Gamespot gives 7.9 points to PLANETSIDE...ahh

[Condrah]

And I though Planetside was going to make record and get 9.6 or something....o well


http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/planetside/review.html

[TekDragon]

And I though Planetside was going to make record and so some 9.6 or something

Why the hell would you think this? Pretty graphics do not equal a high score. If you think this you need to take a look at how Asherons Call 2 is doing.

GameSpot has a policy where they do not review betas. Personally, im suprised they even reviewed the game.

Oh well. Its good to see a game reviewer actually do some thinking about how the game design compares to market standards and how much of a lasting fun factor it has. Seems like most reviewers out there go "Duh, this game is purty! I give it a 9!"

[Glaynor]

Well, I agree with their technical review of the game, especially lately. However, the waiting around does not really happen that much anymore - not with so many people jumping online.

I think that if they do a follow up review in a month or two you will see that it is much better.

[OneManArmy]

ah I must say, Gamespot has done a good job reviewing again. thats why I always trust them the most. :thumbsup:

face it its not the best review but its fair.

[tmartinez72]

Originally posted by Glaynor
Well, I agree with their technical review of the game, especially lately. However, the waiting around does not really happen that much anymore - not with so many people jumping online.

I think that if they do a follow up review in a month or two you will see that it is much better.

Gamespot has a policy of NEVER doing a follow-up review. They will review an expansion or some type or Major re-release (ie UO).

As for their reviews, I find that they are very good. Though I'll never subcsribe to their premeire service, I've always liked their writings over any other "review" site.

[Seer]

Sounds right, I gave planetside an 8 in the review thread. PS is the kind of 8, understand, that is not duplicated anywhere else, which Gamespot reflects in the reviewer's tilt.

I disagree with their assessment of its stability. PS has been rock solid for me whenever I've played it, except when the devs intentionally brought down servers. A couple zone crashes here and there, but these are common in MMORPGs and their ilk.

I definitely know this, I'm able to stay connected to PS for far, far longer than your average player run FPS server.

[JackBoCracken]

It's about right, if 7.9 = not a bad game, but not a good game. PS had so much going for it, too...sigh. I'll wait another three months or so.

[diluted]

everything he said was completely true, imo.

the game didn't meet my expectations but its still worth playing.

[TriumphanT]

and keep in mind, SOE gave Gamespot the 500 beta contest to help promote the game AND Gamespot itself. Even then, Gamespot gave a brutally honest review and wasn't really "bought out"..

[Onizuka]

Geez, who cares what they give it!! All that matters is how much I like it: and i like it a lot. and no im not some n00b who just started playing.
Look me up on myplanetside.com, the names Onizuka and the server is Emerald.

[Hamma]

I have never let a review decide what game I am going to buy. hehe, they probably play it like 2 days max :p

[BigDickMccoy]

I thought it was kinda a ***...but then again I buy games for game play.....As long as it looks like its from recent years graphically and sound wise (no bloody 1993 style doom graphics).

[TheJingle]

7.9 isnt a bad rating , I consider this a good , fun game and im glad I bought it , but 9 and above means a great game , which it isnt at this time ( I stress at this time) . Cant let reviews on MMO games hold too much weight tho , since they are constantly changing. And as to the whole "im surprised they reviewed this game since they dont review betas" , gimme a break...You cant expect it to be 100% stable for everyone with no disconnects or anything , there will always be alot of patching etc. right away . Compared to almost every other MMO game the release of this game has been pretty damn good , though I would say it isnt perfectly balanced (almost though) .

[JackBoCracken]

He does have a point though. You should be able to play any game without hardlocking. Hardlocks mean something went wrong in their QA process, and they should never ever be acceptable because they're showstoppers. Server instability and outages due to overpopulation are understandable.

[Jaged]

Never one hard lock here, not even in beta. I got several CTD's in beta and many "you have left the world" messges. But sience retail I think I have gotten 1 CTD. That is it.

