Official Thread Middle-earth: Shadow of War

Reviews are all over the place with this one. At worst its an average game, at best its a masterpiece.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Grimmy
lowdru2k said:
I’ve never played it. Was always interested.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I didn't play it until early spring this year. Really enjoyed it. Probably going to wait on this one too.
 
Andy said:
Not liking what I'm hearing about GaaS strategies.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=251040914&postcount=1

They better not bog down other SP games with this sort of thing -- designing sections of tedious busywork, just so people will be motivated to pay money to avoid them. I will not be pleased.
Click to expand...
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-10-05-middle-earth-shadow-of-war-review
Speaking of difficulty levels, it would be impossible to review Shadow of War without addressing the inclusion of loot boxes and microtransactions that caused such a stir just a couple of months ago. In essence, loot chests can be bought from the game's market using Mirian, an abundant (and free) in-game currency, or gold - which is given out in much smaller measures and can, crucially, be bought with real money. These chests give out gear, XP boosts, new followers and training orders (essentially follower upgrades) for you to put to use, improving your fortunes as you go about the game world. Given how freely the game gives you skill points, gear and orcs to turn into loyal soldiers, however, these chests are wholly unnecessary. If you need them in order to get by in Shadow of War, in fact, you are almost certainly playing on the wrong difficulty setting.

I was worried about that too. I loathe micro-trans (as opposed to micro-cis-gendered) 99.99% of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grimmy
Bellybama said:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-10-05-middle-earth-shadow-of-war-review
Speaking of difficulty levels, it would be impossible to review Shadow of War without addressing the inclusion of loot boxes and microtransactions that caused such a stir just a couple of months ago. In essence, loot chests can be bought from the game's market using Mirian, an abundant (and free) in-game currency, or gold - which is given out in much smaller measures and can, crucially, be bought with real money. These chests give out gear, XP boosts, new followers and training orders (essentially follower upgrades) for you to put to use, improving your fortunes as you go about the game world. Given how freely the game gives you skill points, gear and orcs to turn into loyal soldiers, however, these chests are wholly unnecessary. If you need them in order to get by in Shadow of War, in fact, you are almost certainly playing on the wrong difficulty setting.

I was worried about that too. I loathe micro-trans (as opposed to micro-cis-gendered) 99.99% of the time.
Click to expand...
Their defense of loot boxes is to put the difficulty on a lower setting? How about f*** off. According to Total Biscuit:

If I ever get around to the game I'll wait until it's $5.
 
Viktor said:
Their defense of loot boxes is to put the difficulty on a lower setting? How about f*** off. According to Total Biscuit:

If I ever get around to the game I'll wait until it's $5.
Click to expand...


hmm, that's too bad. I won't buy the game with that BS. I'm sure they will do a game of the year version with all the s*** later.
 
Both IGN reviewers coming to the defense of a game they gave one of the higher review scores to. RIGGED
 
Maybe. But would make sense why they gave a better score if their experience was better.
 
Grimmy said:
Reviews

Polygon - 7.5

PCGamer - 73

So far, it seems the game has taken a little step back. Also, loot boxes.
Click to expand...

People are getting waay to wound up about the existence of Microtransactions. Just. Don't. Use. Them. I don't understand how people have a problem with devs trying to get more money in an industry where games cost the same as they did 30 years ago but cost orders of magnitude more to produce.
 
Well, the issue is that the game design may be affected -- and thereby everyone's experience, not just the people who choose to buy the loot boxes.

It's not hard to imagine that developers will artificially extend grinds, in order to increase motivation to buy loot boxes in order to avoid those grinds.

So the issue is, has the game design been affected? Am I, as a person who paid $60 for the game, having to go through sections of a game that have been designed in a way (e.g., extended tedium/grind) that motivate me to pay money, in order to bypass them?

If so, you are now decreasing the overall quality of the base game, in order to motivate people to pay more. That effects everyone who plays the game, regardless of whether they pay or not.

I don't know if that's the case here. But that's the danger people are concerned about.
 
It's entitlement. Always annoyed the hell out of me that Apple required their own proprietary cable to charge a damn phone, but that's their prerogative.
 
Frozpot said:
People are getting waay to wound up about the existence of Microtransactions. Just. Don't. Use. Them. I don't understand how people have a problem with devs trying to get more money in an industry where games cost the same as they did 30 years ago but cost orders of magnitude more to produce.
Click to expand...

