Ryzom Comments by Jon Blyth
Five hours as a stranger in a strange land.
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-20 of 20 in total
Poster
|
0
It would be much more interesting if you wrote articles about games rather than reivewed them. Wacking numbers at the bottom just causes argument and completely devalues the preceeding words. I feel I have a much better idea of Ryzom now than I ever did from any review of it I've read.
On a slightly different note - I read Tom's article about the Eurogamer top 50 and the fact that the editors column was meant to reveal a bit more about games journalism. Well here's one thing - games journalism is predominantly not journalism at all it's reviewing, which is very different. Articles like this qualify as journalism and you should do more of them. |
|
0
I covered Ryzom before launch and played it a bit after launch. There was indeed a justified sense of bugginess and lack of completion back then. But it also felt exotic and different. The stanzas are a very nice gameplay element. Use "lego blocks" to build the attacks, debuffs and heals that you want. The game was sluggish and lacking in content back then though. Many areas were only opened after quite a while.
I guess this would not be an issue nowadays. I'm nearly tempted to go back. But so little time and so many games... |
|
seasidebaz
16/12/08 @ 15:29
0
If Albert Einstein and Gary Kasparov started punching each other in the dick, no-one would suggest it was the new chess.
Quite true, but they WOULD suggest it's the new cock fighting... |
|
0
5 hours and you've probably completed all the content.
Not wanting to be harsh, but I tried for a while back and there was bugger all to do. It's a nice looking world with some nice touches (little things like fireflys around lights at night time)... it's perfect maybe for role players, but doesn't have any direction. A good guild is crucial if anyone is trying it, which isn't a problem given the community it enjoys. It might well work as a free to play, and I'm somehow glad it's still running. They're a nice bunch. |
|
0
Agreed that scores lead to arguments, but do you not see any value in them?
If I'm looking for a new game to buy but I don't know what I really want, I can go to the review section, sort all the reviews by score, highest to lowest and work my way down the list, reading each to judge then if it sounds like something I'd like. At least this gives me a good starting point as the ones with the highest scores are likely to be the ones I'll enjoy the most. Without the score I would just have to traipse through every review, one by one and I hope I get lucky.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 16/12/08 @ 15:54
|
|
0
The score itself is not the problem.
But dickheads like oursleves arguing about it. There needs to be some discussion, yes, but if we could just put down the axe, stop stroking our e-peens and just take a more relaxed approach to Scores we would not even question its right at the bottom of a review. |
|
0
Buggs, I know exactly what you mean, and I do agree that they have a value. Sadly since it's so highly subjective it often leads to "this got 6 but read like 8" and other arguments when the score feels even slightly detached.
If you have two very tasty burgers, how do you score them against each other? "Is this burger a 7 and this a 9" A simple solution would be to use three values: "bad", "mediocre" and "good". I think if rate a game to a buddy you will probably end up with something like that. |
|
Whitewalker
16/12/08 @ 22:51
0
What's the end game???...'The Great Roots"...way below the planet's surface...it's where the giants rule and only the strongest warriors on the planet can hope to survive and discover the secrets hidden in the dark depths of the Tree.
|
|
iokthemonkey
17/12/08 @ 09:17
0
Basically a SWG pre-CU without the whining players.
---- Now that makes it sound more interesting... I'm intrigued now... |
Comments: 1-20 of 20 in total
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Advertisement
