Ryzom

raynes wrote:Actually he did agree that his statement concerning when the game was released was misleading. Here is what was said:"

Originally Posted by raynes
"The North American Servers became live on the 20th. You .. The comment is misleading. After reading the way you expressed it, readers would walk away with the impression that Ryzom had a similar setup as FFXI did. "

Fair enough - that wasn't my intention. Also, the servers may have gone live on the 20th, but I certainly didn't see copies on shelves until long after that. But the important thing is that the substance of the statement is accurate - there are still missing features including some fundamental gameplay features mentioned in the manual (PvP, mounts, Kami hostility, siege battles) - that's all I was trying to highlight, as I decribed in further detail after that opening statement.

If all the review pointed to was a cock up in stated availability dates then I dont think all these posts would be so long. Its the other issues that he had to say that is whats really disturbed everyone. Those issues that dont seem to be coming out in these posts, the ones the addicts dont want ppl to talk about.

oh well, not so bad when he's able to stand up and say that he was wrong about something.

I'm happy he has taken the time to address the coments concerning his review.

Ok so since the guy is standing up for is poorly done review then its ok ? come on, the guy is only negative about the game, plus you can see he didnt make it passed mid 20s so around 15 hours of play(not enough to understand an mmorpg) and he didnt even respect the rating on GS. Heres my post from the american forum and from Ryzom@GS forum.

If you compare the score obtain by Ryzom to other mmorpgs on Gamespot, you see theres a problem.

The fact that the review was made by another reviewer is, by no mean, an excuse. Heres why :

Exemple : You make exam A with prof Y, and another guy with prof Z got a better score in exam A (the same exam) but had the exact same mistakes you did. Then you complain to the person in charge of your departement and he will revise your exam. This exemple already happened to me when i was in university.

So what im saying is, according to other score obtain by worse mmorpg, Ryzom score needs to be revised.


A reminder of a few score :

Ryzom got 5.6 / 10

Lineage 2 got 6 / 10 L2 is by far the worse mmorpg ive played, they were lots of balancing issus at release and the castle siege came with Chronicle 1 (patch 1...) about a month after release. The grind is the worst ive seen.

AC2 got 8.3 / 10 Ive tryed the free 14 days and i didnt even played all of them.

FFXI got 8.2 / 10 Its widely known that its one of the most over rated mmorpg. The levelling is slow, it always take 100 hours to get a new thing or a new lvl in harvesting/crafting and after lvl 40, you can wait for 2 hours and dont find any groups (no soloing in FFXI) even if your in a guild.

DaoC got 9 / 10 Truly a great game, but compared to ryzom i dont see why its so good and ryzom so bad.

AC got 8.8 / 10 Same as DaoC

EQ got 8.4 10 Fair review, i dont get why is Ryzom so far away.

Shadowbane got 7.9 / 10 whats so great about shadowbane vs Ryzom ?? ive tested it.... nothing new, usual PVP game with a "dark side".

AO got 7.6 / 10 I liked AO, but again why is Ryzom so far away ?



So yeah, he's standing up, but hes clearly wrong, he did get all the negative aspect of the game but were are the positives ?.... Hitler was standing up for his believes..... standing up doesnt mean your right, it just shows you assume your position and "think" your position is THE good one. And that is clearly not the case, you have the right not to like Ryzom, its all a matter of personnal opinion but some of us think the game as great potential (more then WoW or EQ2) and many reviewer have said so on other gaming sites.

The thing that is really pissing me off about the review is that GS is read by a lot of people. And Ryzom's north american server need some more suscriber, GS is not helping at all here... But they will surely help the big names such as WoW or EQ2.

Final word : Dont say the guy is right, i know the games is not perfect, but thats seeing only one side of it, the bad one. Any new mmorpg would have a low score if it was reviewed only in the first 2 weeks after release.

GS should hire a new guy to write another review after patch 1.

trosky wrote:Ok so since the guy is standing up for is poorly done review then its ok ? come on, the guy is only negative about the game, plus you can see he didnt make it passed mid 20s so around 15 hours of play(not enough to understand an mmorpg) and he didnt even respect the rating on GS. Heres my post from the american forum and from Ryzom@GS forum.

If you compare the score obtain by Ryzom to other mmorpgs on Gamespot, you see theres a problem.

The fact that the review was made by another reviewer is, by no mean, an excuse. Heres why :

Exemple : You make exam A with prof Y, and another guy with prof Z got a better score in exam A (the same exam) but had the exact same mistakes you did. Then you complain to the person in charge of your departement and he will revise your exam. This exemple already happened to me when i was in university.

So what im saying is, according to other score obtain by worse mmorpg, Ryzom score needs to be revised.


A reminder of a few score :

Ryzom got 5.6 / 10

Lineage 2 got 6 / 10 L2 is by far the worse mmorpg ive played, they were lots of balancing issus at release and the castle siege came with Chronicle 1 (patch 1...) about a month after release. The grind is the worst ive seen.

AC2 got 8.3 / 10 Ive tryed the free 14 days and i didnt even played all of them.

FFXI got 8.2 / 10 Its widely known that its one of the most over rated mmorpg. The levelling is slow, it always take 100 hours to get a new thing or a new lvl in harvesting/crafting and after lvl 40, you can wait for 2 hours and dont find any groups (no soloing in FFXI) even if your in a guild.

DaoC got 9 / 10 Truly a great game, but compared to ryzom i dont see why its so good and ryzom so bad.

AC got 8.8 / 10 Same as DaoC

EQ got 8.4 10 Fair review, i dont get why is Ryzom so far away.

Shadowbane got 7.9 / 10 whats so great about shadowbane vs Ryzom ?? ive tested it.... nothing new, usual PVP game with a "dark side".

AO got 7.6 / 10 I liked AO, but again why is Ryzom so far away ?



So yeah, he's standing up, but hes clearly wrong, he did get all the negative aspect of the game but were are the positives ?.... Hitler was standing up for his believes..... standing up doesnt mean your right, it just shows you assume your position and "think" your position is THE good one. And that is clearly not the case, you have the right not to like Ryzom, its all a matter of personnal opinion but some of us think the game as great potential (more then WoW or EQ2) and many reviewer have said so on other gaming sites.

The thing that is really pissing me off about the review is that GS is read by a lot of people. And Ryzom's north american server need some more suscriber, GS is not helping at all here... But they will surely help the big names such as WoW or EQ2.

Final word : Dont say the guy is right, i know the games is not perfect, but thats seeing only one side of it, the bad one. Any new mmorpg would have a low score if it was reviewed only in the first 2 weeks after release.

GS should hire a new guy to write another review after patch 1.

You must be a St Louis Cardinal fan.

raul75 wrote:You must be a St Louis Cardinal fan.

WOW
?????
Coocoo coocoo coocoo
Cocorico cocorico
woohoohoohoohoo
huh ?

A review that really pi$$ed me off was in PG gamer (europe), They reviewed 3 MMORPG's, Ryzom, C.of Heroe's and Lineage 2. They have been playing CoH for months, because I've been reading their views on it i know this for a fact. They reviewed a "boxed" copy of Ryzom (so they couldn't be playing it that long). They practically fell over themselves fawning all over CoH (most probably deserved) and their review was very in-depth. ryzom definately got the short end of the stick, the review came across as "wen't in had a lokk around, the patch stuff wasn't implenented so the game is cr@p" They didn't mention the guilds, the eco system (for crafting etc.) or the prospects that lay ahead as the game develop's (which they did for CoH). Basically they dammned Ryzom "with faint praise". Jeezuz Lineage 2 got a more in-depth review!

My point was that a couple of months were spent playing CoH and it got a very indepth review, Ryzom was penalised by somebody who couldn't have played more than a few hours, because they left out alot of stuff that is important to the game.
I have no problem with valid criticism of Ryzom, I nearly cancelled my account because of it's shortcomings, now I really like the game because I have hooked up with like-minded people and it has rejuvenated my gameplay.