, that's simply not the case. It might be fun to simply play around with game elements in a single player game but it is something completly different to do it in a multiplayer game where it is very likely that you get flamed, yelled at for simply having no clue what's going in.