Devourer Of Souls wrote:

I don't disagree much. I was turned off by the fact that I'd have to spend time with someone I don't know and then roleplaying with an unfamiliar person just to see if I even -liked- the game at its core, and I ended up quitting.

Well that's a shame. But that's beside the point. This review does not take any time to discuss the positive aspects that BLN offers. Of course there are many problems and flaws with it, but there are also things about BLN that make it appealing and great. Shouldn't people who read reviews hear about those things too?


P.S Thanks for actually discussing something about the RP aspect rather than the PVP aspect.

DeathHyren wrote:

Devourer Of Souls wrote:
Well that's a shame. But that's beside the point. This review does not take any time to discuss the positive aspects that BLN offers. Of course there are many problems and flaws with it, but there are also things about BLN that make it appealing and great. Shouldn't people who read reviews hear about those things too?


P.S Thanks for actually discussing something about the RP aspect rather than the PVP aspect.

At the very least, I found the helpfile to be reasonably helpful. But I'm inherently shy and while I do love roleplaying, there's a certain amount of feel I have to get for a world and a game before I feel I can do it.

Just my opinion, though. I'm sure long-term players of the game don't have the same problems, and it looks like a fun game when you get to the heart of it (such as in the gameplay video), but it clearly takes a while to get there.

(even though I dont want to say this) I think that if the BLN staff makes the training system better, it could actually beat GOA in the rankings

Also Hyren I cant edit a guide sorry =P

Superflyspy5 wrote:

Alright, I think this discussion is over, maybe I hit the gameplay too hard, maybe if the owner actually tried training himself... But anyways, just remember this is my opinion of the game

I'd say you didn't. Regardless of what people say about this "excellent" gameplay, training is STILL gameplay, and it still sucks and is stupid and boring.
Forcing people to sit through this dull and tedious training just to get to something worth playing is dumb, and should negatively effect the games overall score.

Afterall, when you go to watch a film at the cinemas, are you forced to watch paint dry for a few hours before being able to watch the film?
I think not, so why does this game have the equivalent of that and not expect it to negatively effect it's score?

Anyway, a good game regardless of what genre should grab you by the balls within the first 30 minutes, otherwise the majority of people wont even give it a second look.

DeathHyren wrote:

Ok, so you just sat there and proved my point that this review is biased. Once again, you ignored all of the other aspects of the game and only discussed what you thought was bad about it.

What other aspects? The fact that I have to sit around for DAYS hitting some log in a game filled with lag just to do something else.

Maybe these positive aspects of the game do exist. Pardon the expression, but I'm not going to eat 10 piles of dog turd just so I can take a bite out of a chocolate muffin.

I'd give the gameplay maybe a 2-3 out of 10. The game makes use of what BYOND is poor at, forces unneeded and tedious grinding on people and feels unpolished. There was also a distinct lack of direction in the game. I logged in for my first time and after following a silly (unhelpful) tutorial was slapping in an overly large (big maps are not better, especially when they are so barren and empty of features), featureless city with nothing to do, I wasn't even told where to train nor could I ask because the world was muted.

But I will judge the other aspects of the game.

The presentation was average at best. Yay another generic title screen that consists of [insert anime character her] filled with tons of poorly used Photoshop filters. Basically the same as every other anime game I've played.
The layout isn't designed very well at all. There is two output boxes in seemling random places, both output text that is seemlingly rainbow coloured and microscopic. There was this... Little grid or output box in the very top that was like... 10 pixels in size and about 3 lines of text (why?). There was also lots of practically unreadable buttons, a massive empty area and the map could have been bigger. (Seriously guys, 800x600 is not a common resolution like it was 10 years ago, now-a-days people commonly have resolutions 50% to 100% that size :[)

Presentation gets a 3 out of 10. Had the game been made to acommodate larger screen resolutions, or at least made text readable in larger resolutions then maybe I would have given it a 4 or 5 out of 10.

As for originality... Where? Generic anime game based of generic shounen that isn't even good. Execution wise it was a grinding RPG similar to most korean MMORPGs, only the game was smaller and with even less to do.
I'd give this game a 0 in originality, nothing about this game is particularly new or innovative, not compared to anime games, not in the BYOND community and not in video games in general.

Overall I would give this game a 2 out of 10 (rounded up). Get rid of the tedious grinding, add some clear and defined objectives, polish the gameplay off and put some effort into the interface and layout of things. Do that and you might score a 4-5 out of 10, which for a BYOND anime game is fairly good (I wouldn't give Naruto GOA more than a 4-5 out of 10 as well, but it would only get that score IF all the blaringly obvious bugs were at least fixed).

Also, I'd recommend getting some better admins/moderators. The second time I logged into the game some admin/mod decided to pick on me for no apparent reason. I was basically confronted with hundreds of "change your name" dialoug boxes, as if they set up a macro to spam me with these boxes. My name didn't break any rules, nor was I even given a decent explanation as to why I was being spammed with name change boxes (even after asking).
You might not think it, but having bad or abusive staff members can detract from the game.

Tubutas, once again, you are clearly ignorant of the purpose of a game review. You're supposed to review the good AND the bad. Not just one or the other. Yes, it is a promotional tool, but this review ignores all of the good content in the game and focuses on the shitty parts, which is not what it is supposed to do.


Thanks for the input though Magic Man.

Again, you want to discuss and find faults in the game, but you need to discuss the things the game does well.


Oh, and quoting the dictionary shows that you're incapable of arguing things in your own words.

Take a look at a professional game review on ign.com or even gamespot.com. You'll see what I'm talking about even if you read a review for a shitty game.

Take this one for instance:
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/748/748598p1.html

Notice it opens by saying that the game was overall poor. Fair enough. That's what SuperFlyspy's review more or less does and there's no problem.

As the review progresses, though, it gives an example of something the reviewer liked, and why he liked it. They also give examples of what was done poorly and what they could have done better.

Good: The other two characters fare a little better. Shadow can ride vehicles and blast stuff better than Sonic can, while Silver uses telekinesis to move giant blocks and build broken bridges. He can also whisk incoming missiles and laser shots and fire them back to enemies.

Bad: Take the major player, Sonic. He accelerates slowly and only starts going with the help of speed pads on the floor. Making matters worse, the levels themselves force him to a grinding halt almost constantly. He needs to stop to handle environmental hazards and enemies, and forget about bumping into anything because it yanks him back to zero.

Again, if the reviewer sat there and merely complained about things that were bad and didn't take the time to discuss things that were decent or "ok" in the game, then it wouldn't be worth a read.

This review should be telling players what they will like in the game, and what they won't like. Take Rugg's reviews for example. Rugg does an excellent job reviewing games because he discusses the good AND the bad about each game.

If you were to compare this BLN review to the GOA review, you would see a clear difference. In the GOA review, SuperFlyspy pretty much goes over all of the good qualities of the game and only mentions the bad qualities a few times. Of course his opinion is that GOA is better than BLN, but GOA certainly is not perfect no matter how you look at it. His BLN review is quite the opposite though, he basically talks about all of the bad qualities and completely ignores the good things that are enjoyable. Fuck, he doesn't even give it an overall score. The only thing you can say is that this review is bias.


And no, I'm implying that you're too stupid to argue without having the dictionary at your side to save you from all the bad people who might prove you wrong.

Tubutas wrote:

Thats what Superflyspy is basically saying here. Sure he didn't have time to say all the things that are good [if any], but he is saying what could be better, and what needs to be improved if it wants to get better reviews.

Yeah, and I don't have a problem with how he concluded his review. MY problem is that he doesn't take the time to discuss good things to give a full glimpse of the game to players who might think of joining. Obviously he liked things about the game, so why can't he take the time to describe them? And yes, he does have the time to discuss those things for BLN if he has the time to do it for the entire span of the GOA review.

In the end, and I'm sorry if I offend you Superfly, but half assed reviews that don't take "time to say all the things that are good [and bad]" aren't doing anyone any favors.

Oh, didnt see the nasty remark

DeathHyren wrote:

And no, I'm implying that you're too stupid to argue without having the dictionary at your side to save you from all the bad people who might prove you wrong.

The dictionary defines words if you're not sure of a word you look it up. You were unsure of the word review and I looked it up for you, the dictionary proves stupid people, like you, and certainly not like me, wrong. Making up your own definition of the word is all fine and dandy until you miss-use(sp?) it, and start convincing other people that thats what it means. Review does not mean the good and bad of something. Review Does mean a critical report