[Krogen]

Before I bought this game, it thought it was awesome (9/10?). Now I think it should get 7+ . I agree with Gamespot. Maybe, if those loading times would be shorter, the engine would be more polished, I'd grade this game 8+. Good that (in a couple of weeks) I'll have vacation for two months. We'll see what did change.

Can I unsubscribe from a game, then subscribe again? (in a couple of months?)

[NightWalker XI]

It isn't fair rating it now, they will sort out the problems eventually and add cool new stuff

[PR24]

Originally posted by Hamma
I have never let a review decide what game I am going to buy. hehe, they probably play it like 2 days max :p

I believe some of the GS staff where in Beta seeing they where media.

One thing I hope is the DEV team see's that review and tries to fix the issues he mentioned. The lag last night was so bad (again) tensions start running high and people get pissed off at each other, the game/lag.

I hope they figure out the issue soon because as it stands now the lag will push a lot of people to night start playing the monthly fee :(

I love the game but HATE the lag. I play to be with my clan/outfit at this point more then to "just play PS" because the lag pisses me off at this point.

[PR24]

Originally posted by NightWalker XI
It isn't fair rating it now, they will sort out the problems eventually and add cool new stuff

Sure it is fair. It's SOE problem they released the game with MASSIVE lag issues not Gamespots. SOE made the decision to release the game so they got the review for the game they released.

I have no idea how they are going to fix these lag issues seeing it's been a big issue for a long time now and nothing has changed. :confused:

[Hamma]

They will fix it.

Sure, these guys were in beta. But I am guessing they dont play nearly as much as most of us :p

Im talking about all reviews, not just PS. These guys get copies of games in everyday :p

[PR24]

Originally posted by Hamma
These guys get copies of games in everyday :p

Luck bastards :D

[Hamma]

Originally posted by JackBoCracken
He does have a point though. You should be able to play any game without hardlocking. Hardlocks mean something went wrong in their QA process, and they should never ever be acceptable because they're showstoppers. Server instability and outages due to overpopulation are understandable. either that or they dont have every possible hardware and software configuration known to man in house :confused:

[kerosene31]

"Unfortunately, putting together a good group and actually coordinating a successful assault can take a lot of time. Essentially, you'll stand around doing nothing, or next to nothing, and shouting on the broadcast channel to get invited into a squad. Then you'll wait as the rest of your squad forms, wait for transportation to your destination if you yourself can't pilot a vehicle, wait to actually arrive at your destination, and wait for everyone else to arrive."

People always say things like this, and I wonder why. I mean, there are usually a stack of vehicles waiting at the sanctuary for new people, you have the instant action, and then there is the Hart shuttle. Once you get enough points, you can spec in your own vehicle, or even go Max and use the run function.

I always wonder with reviews of games this involved, how much time the reviewer actually spent in the game.

[Sputty]

WTF? Loading times take like 8 seconds for me. Also, I've found it unlaggy on Emerald recently. I only had one really bad lag time and it lasted like one minute. Heh

[PR24]

kerosene31,

You have to remember they have to review the game from the average players point of view. They are speaking that unless you are in a outfit and you jump in the game alone it's not easy to set up and get everything ready in a matter of 4-5 minutes.

PS forces people to squad and it can take some time to get set up w/o friends/outfit who know each other.

[kerosene31]

Originally posted by PR24
kerosene31,

PS forces people to squad and it can take some time to get set up w/o friends/outfit who know each other.

Well, see I don't have an outfit either. I just find my own way to the action and then begin looking for a squad. Before I had enough to spec in a vehicle, I would just go max, then run to someplace on the map that had lots of action.

Once I get there, I just find a base hack in progress. Usually when I walk around the base I get numerous squad invites.

I guess my point is that while squads and outfits so make the game more fun, you don't need them all the time. Lots of time, I log in and only have an hour or so to play. Rather than finding a squad, I just go to a hotspot and join the battle.

[NightWalker XI]

It's SOE problem they released the game with MASSIVE lag issues

Werner NEVER lags, not for me or my outfit at least....

[PR24]

Originally posted by NightWalker XI
Werner NEVER lags, not for me or my outfit at least....

They need to move some outfits off of Emerald.

[Happy lil Elf]

Can you guess what a Prima Strategy guide for any MMOG and a review on any MMOG have in common other than both being for an MMOG?

I'll give you a clue, they're both as _______ as a women who can't cook :D

[tmartinez72]

Originally posted by NightWalker XI
It isn't fair rating it now, they will sort out the problems eventually and add cool new stuff

Of course, then it'll NEVER be reviewed as the plan is to always add cool stuff and fix things. It's part of the whole $13/month dealie.

You also have to understand that Gamespot has has a time limit to get that review out. No one will read a review of a game 2 months later when everyone else already has a review out. They can't spend 3 weeks playing it non-stop. Most of the reviewers are freelancers doing other jobs. From a fair standpoint, the review is pretty good.

Contrary to popular belief, Gamespot has some of the most honest reviewers (sometimes even brutal). I've seen the games with advertising banners on there get like 5-something.

7.9 is actually quite high in their avg. Anything above 7.5 would be good. Also, this is all matter of Opinion and personal experiance. Some would rate this game lower, and some higher. Any review of ANYTHING has to be taken with a grain of salt.

[tmax]

i dunno i thought it deserved a minimum of an 8.3

[Hamma]

Looks to me like the main reason it rated low was he could not find a squad to get in.

And of course the stability issues which need to be fixed.

[tmax]

haha yeah he wrote like 2 paragraph on how frustrated he was cuz noone wanted to let him into there squad....sucker

[tmartinez72]

Originally posted by tmax
haha yeah he wrote like 2 paragraph on how frustrated he was cuz noone wanted to let him into there squad....sucker

And thus he should LIE, saying that he COULD get in a squad when he couldn't? If he couldn't get in a squad, then he couldn't get in a squad. Hell, if I couldn't get in a squad, I'd be Bitchin' too on a review saying, "I couldn't get in a squad.".

Exactly WHAT do you want? An honest review from one's experience in game or some trumped up shit to make a game look good because you like the game.

[Krogen]

Originally posted by PR24
I love the game but HATE the lag. I play to be with my clan/outfit at this point more then to "just play PS" because the lag pisses me off at this point.

I have NEVER (almost) experienced any lag. If I did, it was almost unnocitable {however you spell it :)} . OK, my PC lags but in a way, when there's a lot of people on the screen shooting each other, my PC just stops. 0-1 frames per second for a while. I don't include this to lag. If you have a 56k then you might lag.

[Hamma]

Originally posted by tmartinez72
And thus he should LIE, saying that he COULD get in a squad when he couldn't? If he couldn't get in a squad, then he couldn't get in a squad. Hell, if I couldn't get in a squad, I'd be Bitchin' too on a review saying, "I couldn't get in a squad.".

Exactly WHAT do you want? An honest review from one's experience in game or some trumped up shit to make a game look good because you like the game. In any game when you first get in, are you going to find people to play with right away :confused:

[TheJingle]

Heh I get very little lag on a 56k on konried ;( , only time i lag is in battles over 70ish people and even that isnt all the time. I get a little delay from 200 ping obviously , but its hardly noticeable...must be an Emerald problem ;p

[JackBoCracken]

Originally posted by Hamma
either that or they dont have every possible hardware and software configuration known to man in house :confused:

When it happens to a significant percentage of the user base, it's a problem. It's simply unacceptable, similar to the situation that IBM got itself in with their GXPs...it only happened to ~5% of the users, but that's quite a bit in terms of drive failure...

Besides mass computer farms like at some of the larger companies that continuously loop demos of games in production, the only way to eliminate hard locks is to beta test. It's Sony's fault that they didn't eliminate the hard locks in the beta. It's not our fault that we buy computers that may or may not work with the software.

[PR24]

Originally posted by Hamma
Looks to me like the main reason it rated low was he could not find a squad to get in.

And of course the stability issues which need to be fixed.

Other thing they did not take into concideration is the gfx are as good as they can be to not make everyone need a 9700 PRO with 5000 people on a server :lol: