| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (89)

Posted: Oct 30th 2009 6:37PM Arcadian said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That's funny you should mention that, because you've explained pretty clearly the reasons why I've quit CO, just like you have.

Picked up Borderlands. It's an absolute blast. With all the holiday games coming, CO is in real, real trouble. They knew that, and went for the easy money from the C-Store rather than fixing bugs *or* adding new real content.

In a world where the MMO player is demanding more from their game, CO delivers less and less.
Reply

Posted: Oct 30th 2009 10:35AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't think the existence of a C-Store is something that directly relates to the significant flaws in CO, I think the existence of a C-Store is something that directly relates to the significant flaws in Cryptic, and then more specifically the team assigned to CO.

It speaks to, as others have mentioned, an absence of the proper grasp of priorities. Something like a C-Store, which (allegedly) will have no impact on day-to-day playing, shouldn't be something that is released before the actual in-game zones are functional. That's an idiotic way to approach things, and it is obviously going to annoy players who have to slog through the current in-game mess.

In other words, they have the thing that people don't need all nice, shiny and ready to go... but the stuff people have to deal with day in and day out is still a mess. Really? That seemed like a good idea to someone?

Speaking to whatever percieved bias Sera Brennan has, well... duh. Time to wear the grown-up clothes, everyone: people have opinions. You read something Keith Olbermann or Glenn Beck write, I think it's safe to say you'll be able to pick up a whiff of pre-formed conclusions.

Same deal here. Obviously Massively has a staff that likes CO, so for people to have a problem with the writers expressing that opinion strikes me as odd. According to Metacritic, eleven publications/sites gave CO an 80 or higher. Eleven gave it a 70 or less. I don't think there is universal acclaim or universal distaste for the game from the gaming media, but there are certainly going to be data points on either side of neutral. Sera Brennan is clearly a data point of the former. Caveat Emptor.

Posted: Oct 30th 2009 10:29AM Enaris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
To quote "And, to be very honest, don't let people kid you -- the only reason you might screw up your character in Champions is because you didn't do your homework. The powerhouse lets you screw around with many, many powers and builds to see exactly how they function. There shouldn't be any surprises here if you test out your powers properly."


I've not played CO (too many things on my plate as is), but I can't imagine that this is an entirely fair statement. In most games I've played, build weaknesses aren't always apparant first off, but as a character plays in a variety of settings, against a variety of enemies, the weaknesses become more obvious. Sometimes they will be relatively trivial, other times, quite profound. So, even if the Powerhouse has a sufficient variety of enemies to fight to give a reasonable test, you'd need to spend hours upon hours upon hours to test a build before you actually get to take it in game.

Posted: Oct 30th 2009 1:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not entirely on topic: There are those of us among you who believe that CoX got markedly better after NCSoft took over running the ship.

Off topic: I have spent oodles of cash on stuff in the CoX mt store. The way the CO C-Store breaks down, I wouldn't have spent dollar one.

Entirely off-topic: Sera, I have long considered you one of the finest writers on this site. It is sad that this, only my third or fourth post as a non-lurker, must end thusly:

/wagfinger

Posted: Oct 30th 2009 1:33PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That second one should read 'On topic', natch.

/wagfingeratself
Reply

Posted: Oct 30th 2009 1:59PM Seraphina Brennan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
We can't always agree on everything. :3 If we did, the world would be crazy boring.

With that said, I hope you stick around and continue to read. This is (hopefully) the last time I have to get all-up-ons with CO. I too am getting tired of my own CO rants.
Reply

Posted: Oct 30th 2009 3:45PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Of course I'll continue to read. I even read your pieces on some of the more avant-garde MMOs because I value your opinion on such decadent virtual matters.

Sometimes wear the hat of professional writer myself and know that what seems like chipper enthusiasm to the scribe sometimes comes across as die-hard fanaticism to the reader/editor.

The trick I'm trying to perfect is getting die-hard enthusiasm to come over like mild interest... ^_^

Posted: Nov 1st 2009 8:15PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, not going to comment to much on your review but as far as the retcon goes those against it on the side of it shouldn't be there until in game means to aquire the retcons were a little more obtainable was not only legit but won out.

Cryptic is adding in a free retcon that you can get when your toon hits 40. Combine that with retcons being purchasable in game I am fine with retcons being on the C store.

See, normal means for retconing a toon in CO is unbelievably impossible for most. The cost at 40 to retcon is more than you will have made if you saved every penny your toon earned from level 1 to level 40. This is insane compaired to any other MMO.

Even if you failed to realise this it's not a big deal since Cryptic has and there the ones we were complaining to.

Glad you wrote a review to point out how wrong those against the retcon being on the C store were when Cryptic deemed we were correct and is in the process in making things right.

So............... take that as you will.

Posted: Nov 3rd 2009 6:21PM Cinnamoon said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"And, to be very honest, don't let people kid you -- the only reason you might screw up your character in Champions is because you didn't do your homework."

Ah I see, my problem must be that I thought I was paying for a game, not a second job, or a second education. Homework... just listen to yourself!

Comparing paying for retcons to paying for race changes in WoW is completely disingenuous. Retcons are the equivalent of *respecs* which cost next to nothing WoW -- a small chunk of gold that you can earn back in 10 minutes. By why stop at WoW? In SWG, your respec timer resets every month (effectively granting you a dozen freebies per year, on top of those you pay credits for), and you don't just respec your talents, you respec your CLASS. CoH hands them out like candy as vet rewards, craftables, and patch bonuses. UO has a skill system that lets you change your skills around and even trade them to your other characters using soulstones. Heck, why even bother with that at all, when a game like Guild Wars lets you change your skill loadout everytime you hit a zone, and for free?

I love microtransactions, especially in games without fees to begin with. But this issue is about poor management of a basic game concept, whether or not it sells for real or virtual cash. This problem stems from elitist designers who are totally out of touch with their playerbase, and they'll either adapt or die because of these sorts of blunders. Champs won't be the last.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW