Couldn't get a lot worse than that..

When did IGN become credible reviewers?

When did IGN become credible reviewers?

they have been for a long time... read the reviews they are pretty fair and explain their ratings well

at this point nearly every territory is held by well-run super corps that have more than 200 members and strong ties to the most influential EVE guilds."

WOAH!
200 man corps?!

Id hate to see the battles that happen when 2 of these gigantic corps collide!

I mean 200 people, wow...just WOW.

...and "point and pray".

The review raises quite a few very valid issues with the game, wether the fanboiz would agree. I will say that when more 'credible' review sources come in say the same things, how will the fanboiz defend CCP's decision then?

Edit: I got interrupted mid post, so my grammar train was derailled. :(

Wow that's a bad bad review. Couldn't get a lot worse than that.

This bit made me laugh

"And truth be told, most normal players will never participate in a battle of real significance anyhow, because at this point nearly every territory is held by well-run super corps that have more than 200 members and strong ties to the most influential EVE guilds."

Plus +ºa change, plus c'est la m+¬me chose as the garlic eaters would say.....

I will keep it short, with all the money invested in dust... its kinda sad it can only pull a rating of 5.8 from ign?

Reminds me of walking in stations... another ground breaking project that took years to construct and was ultimately a massive flop.

other peoples thoughts?

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/30/dust-514-review

If that happens, and it really hasn't so far, they will probably respond by stating the obvious.

DUST isn't a game that is released once as is and then "might" receive an update at some point to address flaws. DUST will be continuously improved, with bug fixes, upgraded game play, and new content every few months.

Also the number of DUST players could stay fairly low for the first few months and it wouldn't affect it's long term viability in the slightest, as they are in no way dependent on initial sales to make their profit.

For DUST, unlike virtually every other console game out there, reviews that point out weak parts of the game are actually helpful in it's ongoing development process. For other games that type of review would kill initial sales, and since their entire revenue is based on this it would effectively kill the game. Not so for DUST.

And the cons were weak graphics and bad controls - the two things you do NOT want in a first person shooter.

Except it has happened. IGN isn't the only review site to give Dust a poor rating.

Poor controls, graphics, and gameplay progression have nothing to do with implementing future content.

Send lots of money to IGN for a 9.0+ review.

Actually that works for most "professional" reviewers.

since this shouldn't be a thread about IGN, here's the eurogamer review.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-05-24-dust-514-review

What game got terrible reviews but bounced back? Anyone?

Slightly more insightful, however whenever a reviewer mentions grinding in relation to DUST that is a sure sign that they don't really understand how the game works... and that at least to a degree they are still stuck in a typcial FPS mindset.

other peoples thoughts?

What game got terrible reviews but bounced back? Anyone?

What game got terrible reviews but bounced back? Anyone?

EVE?

Looks like this game will
*Puts on sunglasses*
Gather Dust

You forgot to add in addition to the bouncing back also have won several "best MMO of the year" awards. And so on and so forth etc etc etc.

What game got terrible reviews but bounced back? Anyone?

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/dust-514

Opinions are like wormholes.

if you gather ISK/SP with every battle then how is that not grind?

it is an FPS game so there's nothing wrong with explaining it in a context FPS gamers understand, ie. weapon unlocks etc. particularly as this is aimed at them, not eve players, which surely is the reason for targeting a console platform.

Not an answer to your question, but I can think of at least a dozen games that got glowing reviews and then crapped out really fast. So the opposite must be true. It's just easier to find the epic fails than the glorious wins. We, as humans, seem to be like that.

In any case, I don't play games based on what I read online. I play them based on how much I enjoy the demo.

Mr Epeen

Everyone have wormholes? Or just worms in their holes? I am pretty sure that I don't at the moment so does it mean that my opinions don't count until I do? :(

....strong ties to the most influential EVE guilds....

True. Half the games with glowing reviews I wouldn't touch.

First Commandment of EVE : Thou Shalt Not Have Any Games Before EVE.

The IGN review lost all credibility with me right about here...

You haven't played DUST have you...

If you want to discuss how skill points are accumulated, including bonuses for participating in matches, you should really learn how it works first.

Play it if you want or don't play it if you don't want. Just stop with all the dust crying in the eve forum.

wow someone is mad, this is reasonable debate not crying - please learn the difference...

I asked what people's thoughts were because i'm pretty sure its our subscription money being spent on dust and even if it isn't it is directly connected to eve... and if the general gaming community don't like it they wont spend their money on it... money that will then be lost and we will have a dead weight game bringing eve down.

