Lets bump PoE on Metacritic

"

NebulousFury wrote:

Actually metacritic is a really accurate way to look up a game, as long as you focus on the USER review score and reviews and not the CRITIC scores.

No, it's not. As you can see from this thread butthurt kids will give the game a 1/10 because something happened they didn't like, and there will always be blind fanboys that give it a 10/10 regardless. Ueers scores are not accurate. Critics aren't either, they are probably paid off at times, they don't play the game enough to fully understand the game, or they are morons that take away/give points for ridiculous reasons, like the person that took 1 point away from GTA5 because it was supposedly "misogynistic". Neither are very accurate.

Bouter
Oct 24, 2013
10

Diablo 3 was my first ARPG. For some reason I never tried ARGP games in my long gaming history. I thought that Diablo 3 was already quite entertaining for the first 100 hours or so, but after that I got extremely bored.

Then I tried PoE, mainly because people were comparing it with the 'legendary' Diablo 2 all the time. I'm now about 100 hours into the game, but I still have the feeling that I haven't discovered the biggest part of the game. PoE has completely taken me by surprise with its extreme details in gameplay and gamemechanics, its dark gritty atmosphere, and its thrilling (hardcore) gameplay.

I will not be suprised if I still play this game from time to time after several years. Since only a few games have achieved this in 20 years of PC gaming, this game deserves a 10 rating. I have considered bringing this 10 down to 9 because of the desync problems that occur sometime, but I must admit that all online games I have played had their own specific technical problems. So the desync is more related to the current age of technology then the game itself. Therefore the 10 is well deserved.

my build got life buff ... an awesome one ... but ... still giving it 1/10 because of this FUCKING STUPID aura shit and the fact it destroyed other people's builds AND thanks to legacy items makes sure i never want to play in sc/hc again

Legacy fucking items ... pfff ... just like D2 NL. Disgusting.

Thanks for the link LOL

"

jsn006 wrote:

my build got life buff ... an awesome one ... but ... still giving it 1/10 because of this FUCKING STUPID aura shit and the fact it destroyed other people's builds AND thanks to legacy items makes sure i never want to play in sc/hc again

Legacy fucking items ... pfff ... just like D2 NL. Disgusting.

Thanks for the link LOL

QQ

well, I did play for a while last night, and I was very impressed with the new polish on the game, but drop rates are still absolutely horrendous, and the balance changes are awful. The swung the pendulum 100% to the other direction. Life is now extremely OP compared to ES/casters in general. With no changes to the map system I just don't think this version will have nearly the replayability of the open beta version.

(leveling in docks or lunaris is the same joke it already was, you can see the math in any of the various threads. A level 86 character was already getting 2% exp from docks pre patch. Try leveling like that. A level 99 was getting 2% from a 71 map. Try leveling like that.)

Although I did not want a full wipe initially, now I think it would have been a good idea. It's not cool to have useless lvl 88 characters, but I can't bring myself to delete them in hopes that they go back on some of these changes. If they'd just wiped it all I probably wouldn't be worrying about.

Also, have to point out with the new profile options, you can see peoples characters and everyone who is "10/10 best game ever l2p nubs" have shit characters. You might feel differently if you get one up there sometime. Or you might not since you missed the sweetness of that in Open Beta.

"

reboticon wrote:

well, I did play for a while last night, and I was very impressed with the new polish on the game, but drop rates are still absolutely horrendous, and the balance changes are awful. The swung the pendulum 100% to the other direction. Life is now extremely OP compared to ES/casters in general. With no changes to the map system I just don't think this version will have nearly the replayability of the open beta version.

(leveling in docks or lunaris is the same joke it already was, you can see the math in any of the various threads. A level 86 character was already getting 2% exp from docks pre patch. Try leveling like that. A level 99 was getting 2% from a 71 map. Try leveling like that.)

Although I did not want a full wipe initially, now I think it would have been a good idea. It's not cool to have useless lvl 88 characters, but I can't bring myself to delete them in hopes that they go back on some of these changes. If they'd just wiped it all I probably wouldn't be worrying about.