Disc based games went up in price to $59.99 at the beginning of the PS3, 360 generation, before that they were $49.99 for what seemed like forever. That being said your point still stands, as long as the optional charges aren't things you absolutely need to get the full gaming experience I'm fine with it. Honestly I'd be fine with another price increase if it means making the industry more stable, even just $5.00 a game would likely help a lot and they'd make more money that way than by getting what is likely a small percentage of overall players buying loot boxes.
 
Last edited:
Frozpot said:
People are getting waay to wound up about the existence of Microtransactions. Just. Don't. Use. Them. I don't understand how people have a problem with devs trying to get more money in an industry where games cost the same as they did 30 years ago but cost orders of magnitude more to produce.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with microtransactions if it doesn't effect the game. But Polygon was claiming to get legendary orcs to finsih the true ending required grinding or opening loot boxes. However, someone at IGN said that wasn't true.
 
Loot boxes, MTs, and all other GaaS strategies are here to stay -- and expand -- that's for sure. I just don't want them compromising SP games in an attempt to suck more money out of me.

That's just a general comment. I don't know if Shadow of War has done it right or wrong. I don't know enough about the game to say.
 
Andy said:
Well, the issue is that the game design may be affected -- and thereby everyone's experience, not just the people who choose to buy the loot boxes.

It's not hard to imagine that developers will artificially extend grinds, in order to increase motivation to buy loot boxes in order to avoid those grinds.

So the issue is, has the game design been affected? Am I, as a person who paid $60 for the game, having to go through sections of a game that have been designed in a way (e.g., extended tedium/grind) that motivate me to pay money, in order to bypass them?

If so, you are now decreasing the overall quality of the base game, in order to motivate people to pay more. That effects everyone who plays the game, regardless of whether they pay or not.

I don't know if that's the case here. But that's the danger people are concerned about.
Click to expand...

The issue is game design "maybe" affected?
Well it either is. Or it isn't. And from every other article beside the one Polygon wrote seems to state without ambiguity that game design is not a affected.

So. What's this then? Sensational journalism or fact based reporting?

I know the one I'm betting on.
 
D-V-ANT said:
The issue is game design "maybe" affected?
Well it either is. Or it isn't. And from every other article beside the one Polygon wrote seems to state without ambiguity that game design is not a affected.

So. What's this then? Sensational journalism or fact based reporting?

I know the one I'm betting on.
Click to expand...

I was addressing the general point of why people are concerned about these issues. As I said twice, I wasn't sure whether this was true of Shadow of War. I'm not tuned into the game enough to know.
 
My steam copy unlocked earlier tonight. I only had time to play for an hour. So far the loot boxes are un-obstructive and quite honestly barely noticeable once you get into the meat of the game.
 
I'm looking forward to playing this game but I'll be waiting until Nov 7, this is one of the few games I'll be getting on the One X this fall.
 
Last couple hours to get the first game of the year edition dirt cheap on Xbox one marketplace

 
The Wolf King said:
Last couple hours to get the first game of the year edition dirt cheap on Xbox one marketplace

Click to expand...


There is a nice example of the ridiculous group think that goes on nowadays right in the beginning. You get the disgust over paid loot crates taking immediate air-time, only to find out that is has been a non-factor to the guy who has actually been playing it. The pearl-clutching that goes on today is nauseating.
 
Do I have this right? A couple reviewers say the endgame content (not much) is preceded by a long, tedious grind?

If so, that doesn't sound too bad.
 
Frozpot said:
There is a nice example of the ridiculous group think that goes on nowadays right in the beginning. You get the disgust over paid loot crates taking immediate air-time, only to find out that is has been a non-factor to the guy who has actually been playing it. The pearl-clutching that goes on today is nauseating.
Click to expand...
I am half way through Forza 7 career. Never bought a single loot box with the in game credits. I have nearly every car unlocked and have had over 2 million in credits earned already.

Got to love the drama around nothing.
 
When Halo 5 first launched, it got killed for paid REQ packs. I've put near 1500 hours into the game without buying one of them. My total cost for that game is still $60. As long as these microtansactions aren't required to complete the core game, I fail to understand the controversy. Factoring inflation, games are actually cheaper today than they were a decade ago, offer far more average content and are much more expensive to produce. I suppose publishers could match inflation and start selling games for $80...or continue to rely on a handful of people with money to burn buying micro-transactions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back