I didn't say it was a bad game i was pointing to a website that didn't like it - a website that a lot of console gamers use and believe in. Not to mention this isn't the only website saying the same things (and i don't mean good things).

sorry, I want to take you seriously, but your name is FLUFFY DELIVERIES, and that invalidates all your points.

I remember seeing reviews for EVE in the low 6's when it was first released. Just sayin'.

yeah i read you accumulate some SP by playing and the rest is like eve. like i'm going to buy a PS3 so i can play this nonsense.

this is a console FPS game though, I'm not sure it's as much of a keeper. great idea and all but if it's mainly going to get support from eve fanbois then they should have put it on the PC in the first place.

time will tell i guess.

wow someone is mad, this is reasonable debate not crying - please learn the difference...

I asked what people's thoughts were because i'm pretty sure its our subscription money being spent on dust and even if it isn't it is directly connected to eve... and if the general gaming community don't like it they wont spend their money on it / play it... money that will then be lost and we/ccp will have a dead weight game bringing eve down.

I didn't say it was a bad game i was pointing to a website that didn't like it - a website that a lot of console gamers use and believe in. Not to mention this isn't the only website saying the same things (and i don't mean good things).

I realize you have a personal agenda, that being you are irritated that it's not available for PC (which is somewhat ironic), but again you do not need to grind in DUST to develop a character. If you choose to you skill up more quickly, but by the same token if you play something completely unrelated for awhile you still gain skill points until you come back.

DUST only becomes a grind fest if you choose to play it that way, which is something those reviewers refuse to admit (if they even bothered to play it long enough to be aware of these facts to begin with).

Dust was always going to suffer against the likes of Battlefield and CoD, not only technically (this is CCP's first FPS, whereas Activision and DICE have had many cycles to hone their games) but also commercially - because Activision and EA can throw money at reviewers.

The big problem I think is that whilst EVE has the enviable position of being the premiere space MMO and therefore CCP has the luxury of being able to get things wrong, the whole "will get better in the years to come" model won't really work in the FPS space I don't think. BF4 and CoD 100 and beyond will leave it looking more and more lukewarm, and unless the Eve link starts to get some real teeth really fast, it's tough to see what longevity there will be in the game.

On the one hand it's IGN, finger toy of the Fox conglomerate, on the other hand it does raise valid points. Also gj whoever made goonfeet, you dirty fetishist you.

Wow that's a bad bad review. Couldn't get a lot worse than that.

Wow that's a bad bad review. Couldn't get a lot worse than that.

This bit made me laugh

"And truth be told, most normal players will never participate in a battle of real significance anyhow, because at this point nearly every territory is held by well-run super corps that have more than 200 members and strong ties to the most influential EVE guilds."

Plus +ºa change, plus c'est la m+¬me chose as the garlic eaters would say.....

When did IGN become credible reviewers?

At the moment though it's painfully apparent that the reviewer is still thinking in terms of other FPS games on the market.

But it has everything to do with implementing regular game play improvements and bug fixes, which are facts I pointed out that you have chosen to conveniently overlook.

What game got terrible reviews but bounced back? Anyone?

Diablo 2.

Can we compare another FPS clone to something that pretty much started online gaming as we know it?

Wait, started online gaming?

You mean Ultima Online for proper MMO's, right?

Or maybe Doom for FPS's.

Diablo 2? WAY too recent to have 'started' anything.

Didn't realize it was made so recently, must've been thinking of Warcraft 2 or something, loved that game on B.net.

It's a matter of perspective. Y2K was just the other day.

DUST to-date... my experience of watching DUST trailers, anticipating the game, disappointment in the demo, and watching DUST CCP reacting (if you can call it that) to suggestions, reminds me a lot of Aliens: Colonial Marines.

Check it out:

DUST 514 announcement demo: DUST 514 demo | DUST as it actually is

• Better explosions, textures, and effects, it's a different game engine than final product (ended up using Unreal 3. Unreal 4 available but too expensive for game, I guess.).
• Vehicle control is a lot better. Let's see anyone in DUST right now driving like they do in this demo.
• Graphics a lot better in demo.
• Lots of features in demo omitted from final game.
• Developer commits to continued updates and new features. Has yet to overcome most of the original criticism, or match their demo.

Aliens: Colonial Marines in-progress demo: Demo vs Final Product

• Better explosions, textures, and effects, it's a different game engine than final product (ended up using Unreal 3. Unreal 4 available but too expensive for game, I guess.).
• Graphics a lot better in demo than final.
• Lots of features in demo omitted from final game.
• Developer commits to continued updates and new features. Has yet to overcome most of the original criticism, or match their demo.

It's the same thing.

I'm not trying to diss DUST too much... I want to see it successful. I've spent a decent amount of rl cash to support it too. However, you have to look at the reality of the situation: DUST is free. My time is not. If the game isn't good RIGHT NOW, it's not a good game. Maybe it can be a good game in the future... but it needs to get real quick and there's not much sign of anything but little tweaks coming up in the near future.

Must remember DUST 514 will continue to get updates just like EVE does. That means it will give CCP a chance to address the issues the reviews are mentioning. Give it some time before you declare DUST 514 dead or a waste of money.

I will keep it short, with all the money invested in dust... its kinda sad it can only pull a rating of 5.8 from ign?

Reminds me of walking in stations... another ground breaking project that took years to construct and was ultimately a massive flop.

other peoples thoughts?

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/30/dust-514-review

update is coming in two weeks. That not quick enough for ya?

source.

Must remember DUST 514 will continue to get updates just like EVE does. That means it will give CCP a chance to address the issues the reviews are mentioning. Give it some time before you declare DUST 514 dead or a waste of money.

I wonder why it is that some here are so desperate for dust to fail.

I log onto Black Ops and there are, at any given time, over 150k people on with me. DUST 5k. Don't need a review to tell me what that means.

I log onto Black Ops and there are, at any given time, over 150k people on with me. DUST 5k. Don't need a review to tell me what that means.
.

I will keep it short, with all the money invested in dust... its kinda sad it can only pull a rating of 5.8 from ign?

Reminds me of walking in stations... another ground breaking project that took years to construct and was ultimately a massive flop.

other peoples thoughts?

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/30/dust-514-review

If by "update" you mean a couple of teaks, than "no" because it doesn't count. We need a lot more than pushing a couple damage sliders around, I think you'll agree.

I log onto Black Ops and there are, at any given time, over 150k people on with me. DUST 5k. Don't need a review to tell me what that means.

I will keep it short, with all the money invested in dust... its kinda sad it can only pull a rating of 5.8 from ign?

Reminds me of walking in stations... another ground breaking project that took years to construct and was ultimately a massive flop.

other peoples thoughts?

I like DUST.

I was one of those that played it in early beta, but RL got in the way, so I didn't manage to pick up again until last Saturday. Spent all day on it. My sniper rifle had horrible sway, so I tracked down the skill to cure it. I quite like the clunky movement. It reminds me of Dead Space. I am moving around in a bulky suit with a rifle nearly as long as I am tall after all.

Im sure Dust is really good.........

If you like generic bland dull console FPS games

I really WANT Dust to succeed (and come to the PC),

I log onto Black Ops and there are, at any given time, over 150k people on with me. DUST 5k. Don't need a review to tell me what that means.

..banal art design, poor shooting and driving mechanics, and a terrible grind..

I guess it means that World Of Warcraft is 16 times better than EVE?

Dust is not a good and enjoyable FPS game. I tried playing it, I really tried, but when the aiming is so atrocious and the vehicles controls so bad and the physics are just bad, there isn't much left in the game. The shooting sucks, the driving sucks, and really I don't see a reason to continue playing as there are hundreds of other dust bunnies to take my place in battles.

I will keep it short, with all the money invested in dust... its kinda sad it can only pull a rating of 5.8 from ign?

Reminds me of walking in stations... another ground breaking project that took years to construct and was ultimately a massive flop.

other peoples thoughts?

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/30/dust-514-review

My only thought is, what's the point in reviewing a free to play game? A review is meant to be to help people determine whether or not they spend their money on the product.

My only thought is, what's the point in reviewing a free to play game? A review is meant to be to help people determine whether or not they spend their money on the product.

You must be one of those glass half full guys.

Well, let's be fair, IGN is not the only one that's giving the game lukewarm reviews.

I remember when Dust hit open beta earlier this year. What happened? Nothing! Like, literally, nothing. I dropped by many prominent sites that would cover something like this, and not a word. Meanwhile, when games like Vindictus or Dragon's Nest were approaching beta, there were weeks of coverage. So, right out of the gate, Dust was a niche within a niche (EVE).

There's very little Dust coverage from what I saw, and most of it wasn't all that good. One review especially made me chuckle because the last point of Pros and the last point in Cons was the same - future potential tied to EVE Online. And the cons were weak graphics and bad controls - the two things you do NOT want in a first person shooter. And did we mention it was for PS3-only? When EVE is PC-only? Makes so much sense... But hey, all of this was covered already so many times, so why am I rehashing it yet again.