Also, have to point out with the new profile options, you can see peoples characters and everyone who is "10/10 best game ever l2p nubs" have shit characters. You might feel differently if you get one up there sometime. Or you might not since you missed the sweetness of that in Open Beta.

+1

IMHO Metacritic is not worth the time to read it. They would rate oral sex 2/10.

And even then D2 drops were better than PoE with OB+
But I think it's funny that players having only some level 2X characters and namereservers(botterboard nameselling) try to judge/provocate me.

"

Are you sure that botting is the sole reason for the game restrictions in D2? The restrictions were clearly added to punish gameplay that relied on rapidly hopping from game to game. There was absolutely nothing forcing bots to spend a short time in each individual game.

Yes I am sure. You clearly show that you know nothing about the D2 history.

The first diablo 2 bots were designed for a toolkit named d2hackit, they were primitive and could do only 1 task. They weren't any scripting engines involved like in modern bots that have a core and a scripting engine.
There were 3 pindlebots and 1 mephbot (the author even visited a talkshow promoting his bot.)


It was stated by the CMs at the time when the first threads arose which asked "What is Realm Down?"

Blizzard added queues, Failed to Join, tagging and realm down solely for the purpose of reduce economical damage of bots they couldn't detect.
And the damage was like 500 pindle runs per hour or 300 meph runs per hour.

Tagged was introduced so botters couldn't sell their items because they only saw games of max 5 other tagged CD-Keys.
Queues were introduced to slow botters down.
Realm Down was introduced to heavily slow botters down.

Bots created games instantly so every 5 games one creation failed.

The same reason D3 introduced an Input limit. Not to annoy players but to disturb bots.

"

Bots were simply doing the same thing that players were doing; very fast magic find runs. So what makes you think the change was directed solely at bots and not the gameplay style itself?

Bots don't do mistakes.
Bots don't get tired.
Bits check loot within some milliseconds.
Bots have no RL.
Bots can run 24/7

"

Keep in mind that realm down in D2 was added before warden was added to the game, which forced less sophisticates bots to exit the game in under 45 seconds. Your argument would hold more water if they added the realm down restrictions after warden was put in place. Additionally, no bans were issued to players (or bots) that tried to create too many games within a certain period of time.

You are obviously a child of 1.10+
Diablo2 HAD their own Antidetection prior to 1.11.
Diablo 2 DID ban cheats prior to 1.10.
Blizzard BANNED accounts trying to create too many games(FTJ counter). They even disabled CD-Keys from playing in closed b.net(not the entire server like 1.11+)
The pre 1.11 ban message said: Account has been banned.
The pre 1.11 cd-key ban said in lobby: This cd-key has been disabled for Realm play you still can join Open B.net and play single player and you didn't receive a tempban for 2 weeks after a failed connection.
The main problem with D2 was. The 1.09 detection was a simple integrity scan on b.net connection. They added additional methods in 1.10 but they were on the same level, so they stopped caring.
1.11 introduced an antidetection they paid a 3rd party company for.
Look at the so much loved botter board. Almost their entire community from 2002 and early 2003 got banned.(check other boards from 2003 laughing at those botters)

Also the 45 second rule only applies only to clientless bots because they never responded to warden. It was just a cat and mouse game to give a proper response(till blizzard got lazy) or they had to emulate warden entirely which has been done only by a few coders.

"

Furthermore, even if the restrictions were solely designed to hurt botting, an important question remains. Under your definition of an ARPG, why would Blizzard even bother to try to slow down bots? To preserve the economic integrity of the game? Isn't that the exact same reason that GGG would move a waypoint away from a unique monster?

NO.
Because bots are 4-5 times more efficient than the biggest no lifer.
Easy mf runs are targeted towards players who don't have much time to play a game. They should feel some find of reward.
They are designed for weaker characters to improve equipment.(Just look at the introduction at TC87 zones as 1.10) Their sole purpose was for characters who can't progress due to immunities of mobs.
For example do Diaruns with a Fire Orb Sorc->Impossible half of the mobs is fire immune or has high fire res and 25% of the mobs is cold immune.
And Blizzard even did stuff to make players kill uniques close to WPs.
For example the inner cloister had a sniper squill rat with amp and extra strong mod which killed several players. They removed it so players could farm the skeleton in the cathedral, without getting killed by the sniper.
Or look at the beginnings of crafting. They removed the 1.08 receipes which required runes around hel-lem and made the receipes use el-sol in 1.09.

No Blizzard North did much stuff in favour of players. Sadly some of their changes in D2 affected normal players too but the main idea was to counter bots.
Despite bots the chipped gem/perf skull/pg/um and ist trading in D2 was quiet active and the prices were stable.
9 chips= 1 PG 2 Pgs = 1 Ps 40 PGs = um 60 Pgs = ist 3 um = 2 ist
You had to pay 10 pgs for shaftstopper early in 1.09 and also also the last moments before 1.10.

"

From what I've read of this thread — before I got nauseous — it seems like a bunch of people are being immature internet children and wanting to give something a vote of 10 or a vote of 1 just because of their personal biases towards wanting to see the game succeed or fail, and no one is actually considering the thing that is most important: giving a competent, thorough, unbiased review of the game. If you can't do that, please, stay the fuck off of Metacritic.

So why doesn't your 9/10 doesn't make you a fanboy?
Even CB PoE I really liked would get a 7/10.

Gamecritics often get paid to give high ratings to shabby games and companies attempt to remove low ratings. Look at the most recent incident: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0
Or they let critics play a demo with content not in the game or only the flawless part of the game.

So this moved the actual feeling of a realistic rating.

Instead of 5/10 being an average game it's already considered as really bad game.
Rather average games are considered as 7-8 ratings and 9-10 as good game.

10/10 means this game is perfect it has no flaws at the current time. Perfect from a technical and gameplay aspect.

Now look at PoE: Due a low Budget the technical quality has issues(most common one being desync), Isometric graphics are outdated. Even from the technical aspect PoE can't get a 10/10.
Just compare Leisure Suit Larry 1/Leisure Suit Larry VGA and Leisure Suit Larry Reloaded.
While the games from 1987(It wasn't even point and click at that time. You had to type: "Go to mirror", "knock at the door" and the point and click remake had 7-8/10 ratings the remake which was a graphical update suddenly scored from 4-6 because the more recent PnC games were technically refined.


One important thing at a game rating are innovations.
PoE mainly copied stuff from other games. It's a valid strategy but now you have to execute it properly.
Such as the Skillgemsystem being a materia copy from FF7.
FF7 was limited to 2 links and not to colors/stats.

PoE goes up to 6links, it's color based and the gems require certain stat levels to improve(far higher in OB than in CB)
Now which issues do we have-->You have to invest time into getting the correct links+colors(Question is how much) and this might be a frustrating experience especially even if you got a 6 link but you need a b ggg rr ES armor for example. This means that the currency to link must be common.
Not being able to leveling up gems is also an issue especially if you can only use them beause of items. It might a a smarter way to give the gem no limit in experience but cut down the current gem level to stats and character level. This means you may level up GMP to level 20 but it only has effective level 9 because you lack Dex. This is a sensetive matter.
Now look at the spell costs for different link combos. It would be a far better system if each support gem adds a constant factor or gems are interacting between themselves.
The illusion of the optimal 6 link gets broken on expensive spells because 1 cast costs over 250 mana at 5l already and link nummer 6 must be RMC/ML.

Now look at the skill tree. At first glance it might look great similar to FF10 but on the second glance you will find out really soon that you will only travel to certain clusters and take the most effective nodes with you on the way. The deeper idea of a net between clusters or possible more effective longer paths is missing.
For example why would you take 6% cold/fire/light nodes with a 6% elemental does the same job and is more versaitile. Or why would you take a 6% elemental node if raising crit multiplier and chance is also far more effective and requires less point?
There is valid critic towards something like "Path of life nodes", or "path to CI".
Especially the Skilltree is essential. Remember for example the CB skilltree before 9.12 or 9.13 when the shadow lacked so many life nodes he had like EHP 700 life at level 40 while each other classes were at 1200-1800?

This leads to look the gameplay. Surely normal difficulty is a good game but at some point you feel you don't have enough currency items because on the first character you might use them on low level items.
Then you have a 20-30 min find with the A3 Boss and you may think is it really necesaary to give him so much HP? Brutus/Merveil cruel don't have that much HP!

Once you reach cruel you might be able to try out several gem combinations. But then is the issue with raising spell costs and reduced kill speed. You won't be able to sustain potion charges in most cases but the low cost spells+ certain items.
The recent Aurachanges even made the issue worse. How are you supposed to use for example clarity which usually eats up all your mana reserves and Discipline at lvl 40? Even 1 reduces your mana pool so you can barely casts spells.
That is a big issue which needs to be fixed. And this will make many players quit the game.
Just looking at the Endgame builds and conclude: "TOO MANY AURAS" isn't good balancing.
There are better solutions such as limiting auras via the passive tree, don't reserve mana/life but use some kind of fog which indicates how much life/mana you need so the aura remains active. Even the order of casting the auras would become important. For example you cast hatred casted first(30%) and haste(40%) if you have over 70% mana hatred is active and haste too.
If you have 30-69% mana only haste is active. <30% auras aren't active.
This would have a heavy impact on aura use and somebody using BM Auras wouldn't be on low life. It also offers the idea of a new keystone which would use the old resevervation and low life builds. Such as Auras Reserve Mana/Life instead of cloak it. X% less reseveration costs(multiplicative)
During cruel you will find the need of currency but you don't find one and also you might need new EQ because you don't hit hard enough anymore you are forced to grind->Many players don't like grindwalls.
Even you were good enough to do cruel without grinding in Merciless you must grind.
You will be heavily underleveled without grinding.

Looking at the content shows you there isn't that much content but the gameplay is slowed down on purpose. There were several games like that in the NES Era and they all got low ratings because of that.

Now looking at Endgame you will be forced to play in party.(Is that part of an ARPG or MMO?)
Currency drops feel even less rewarding and on top of that you get one shot gear checks reducing the illusion that the skill tree even matters anymore.
Not enough resist?->Whack dead.
This is especially horrible if a game uses evasion AND reduce mechanics at the same time.
Evasion characters will always be oneshot at one point no matter how good their evasion is.

It's a game with a good normal difficulty but cruel and merciless show so many fundamental flaws so the game becomes bad.
Diablo3 also got good ratings and at the first sight it doesn't look like a bad game but after time you see fundamental flaws which turn it into a bad game.

On the other side a bad game at first sight doesn't need to be bad. For example AitD got really low end ratings because the car didn't drive like in racing simulations and an uncommon control. But would Super Mario get a bad rating if B is Jump and A Attack?
Surely AitD isn't a good game but it isn't such a bad game either like IGN or other critics made it look like with 1/10 ratings.
A game must be reviewed entirely. Or we can just go back to the time of fake trailers and fake gameplay.

"

Blizz changed balance in D2 quite a lot too, but now balance can shift much faster (which is a good thing). Or are you too lazy to figure out a new build or what?

Yes and I heavily critisize Blizzard for several changes too.
Especially for 1.10 ones.
1.10 would be a much better patch without overpowered runewords and if one Team did the damage scaling. Not a palalover team which turned even a shitty equipped character into a harbringer of destruction and a "similar to 1.09 team" which buffed some skills a bit so the can compare to the best ones of 1.09.
1.10 wasn't the greatest patch of D2 imo it was the patch that destroyed D2. It reached more build diversity yes but it also resulted in horrible differences in power.

I critisize PoE the same way since OB.

"

Most people here are intelligent enough to know why these opinions are objectively worthless, it's a shame this whining vocal minority creates such a poor image for the community.

