That's the problem with the internet. Every idiot with half a brain has access to it, and you notice that. I bet half of the kids that voted on MOP on metacritic plays Guild Wars 2 and is 12 years old. Not to mention the people that probably haven't even reached 90 yet and are butt hurt because 85-90 isn't done in 10 hours when questing normally.
CPU: I7 2600k @ 4GHz - Cooler: Corsair H100i - GPU: 2 x GTX970 Strix - MOBO: MSI Z68-GD65 G3 - RAM: Crucial ballistix sport 16GB - SSD: MX100 512GB - HDD: WD Blue 1TB/WD Green 2TB - CASE: Define R4 - Monitor: Samsung SA300 23" + Medion 23" (2x 1080p) - PSU: Corsair TX 850 - OS: Win7 Ultimate 64
Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
I still got 2 months of game-time left, but it seems that I have to stop playing because of all these bad reviews... Jokes aside, I used to buy games only with good scores from sites like gamespot or IGN (that was ages ago), but then I noticed that I have a mind of my own and now I feel that I missed couple of great games that are not available anymore!
If you're going to attack metacritic, just say you can't trust any of the scores, good or bad. Don't just attack the bad scores (as you implicitly do here, by only giving explanations why the newest expansion got a lower score without explaining why any of the other expansions got higher scores). Or comment that the high scores could easily be posted by fan boys who don't care about the quality of the game so long as it's a Blizzard game, AND the negative scores can come from haters. If you're only attacking the one side, you look less like someone pointing out the (many) flaws of metacritic and more like a defender of WoW who only attacks things that disagree with your own opinion (not saying that you are, that's just the impression I get from your post).
Seriously, just say "metacritic is untrustworthy because anyone can give any score/review, regardless of reason or experience." Nice and neutral, and makes the exact same point.
mmm mop isnt a bad expansion.. its not really a great one.. imo i think its priced too high at $40.. should be 20 or less. but anyway id say its more or less on par with the start of cata.
Wait, are you saying that Cata is better than MoP? You are? OK. Now I know not to pay any attention to OP nor Metacritic.
"There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
"Almost every time I have gotten to know a critic personally, they keep up with the criticism but lose the venom." -- Ghostcrawler
"Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome." -- Samuel Johnson
WoW PVP (especially right now) is horribly unbalanced and very poorly designed, and there's really no way to fix it without backtracking on a lot of the mechanics changes from cata to MOP.
In other words, PVP will not be fixed in WoW this expansion.
I don't understand what this thread is even about. WoW has numerous, undeniable flaws, but unless you're going to explain what you think those are, and give suggestions as to what you think can be done to fix them, bringing up useless crap like "METACRITIC SAID THIS" is meaningless, regardless if it's positive OR negative.
At least Cataclysm promised and delivered on something that drew old customers back to the game: a return to BC-difficulty heroics & raids. It was a fun gimmick for a while, and many players on my server came back to check it out.
Competition and compared to, in reviews: Uuh..eeh? Everquest xpack maybe?
Tbc follows good style and adds pretty fresh features(flying mounts, smaller raids, heroics etc)
Competition and compared to, in reviews: Warhammer, age of conan maybe aion.
Wotlk holds its ground as neither of those are ground-breaking and are bit similiar (cept conan with some combat stuff and boobs..)
Competition and compared to, in reviews: LOTRO..later rift (rift came about month after 4.1).
Cata holds its ground as neither lotro and rift are ground-breaking and are similiar to wow's style (hotkey mmos).
Competition and compared to, in reviews: Guild wars 2, Swtor, Tera, The Secret World(maybe) + others in past/soon maybe.
Mop brings same old with some new features(and its okay if you like that).
Swtor brings great story and voice-acting, still bit hotkeyish mmo.
GW2..well we know all the hype that had and what it brings.
Tera had pretty good new combat system.
Secret world..uuh..err..got released. Ok questing maybe?
Is it wonder MOP got lower score? I admit I havent played mop at all, but its no wonder it got lower score with high guns pointing around and changing lot of stuff. Its good that its still holding up, but getting lower score than xpacks in past is no wonder. Its just fact that getting lower scores starts getting "its still doing stuff great but soon its time to change" (their subjective opinion and due other mmos starting to get more and more action-oriented and moving away from hotkeys and old questing)
"In the tone of their complaint you can see a mind already made up. Instead, it’s about affirmation they expected and didn’t receive. It’s not about the game getting universal praise from every writer reviewing it. It’s about getting universal praise for buying it."
Firstly, OP, Gamespot hasn't reviewed the game yet so don't bring them up. :P
Anyway, these reviewers are reviewing the early game and the levelling game. I completely agree with them that it feels dated.
The end-game, however, is the best Blizzard has delivered in terms of PvE - ever. In PvP it can grow very large if they fix a couple of small things. The game is as solid as ever in the end-game.
And that's what most WoW players care about. The end-game.
The cake is now an alternative fact.
Cata was pure unadulteratred SHIT.
MoP is fucking awesome.
Critics rarely play the games they rate, they take the media pack and rate it based around their own perceptions. "Fuzzy pandas? Pokemon? No bigbad? This is probably horrible!"
Want to see pony art? CLICK HERE --> My DA!