At this point though, I really don't think Dust can even be saved. FPS games have been making quite impressive strides forward. The Rage game by id Software had spectacular enemy animations (mutants attacking by leaping off walls, executing rolls to avoid thrown blades and so on), the Battlefield series is still going strong with its destructible environments and somewhat new mechanics such as suppression, lens glow on scopes to help deal with snipers, not to mention stunning graphics. Call of Duty I can't comment on, it's a little too ADD for me, but they manage to sell the same crap every year with record numbers, so they must be doing something right, right? And where is Dust in all of this? Oh, yeah, it's F2P, so there's no sales to report really.

And later this year we're getting Battlefield 4, and where will Dust be compared to it? Graphics? Controls? Features? Short on all of those. The only thing Dust has is the connection to EVE, a PC game that your average PS3 FPS gamer never played and never will, and thus the connection is utterly meaningless. I made this comparison before, but imagine if there was a connection between EVE and World of Warcraft. On a Venn diagram, the overlap of the two circles would be virtually invisible. I have a strong suspicion it's the same for Dust on PS3 and EVE on PC. One is an FPS on a console, and one is an MMO on a PC. Overlap between those? Not that great.

OK, all right, I admit that EVE is unique. Mostly because there really hasn't been any MMO about spaceships out there in a very long time. When was the last one? Jumpgate? More than a decade ago? But releasing an FPS sci-fi shooter, an F2P one, within months of MMOFPS like Planetside 2 or a bunch of futuristic F2P FPSers? Madness.

they have been for a long time... read the reviews they are pretty fair and explain their ratings well

Not played Dust myself, but is it true your aim, pitch and yaw, and such things as cross hair moving with breath, are all related to skill points?

If that is the case, I'd not like it either.

Not played Dust myself, but is it true your aim, pitch and yaw, and such things as cross hair moving with breath, are all related to skill points?

If that is the case, I'd not like it either.

No. Not at all.

I hear you have to play it with a joypad AND its an FPS.

When did IGN become credible reviewers?

Dust is not a good and enjoyable FPS game. I tried playing it, I really tried, but when the aiming is so atrocious and the vehicles controls so bad and the physics are just bad, there isn't much left in the game. The shooting sucks, the driving sucks, and really I don't see a reason to continue playing as there are hundreds of other dust bunnies to take my place in battles.

When I read their reviews on other games and actually agree with them thats when.

this is a console FPS game though, I'm not sure it's as much of a keeper. great idea and all but if it's mainly going to get support from eve fanbois then they should have put it on the PC in the first place.

time will tell i guess.

Whilst orbital bombardments are cool they're nothing compared to all the other crazy interactions that you'll eventually have and people will eventually discover this.

For DUST, unlike virtually every other console game out there, reviews that point out weak parts of the game are actually helpful in it's ongoing development process. For other games that type of review would kill initial sales, and since their entire revenue is based on this it would effectively kill the game. Not so for DUST.

I feel like I am in a washing machine with all this spin going on.

FPS with out a mouse and keyboard is not srs business.

You have any examples of this or are we just pipe dreaming here? Just log into EVE, enter the CQ and look at the door. That door is going to be DUST's legacy here.

Post Incarna:
Sorry we messed up guys. We're only going to focus on spaceships from now on....except for that F2P shooter we're making...but we promise it will be just as good as the captain's quarters and have "potential".

since this shouldn't be a thread about IGN, here's the eurogamer review.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-05-24-dust-514-review

http://www.gamespot.com/eve-online/reviews/eve-online-the-second-genesis-review-6029978/

Well obviously I at least live in the reality where I know that everything cannot be created in half an hour.

Dust is part of a heavily saturated market which is why it is always being compared to BF, PS2, and CoD.

Well obviously I at least live in the reality where I know that everything cannot be created in half an hour. I am fully aware that the door is going to stay closed for quite some time still due to resources having been redirected elsewhere and that CCP made a couple of mistakes which led to this. But hey, that is reality and bitching about it is a task for fools and worse.

As for new content, we've heard a lot of different things already. Again, I don't expect it to be around for at least a couple of years but what we all know is that CCP wants to essentially merge these two games into one where dusties run around in stations and ships (titans) and cause havoc. I don't play dust in the slightest as I'm not even a console user but nevertheless I think that Dust is the best thing since sliced bread in terms of innovation. Specially when you consider how god damn stale the whole gaming industry has been for the last 5 or so years.

and the cash grab flopped

I will keep it short, with all the money invested in dust... its kinda sad it can only pull a rating of 5.8 from ign?

Reminds me of walking in stations... another ground breaking project that took years to construct and was ultimately a massive flop.

other peoples thoughts?

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/30/dust-514-review

Yeah, it'll do that in a F2P game.

Was your original name as stupid as your banal nonsense?

I guess I should say cash SHOP flopped? The fact that it's free is supposed to be a good thing when it's connected to a subscription based game carrying the weight? One that has a cash shop known to be an unnecessary rip off?

I know if I was in business I would make products that are 100% free...the bottom line must look amazing on the balance sheets.

Now, I don't claim to be an expert marksman, but I had more trouble keeping my sights on target in Dust than in any FPS in recent memory.

But the possibilities arenGÇÖt the only thing thatGÇÖs endless. ThereGÇÖs also the grind, and this is where the free-to-play business model rears its ugly head. See, each of the many categories and sub-categories of gear has its own skill requirements for use, and the skill points (SP) required to attain said skills increases multiplicatively with each rank. For instance, the skills required to get into a base-model logistic suit cost around 330,000SP, and if you want to go top-of-the-line, you're in for quadruple that number. At an average of 3,000-7,000SP per match, that's a lot of sleepless nights between you and the suit you want to build...unless of course, you open your wallet.

Nearly every item has a real-money counterpart that can be used by anyone, free of skill requirements. Prices are reasonable, but whether you're using real (AUR) or in-game (ISK) currency, you lose a copy of every piece of gear in a loadout each time you die, so you'll be making regular post-match trips to the marketplace to restock whatever you just lost

Such high stakes can add tension and excitement to a battle, but at the expense of making new players feel nickeled and dimed every time an experimental loadout goes wrong.

So show me any F2P game that made profit in its first year then.

Hold on I'll start collecting revenue info from all the F2P clones out there...

Considering some of them have a box price I think you're very wrong on that one. What are we comparing this to Combat Arms?

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/eve-online

Metacritic on Eve Online, 69.

Metacritic for Dust 514 56.

I guess we all like ****** games, if you go by the reviews. Considering that Eve Online is not for your average gamer, it isn't surprising the bulk of reviews are negative. If CCP makes Dust like they did Eve, then a similarity of reviews should not be surprising.

v0v

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/eve-online

Metacritic on Eve Online, 69.

Metacritic for Dust 514 56.

I guess we all like ****** games, if you go by the reviews. Considering that Eve Online is not for your average gamer, it isn't surprising the bulk of reviews are negative. If CCP makes Dust like they did Eve, then a similarity of reviews should not be surprising.

v0v

The AI in EVE is a joke. Combat is even simpler than tab-targeting of other MMOs, and nowhere near as player-skill-intensive.

The amount of "abilities" you can use with any given ship are laughable. Compare it to SWTOR, for instance, where a level 80 can have up to 40 abilities, many of which are meant to be reactive counters to specific abilities of other classes.

The amount of content the game offers is miniscule, and yes it's a sandbox and we're supposed to create our own content and blah blah blah blah, but in a good game there would be content built in by default

And I feel the only reason it is still around today is because it has had ZERO competition. [GǪ] And Dust, unlike EVE, isn't protected by that uniqueness and lack of competition.

My thoughts exactly



This is why I dont rely on "critics" to tell me what I should like.

F-tards want me to buy some pretty terrible games. But Im EvE-O all the way.



Well, unless Elite: Dangerous actually surfaces and is any good.

Reviewer said guilds....

Pretty much makes the whole review invalid then, doesn't it?

Pretty much makes the whole review invalid then, doesn't it?

I will keep it short, with all the money invested in dust... its kinda sad it can only pull a rating of 5.8 from ign?


http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/30/dust-514-review

I lol-ed hard at the IGN review. In fact, most of IGN reviews are irrelevant. I mean here is a site that awarded Twilight the Movie a 4.5 upon 5. Srsly, that alone is an indicator of the near retardation of IGN.

5.8? Isn't that supposed to mean 0.8 points above average?

IGN is worthless.

Right, and so are:
GameRankings
Metacritic
GamesRadar
GameTrailers
Destructoid
Eurogamer
Metro GameCentral
Hardcore Gamer

if they give dust a bad review, it's them who are bad, not dust. duuh.

also

pre-release: " IGN said that the game was highly ambitious and called it the future of gaming."

I will keep it short, with all the money invested in dust... its kinda sad it can only pull a rating of 5.8 from ign?

Reminds me of walking in stations... another ground breaking project that took years to construct and was ultimately a massive flop.

other peoples thoughts?

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/30/dust-514-review