The community here gets a -10/10 the only communities with the same amount of insults, suggestive provocations and flaming are the shitholes of the internet.

"

Nah I don't agree, butthurt internet heroes like to exaggerate a lot on metacritic. Or is D3 really a 3,8/10? If I try to rate it objectively I'd give it a 6/10, maybe even 7... 3,8 just reeks of butthurt.

Well Error 37 for weeks, no pvp, no skill system, max level reached too fast, unrewarding drops, focus on AH/RMAH, items are 100% based on stats(similar to PoE now which is nothing but Defsne/Evasion/ES/HP and Resist pushing), even it's a good item wrong class->Throw away/Sell, Inferno as oneshot gearcheck difficulty.
I would give D3 also a 3/10 because of massive gameplay issues. But I already mentionedtimes, that PoE became not much different from D3 several.

From a technical aspect D3 is better than PoE but from the gameplay aspect it did worse.

"

No, it's not. As you can see from this thread butthurt kids will give the game a 1/10 because something happened they didn't like, and there will always be blind fanboys that give it a 10/10 regardless. Ueers scores are not accurate. Critics aren't either, they are probably paid off at times, they don't play the game enough to fully understand the game, or they are morons that take away/give points for ridiculous reasons, like the person that took 1 point away from GTA5 because it was supposedly "misogynistic". Neither are very accurate.

You can filter low end and high end ratings if they aren't well explained. That's what amazon does for years.

Then there are several repeating ratings such as: "DRM and forced to be online router reset corrupts my savegame" so they will come through from time to time.

"

Also, have to point out with the new profile options, you can see peoples characters and everyone who is "10/10 best game ever l2p nubs" have shit characters. You might feel differently if you get one up there sometime. Or you might not since you missed the sweetness of that in Open Beta.

Or look at race results. I certainly agree that normal is still a good game.
But Cruel(Progression Phase) and Merciless(Late Game/Endgame) is the main issue here.
I can't stand fixes which only take local copies of High End characters and think all those characters need to do 20% less damage and spells must be more expensive but those changes have far more effect on the progression phase and late game without high end EQ.

Several OB players should force the devs to launch legacy races with settings from CB.
You would beg for some CB changes again.

"

IMHO Metacritic is not worth the time to read it. They would rate oral sex 2/10.

Still a proper reflection of homosexual oral sex on mainly heterosexual users ;)

"

reboticon wrote:

well, I did play for a while last night, and I was very impressed with the new polish on the game, but drop rates are still absolutely horrendous, and the balance changes are awful. The swung the pendulum 100% to the other direction. Life is now extremely OP compared to ES/casters in general. With no changes to the map system I just don't think this version will have nearly the replayability of the open beta version.

(leveling in docks or lunaris is the same joke it already was, you can see the math in any of the various threads. A level 86 character was already getting 2% exp from docks pre patch. Try leveling like that. A level 99 was getting 2% from a 71 map. Try leveling like that.)

Although I did not want a full wipe initially, now I think it would have been a good idea. It's not cool to have useless lvl 88 characters, but I can't bring myself to delete them in hopes that they go back on some of these changes. If they'd just wiped it all I probably wouldn't be worrying about.

Also, have to point out with the new profile options, you can see peoples characters and everyone who is "10/10 best game ever l2p nubs" have shit characters. You might feel differently if you get one up there sometime. Or you might not since you missed the sweetness of that in Open Beta.

Level 87 Shadow, build completely trashed with new skill tree. Later dumpster league, hello sweet, sweet, new leagues.

10/10



My legacy items will sit unused. (Although, I do agree they should've just done all or nothing, but I'm not going to cry about it because....it's dumpster league).

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

NebulousFury wrote:

Actually metacritic is a really accurate way to look up a game, as long as you focus on the USER review score and reviews and not the CRITIC scores.

Nah I don't agree, butthurt internet heroes like to exaggerate a lot on metacritic. Or is D3 really a 3,8/10? If I try to rate it objectively I'd give it a 6/10, maybe even 7... 3,8 just reeks of butthurt.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA