Lets bump PoE on Metacritic

"

Delmas wrote:

Why are there two elders rambling on about the history of diablo 2 in a thread about rating path of exile on metacritic?

I read many reviews on metacritic and almost all the negative ones reasons are almost all simply false. I read someone who said this game was an economy simulator lmao.

"

Hilbert wrote:

"

Spoiler

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.

Wall of text

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look at PoE: Due a low Budget the technical quality has issues(most common one being desync), Isometric graphics are outdated.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.

"

Veta321 wrote:

"

Delmas wrote:

Why are there two elders rambling on about the history of diablo 2 in a thread about rating path of exile on metacritic?

I read many reviews on metacritic and almost all the negative ones reasons are almost all simply false. I read someone who said this game was an economy simulator lmao.

Oh, so earnest reviewers are liars now? Perceived problems often indicate an underlying problem if not the overt problem. Whether that's a poor method of teaching players or it really is poor design is up to the devs to figure out. I'm keen on these concerns being resolved so POE can succeed. Pretending they don't exist however helps no one.

"

johnKeys wrote:

I'd like to start by saying, the game doesn't deserve a 10/10 from me.
very, very few games in my 30 years of playing, do.

but you guys raging here, and going over to Metacritic and giving the game 2/10? that's wrong.

you may be raging about legacy uniques, and aura nerf and whatnot - but you need to stop for a second and think: does the random person reading your review know about these stuff?
chances are, he doesn't.
he just heard of this new game called "Path Of Exile", and went to read reviews of it.
he didn't play any of the Betas. he doesn't know what legacy uniques are.

so for him, please write an honest, responsible review. "professional" even.

looking at PoE 1.0 as a standalone game, I'd give it 8.5/10.
I gave Open Beta 7/10.
seeing the incredible amount of work GGG put in since Beta, it's a 9.5/10 - but if I were to write a review on Metacritic right now, the score would be the first (8.5).

"

jsn006 wrote:

yeah newbfags will rate it on normal difficulty, suffice to say reviews right now are not to be taken any seriously.

And omg how come you didnt give it 10/10? I thought you said the monster design was so horrible in this game, thats a big enough part of the game to warrant more than 0.5 knocked off imo. Q_Q titty bitches so OP, lunaris runs so difficult!

Fanboys gonna fanboy

"

johnKeys wrote:

"

jsn006 wrote:

yeah newbfags will rate it on normal difficulty, suffice to say reviews right now are not to be taken any seriously.

And omg how come you didnt give it 10/10? I thought you said the monster design was so horrible in this game, thats a big enough part of the game to warrant more than 0.5 knocked off imo. Q_Q titty bitches so OP, lunaris runs so difficult!

Fanboys gonna fanboy

see? that's where you are wrong: 8.5 is for Release.
all my QQ was in Beta, and most of it stayed in Beta.

GGG managed to make a huge improvement to the game code.
they made it release-worthy AND improved the visuals, which is nothing short of remarkable.
AI of mobs - especially in A3X - is more than satisfactory, A3X unique mobs are well-designed, new mobs in previous acts are good, and Dominus as a boss is just plain epic.
they just need to fix that zone-in crash thing I am having with the tower roof right now.

overall, the game is fun and pretty well-made, and this deserves 8.5/10 without wall-of-texting why.
maybe I'll wall-of-text a full review later, if I have time.

you are trolling me for posts I did a long time ago, and I'm ignoring your trolling.
why? because it is a time to be serious, Jsn. especially if writing a player review in a neutral site.

"

Odoakar wrote:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/path-of-exile

Give it a 10/10. Go, do it.

"

jsn006 wrote:

The AI and pathfinding hasnt changed at all, I'd say its even worse than before if you thought it was bad. See, why would you flat out lie about something like that? Their pathfinding is horrendous sometimes, and the issues with shift targeting are more frustrating than ever (with cleave, lightning strike, infernal blow ... same old shit, and I play RT mind you, so its not an accuracy issue)

Not gonna address anything else tbh ... fanboys gonna fanboy