Ryzom

Maybe the reviewer just had enough time to check the content that was promised on the box back-cover and inside the manual - that would explain his dissapointment.

Btw: critics on this forum get told over and over to shut up and play or leave because EVERY MMORPG offers bugs instead promised content at release and he should have known better.

But even a "pro" reviewer like the one writing for IGN doesn't seem to accept that...

IMO the IGN report is basically accurate. There are problems with this game, and it will take time to fix bugs and implement other parts of the game. That applies to all new games and, in fairness, Nevrax is one of the better releases in the MMORPG world.

However, the report falls short of describing the feel or the concept of the game, presumably due to short play time. Nor does the review make any mention of the good customer service -- a rarity in the MMORPG industry. The report is more like an initial impression than a proper review.

When one considers how new Ryzom is, and how much is yet to be implemented, the scoring is encouraging. Those are basically good scores, and can only go up as Nevrax implements more of the game. For myself, I only ever rated IGN as semi-reliable anyways.

Here's another short review that might be worth looking into.

http://www.gamezone.com/gzreviews/r23461.htm

spaaz69 wrote:Yeah, but they weren't too impressed with it :\

Heh, also considering the fact that while reading the review and looking at their screenshot, I was treated to several EQ2 ads.... I think their loyalties lie elsewhere already.

jdomack wrote:Heh, also considering the fact that while reading the review and looking at their screenshot, I was treated to several EQ2 ads.... I think their loyalties lie elsewhere already.

Almost makes one wonder if advertising budgets and ratings are linked

jdomack wrote:Heh, also considering the fact that while reading the review and looking at their screenshot, I was treated to several EQ2 ads.... I think their loyalties lie elsewhere already.

Yeah, thats why I stated in another post that a lot of the reviews from the bigger sites like IGN and Gamespot are bunk because they are bought out. Gamespot I swear is in bed with EA and as you stated IGN is jumpin up and down on that matress with SoE having instead of pillow fights money bag fights.

Didn't a company just get busted for that with a review of the game Driver?

I can't remember the details but basically the reviewer was payed to give a review that was obviously *way* more than the game deserved.

Talk about losing your credibility in a matter of minutes...

neiana wrote:4 out of 5 stars is 8 of 10, FYI.

IGN = 7.9

- N

They're different scales, though. 4 out of 5 stars is pretty high for Gamespy, but 7.9 is on the low end of average for IGN.

On the division, 4/5 could be anywhere from 8.0 to 9.9, depending on wheither you round or drop decimals. All of this isn't entirely relevant though, since it was the content of the review that was getting criticized, not the end score.