-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Anthem Review Thread
- Thread starter Earvin Infinity
- Start date
that would ensure a shitstorm of epic proportions and i am sure they will want to make money from the game, regardless of the state it is in at the moment
I blame game media in the first place for mismanaged expectations. The impressions from E3 where absolutely ridiculous, even people like Jeff Gerstmann and Austin Walker doing complete 180s from their first takes.
It's the same exact thing as Evolved, scooping up E3 awards left and right, while the gamers at home are scratching their heads in disbelief. Why? Whats special about this game?
Then low and behold the game comes out and is forgotten in a week.
It's the same exact thing as Evolved, scooping up E3 awards left and right, while the gamers at home are scratching their heads in disbelief. Why? Whats special about this game?
Then low and behold the game comes out and is forgotten in a week.
BioWare and EA will consider a sub-70 MC pretty disastrous tbh.
The launch date isn't arbitrary (I mean it is depending on how you look at it, but I get what you mean), but the idea that the game on week 1 is not ready to be reviewed but on week 2 it's totally ready is completely arbitrary.I am just gonna pre-face this by saying I actually had my pre-order canceled so I am not sayint it to defend BW or justify my purchase AND I agree it is a shitting position that they bring upon themselves solely for subscription money via early access.
However I would argue the actual launch date is not arbitrary. All of their official advertising had 2.22.2019 as launch date. What they should have done is put a giant disclaimer for those that can play it early to say "early access experience does not include potential patches available at launch".
You don't get to release a game, charge people for it, and then state they aren't allowed to judge it until a specific patch is out.
My comment was *most consumers. Of course any reviewer is also free to create a review for the select who got in early.
There are more than 3 reviews, and it is a giant release from a well known company so of course there is lots of discussion.
If this sells poorly, I wonder if EA will learn their lesson that they should stop this "play a week early" nonsense? Word of mouth in a week's time really does them no favors, especially when their games aren't in great condition. Didn't Battlefield V suffer the same fate of getting torn apart it's early week?
For games like Anthem or Destiny, I'm just wondering what the proper way is to set a foundation. I listened to a podcast last year from a big Fantasy writer (I feel bad I can't remember who it was), but I liked his idea that in a world with massive lore surrounding gods and magic, the best way to start is small. Keep your story focused and personal. Let the reader enjoy the mystery of the world, all the while feeling like they are part of it as the characters slowly, incidentally reveal said world through bits of dialogue. Games like Anthem seem to think the best way to bring you into a new world is to throw you into the deep end right off the bat. Then have characters go on long expositions explaining more and more when needed. Honestly, one of the strengths of something like Harry Potter is that it starts small, and slowly unravels the world and it's lore. I know books and video games aren't the same...but it is something I keep going back to.
There are some 7 scores on .metacritic that might not be on Opencritic yet (I didn't check). If it gets enough 7s and 8s, especially after the big patch, The review score might land in a decent place...?
They announced they had a new IP in the works pretty early. I think just murmurs in 2013 but at E3 2014 they said it at E3 but then months later Casey left. When Aaryn Flynn had to leave after Andromeda Casey took his place as GM. Unfortunately I've also heard from a BioWare guy who was laid off in 2012 said that Casey Hudson might've left so Flynn took the blame for Andromeda, but he had very negative opinions about Casey in general so idk.
EA is obsessed with subscription service, but somethings gotta give. Here's the problem though: they have now signed up lots of people to Premiere (annual payment version) with the frontline game access being a major listed benefit. So they've painted themselves into a bit of a corner with customers. It's a terrible program from the dev Studio perspective.
I entered in Ars to read some tech news, and I found their review
Anthem review: BioWare's sky-high gaming ambition crashes back to Earth
It's out, finally. But maybe it shouldn't be.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/02/anthem-game-review-honestly-its-not-finished/
Anthem review: BioWare's sky-high gaming ambition crashes back to Earth
It's out, finally. But maybe it shouldn't be.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/02/anthem-game-review-honestly-its-not-finished/
The game has been available for the general public to play since the 14th so we're discussing the game as well as the reviews.
And people get pissy if you say anything critical in the OT so I guess everyone should be glad that a lot of discussion is taking place here
I completely agree with you, there should only be 1 launch date and with the day 1 patch at launch, but none of us can reverse time so I am just suggesting what they can do to soften the blow.
Ultimately individual outlets will have to decide what they want to do and there will be many that will just release a review base on the 15th build and some with the 22nd build with the day 1 patch.
Of course not, that would be insane. Now you don't have to wonder.
Yuuuup. All rings very correct and echoes all my own sentiments.
My point is that EA shouldn't try to soften the blow since doing so comes with the implicit "do what we say or you'll worsen our relationship, which will hurt you", regardless of whether they actually would take action against sites or not.
Big companies need to have as little impact on review sites as possible, or else the reviews start to come into question.
Wow. I don't read reviews much, but this one really take it's time detailing out it's thoughts. That's a great review.
What is insane is that Destiny's method of filling you in on it's lore was god awful (load screens, go online, etc.) And yet it still managed to do it better than Anthem. I thiiiink the lore itself might be interesting. But the way it has been delivered to me so far makes me yawn.
That's too bad. When there's this much money in a game I guess the story is bound to be safe and cookie-cutter.
It's tough too, nobody wants to listen to a long exposition by an NPC when the reason they went to that NPC in the first place was to craft a new piece of gear. It doesn't flow well and that's not what I'm looking for in that moment of time. What your asking for is tough and not what the mainstream player base wants unfortunately. World building through a character story works fantastic, but not when your game is predicated on a power fantasy of flying mech suits meant to be played co-op. Not sure players have the attention span to sit through a 10 hour ramp up to a game when all they want to do is shoot aliens with their buddies. It really needs to be a single player experience you can work through at your own pace a la the other BioWare games. There's so many cool Pop Sci-Fi series out there that would be perfect for a GaaS game (I read a ton) but they all start small like you say and build themselves up to something grander.
Well I said "ask nicely" not "threaten" and I am not EA nor EA is actually doing what I suggest.
It's day 1 patch. Not 8. You've been playing early access.
I'm not saying the patch will fix issues or make the game better, I don't know. But the game officially launches on 22nd and that's a fact.
You people are aware we had pre-release early access games before? And these cost money? For example, I payed $40 to play Dauntless in early access last year and that game still isn't out. This is nothing new, and the fact you payed money to play it early doesn't mean the game launched.
Perhaps better would be Patch X- Anthem: Reduced Loading.
Holy crap how lol, that surprises me. Did they update it with forsaken of something - which is an 8.5 for me, base game is like a 7.5 maybe.
I'd give Anthem around a 7 right now, maybe a tad higher but haven't gotten to the end game yet, so that could change. About the same score I'd give destiny 1 at launch. I know I'll play it for a few weeks like those games and stop until there's a big content drop at some point like both destiny games. Let's hope those content drops are as good as taken king and forsaken, which improved those games drastically.
There was zero threat in the email we got. In fact I am happy we got informed so I don't sound like a complete idiot on the 22 with a review full of issues that might not exist by then.
As is the usual this gen. All style and little substance. It seems most the content/fixes will be added post lauch, as is the trend now. With how graphically intense games are now it's getting hard for devs to create great looking games with loads of content at launch in a reasonable amount of time. Unfortunately by the time the content rolls out I've moved on. First impressions are huge.
I reckon they don't want to be accused of reviewing the game too quick. I've played the game for 10 hours and think they should just post the reviews, the patch on Friday is going to be minor at best, not much is going to change and we know what the end game is all about.
Can't wait for the not-Fort-Tarsis hub.
What it needs is like an airship/javelin-carrier hub. Maybe at the start of the expac you unearth this ship, do some quests to get it flying, and then you can use it to travel to the jungle, or other biomes. To start freeplay you'd just jump off the carrier and dive (diving disguising the loading screen) into the open world.
Hmmm. These premium early releases sure do throw a wrench in the review process. I can see why it's worth waiting for the "day 1" patches, and reviews in progress make sense for live games like these, but at the same time it's wild that this is almost treated as a last-minute closed beta.
Day 0
But it will be followed by a weak Anthem 2
but Anthem: Forsaken will be fuckin lit
Pray that the story of Borderlands 3 will bless us with unforgettable memes and sociopathic little girls.
Anthem is another case where Early Access is not a good selling point at all.
it frustrates the players with bugs, and it frustrates the review process because people are playing it a week+ early but um wait guys for the "Day 1 patch" that will improve everything.
it frustrates the players with bugs, and it frustrates the review process because people are playing it a week+ early but um wait guys for the "Day 1 patch" that will improve everything.
I was looking forward to giving it a try, even though it looked very bland from what little I had seen since first being shown. Think I'll wait until it's had time to cook a bit longer
People use this reason to downplay the problems but this is exactly the reason they can keep pulling this kind of crap.
It's the final build and people are playing the full game, wether or not they call it early play or early access.
Division 2 will be a safe bet for many because its not drastically different from the first, mostly refining and fleshing out what worked in the first game.
Just patch in some elevators...
Anthem already has tubes, corridors, and caves to transition you from one region to another, but even that doesn't work.