GameSpot gave Wrath higher Rating than Cataclysm

[Baracuda]

I can't believe you guys still have faith in GameSpot after the "best villain of all time" BS.

There's no arguing to this, this is my opinion and to whomever disagrees with me, I don't give a shit, I write this so people can get some insight in what the hell this expansion is about instead being blinded by some "WOW goblins, 525 level prof, archeology, "HARD" raids and heroics!". Yeah, sure, nice addition, but will never be as amazing as TBC and Wotlk was.

Your way-too-early nostalgia makes me sick.

[Deleted]

The talent trees were reworked, a new glyph system was added.
Mastery is a brand new stat, tank threat mechanics have changed considerably.
Armour penetration was removed because it was a broken stat.
Gear is now more valuable to more classes of the same armour type,
plus more emphasis was put on wearing your own armour type.
The badge system was redone to become far less bloated too.

Also get back to me on if we got a raid that was years old retuned to the current level for the first main raid.

But yeah nothing new ignoring all of the above, plus everything people above me have mentioned.....

[Novarx]

Once again, people are too dim and ADD to understand the proper context of a review.

It's right there in the summary review: "unlike the free content patch that preceded it."

The 8.5 does not take into account the 1-60 revamp. Why? Because it's FREE. It doesn't factor into a review of whether you should buy the Cataclysm box.

Cataclysm has far less zones and dungeons than Wrath did. There's less leniency and choice involved in where to level. The quality is exponentially higher, IMO, and the higher difficulty is welcome, but low or high difficulty doesn't factor into the rating. New races aren't a new class, which is a much bigger addition to whether you should buy the game if you want a dramatic change.

It's an 8.5 because it simply has less content. Everyone thinks of 1-60 as part of "Cataclysm." It's not.

So the sundering of the earth is not the cataclysmic event, that pushes us into the expansion? which revamped multiple zones, changing the content, the way we quest, areas we level in. You mean to tell me, that when the pre-patches came out in BC, they were considered BC content, and not Wrath content, because I'm pretty sure that stuff was free too.

[Grimmer]

Im gonna have to agree with this

these types of games really go outside the norm when you try to "rate" them. Its hard to give it a concrete score because the content in the game can literally give everyone a different experience

But there are some games that are good or horrible enough to give a straight review, like FF14. :P And part of me loves seeing Squeenix squirm. So I support reviews of MMOGs.

So the sundering of the earth is not the cataclysmic event, that pushes us into the expansion? which revamped multiple zones, changing the content, the way we quest, areas we level in. You mean to tell me, that when the pre-patches came out in BC, they were considered BC content, and not Wrath content, because I'm pretty sure that stuff was free too.

I don't mean "Cataclysm" the lore event, I mean "Cataclysm" the product you buy. This is a review of "Cataclysm," the product you buy with 40 dollars. No, 1-60 is not part of the Cataclysm you can review. It's infinitely more content than the 40 dollar package you can buy, so it's unfair to factor in a free bonus into the quality of something in terms of its price when you don't actually need to pay for it.

In order for them to actually review the 1-60 content, they'd need to re-review WoW itself, and that's just dumb as already stated.

And 2.0 and 3.0 barely added anything, so I don't know why the hell you're comparing the TBC and Wrath pre-patches. They added new talent trees, the BC pre-patch changed the way honor worked, and that's about it. The only exception were the events, and those aren't big enough or long-lasting enough to factor into a review of a 40 dollar product.

If I sell you an above-average and very tasty orange, but I am throwing in the golden apple of Iðunn that will give you perpetual youth as a free bonus, the rating for the tasty orange is still above average.

[Charblaze]

I think the bulk of the lower rating is attributed to Archaeology. I agree with the reviewer in that regard because the profession is pretty terrible. It probably should have been scrapped entirely along with Paths of the Titans.

I agree, professions in general in WoW were never its forte... Bloody RuneScape's professions are more interesting than WoW's.
Archeology is like mining, except with invisible rocks.

And about the review, it doesn't even matter, people who already play WoW will most likely get it and people that don't play WoW/hate it will probably not get it... The review isn't going to change anything.

And for the record, I disagree with the review... Cataclysm should be higher rated than WotLK

[Pascal]

Revamping old world is what made me not quit the game. Best thing that happened to the game since its release. I'm pretty sure Mount Hyjal being a zone single handedly made me not quit.

People saying cata didn't bring anything new are blind or stupid. Step back and take a second. Think. Look at the changes. K? ENTIRELY new talent trees? Old world is completely different? Starting zones for each race are amazing, phasing from 1-85? The quests you do make a difference in the actual world to you? All the "changes" that happened actually happened? The game is so much better right now. Wrath just added a new continent. amg how craaaazy. durf durf.

oh, and new race/class combinations. did I mention that troll druids worship a raptor jesus?

[Crush]

Only difference between them is ulduar and level cap, if blizzard thing 10 man heroic mode is hard then they should rather take

XT compeered to BoNR

XT (Don't kill the heart or hard mode is active) while BoNR is just plain the same god damn tactics, i want ulduar HARD mode back,

Also death knight vs goblin/worgen

both get same great 7.5

would be 8 if trade would be "Trade"

[Deleted]

Didn't gamespot get paid to give Kain and Lynch a good rating, and one of the raters put down a game because he was a fan of another.

yea, their opinion is stupid

[Soro]

Didn't read all the replies, so sorry if this has come up already. But I stopped reading after this.

" Not enough zones to level a second character without repeating lots of content."

As far as I remember I had to repeat a fair amount of content while I was leveling my second character.

[smallz]

Once again, people are too dim and ADD to understand the proper context of a review.

It's right there in the summary review: "unlike the free content patch that preceded it."

The 8.5 does not take into account the 1-60 revamp. Why? Because it's FREE. It doesn't factor into a review of whether you should buy the Cataclysm box.

Cataclysm has far less zones and dungeons than Wrath did. There's less leniency and choice involved in where to level. The quality is exponentially higher, IMO, and the higher difficulty is welcome, but low or high difficulty doesn't factor into the rating. New races aren't a new class, which is a much bigger addition to whether you should buy the game if you want a dramatic change.

It's an 8.5 because it simply has less content. Everyone thinks of 1-60 as part of "Cataclysm." It's not.



Implying Kezan, Gilneas, and Lost Isles really count.

A game is only as good as its high level content. With the exception of raids, Cataclysm has far less than that of Wrath. Nine dungeons gets mighty repetitive, and you're nearly forced to do the same linear progression of zones.

If you would actually compare the numbers of zones & dungeons the two expansions added instead of just spewing random nonsense...

[Tehfred]

So it shall be written, so shall it be done.

Sorry, GameSpot is not Pharaoh. It's their opinion. The people dumb enough to solely use one company's review are the people dumb enough to argue that WotLK > Cataclysm anyways. Why even participate in said argument?

[Scuravolpe]

I can't seem to recall the time when I began giving a shit about what Gamespot thinks about anything.

Because that never happened.

[ericyeahright]

There quotes are based off sales. My friends a senior manager for a store.

[KCguy]

Love how under The Bad they put "New archaeology profession isn't fun".

I know it's all a matter of opinion, but I find it fun. You get to explore because of it and it's not like fishing where you can fish in one spot. And in terms of rewards there is a lot you can get. More for fun, but there is some good stuff as well. It's a secondary profession and I think Blizzard knocked it out of the park.

---------- Post added 2010-12-18 at 01:34 AM ----------

Revamping old world is what made me not quit the game. Best thing that happened to the game since its release. I'm pretty sure Mount Hyjal being a zone single handedly made me not quit.

People saying cata didn't bring anything new are blind or stupid. Step back and take a second. Think. Look at the changes. K? ENTIRELY new talent trees? Old world is completely different? Starting zones for each race are amazing, phasing from 1-85? The quests you do make a difference in the actual world to you? All the "changes" that happened actually happened? The game is so much better right now. Wrath just added a new continent. amg how craaaazy. durf durf.

oh, and new race/class combinations. did I mention that troll druids worship a raptor jesus?

Blizzard did a hell of a lot. They even said in a blue post that Cata was like 2 or 3 expansions in one because of the sheer amount of work that was involved. I don't agree with the rating, but at the same time it's still a good rating.

[Tyberes]

when has anybody ever listened to gamespot reviews anyways?

[Belize]

Opinions will and ever shall stay just what they are: opinions. Gamespot isn't any different.

[Deleted]

Wrtah was better than Cata. Miss it cold winter mood Now we have some random angry dragon
that go nuts because of Old gods of Whatever told him to. How cool! Only one zone that i like was Twilight Highland due to design/music (not necesarry questes kill some horde skirmishers/ ogre mauler/ slaughter some dragons/ ride a gryffon). I miss epic Wrathgate storyline and storming into ICC

[Deleted]

but really, what's so new about it? this just looks like a patch to me, not an expansion. all that shattering crap aside, we got, what, 4-5 new zones which i have no interest in visiting again? well, looks like we're back @ farming HCs for gear...

[Penatar]

Well lets see.

All reps are a breeze, my main is geared for raid, and I pvp until i get bored with it then there is no other game play.

Wrath at least had stuff to do besides farm when you weren't dong end game content. I miss oracles/wolvar, getting fun items, etc.

[turlyonlost to tirion wtf]

Lack of updating TBC Azeroth zones to be flyable and horrible new BGs must likely took it down .5 facepalm.