By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Sea of Thieves - Metacritic/Review thread - Metascore: XBO - 69 (69 reviews) PC - 68 (23 reviews)

Seventizz on 23 March 2018
JRPGfan said:
CaptainExplosion said:
The most it's gotten is a 67 on Meta Critic? Was all of Rare's hard work for nothing? -_-

its first review, was a 82.. they got that only hours after it launched.
It was probably rushed and by pro MS reviewers.

Running joke is that there 4 skeletions / 2 boats in the game, and it took them 4-5 years of developement time.
Hence the 1 skeletion / year gag.

The no progression backfired heavily, and it does feel like not much work was put into the game (from the outside looking in).
Rare should have taken a year more and added more content to the world before launching it.

Wrong.  You clearly don’t understand the game which you clearly haven’t played, but insist on being an expert on it.  First off, the game’s progression is lacking on purpose.  This isn’t about min/maxing a character to death like some boring RPG, it’s about having a balanced PvP environment where your skill takes precedence over a skill tree.  You log in, and you're on an equal footing with a more seasoned player.  It’s casual at its finest, and there’s nothing wrong with that.  For some of us, we’d rather be gaming then spending hours at a time in a menu.  You don’t like it?  Fine.  I doubt you even own an X1 or a gaming PC to play it anyway.  Not every game has to be for everyone.  



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 23 March 2018
Faelco said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Thats the problem, Phil Spencer's true plan can only unfold at this point towards and onward towards next gen. All Phil could do was fix what the past leadership had done. Whatever happens with Gamepass and Xbox next gen is all on Phil. If Gamepass does succeed it will depend upon exclusives to hoist itself up because it will worth its own weight in gold (literally). It would be more profitable than selling games by themselves.

Phil Spencer has been head of Xbox for years now, and he was even head of the dev studios before that. The "it's not his fault, it's all because of the guys before him" excuse has stopped working a long time ago.

 

And if someone says "You can't recover from a launch fail", the PS3 proved that wrong. 

Sony already had those games planned before their financial issues started. Sony has always been more first party dedicated than Microsoft. Also, yes, I am willing to give Phil Spencer the benefit of the doubt (for now) because of the fact that he had to turn a ship around that was screwed up. Microsoft has never had or been known for great first party so a restructuring process has to take place. Phil has only recently been given access to the checkbook where he can gather studios and make new ips as everyone has asked. If you dont believe me, look it up.



AngryLittleAlchemist on 23 March 2018
Seventizz said:
JRPGfan said:

its first review, was a 82.. they got that only hours after it launched.
It was probably rushed and by pro MS reviewers.

Running joke is that there 4 skeletions / 2 boats in the game, and it took them 4-5 years of developement time.
Hence the 1 skeletion / year gag.

The no progression backfired heavily, and it does feel like not much work was put into the game (from the outside looking in).
Rare should have taken a year more and added more content to the world before launching it.

Wrong.  You clearly don’t understand the game which you clearly haven’t played, but insist on being an expert on it.  First off, the game’s progression is lacking on purpose.  This isn’t about min/maxing a character to death like some boring RPG, it’s about having a balanced PvP environment where your skill takes precedence over a skill tree.  You log in, and you're on an equal footing with a more seasoned player.  It’s casual at its finest, and there’s nothing wrong with that.  For some of us, we’d rather be gaming then spending hours at a time in a menu.  You don’t like it?  Fine.  I doubt you even own an X1 or a gaming PC to play it anyway.  Not every game has to be for everyone.  

You spend hours at a time ... in menus? In .. games? How do you function at restaurants 0_0



JRPGfan on 23 March 2018
Seventizz said:
JRPGfan said:

its first review, was a 82.. they got that only hours after it launched.
It was probably rushed and by pro MS reviewers.

Running joke is that there 4 skeletions / 2 boats in the game, and it took them 4-5 years of developement time.
Hence the 1 skeletion / year gag.

The no progression backfired heavily, and it does feel like not much work was put into the game (from the outside looking in).
Rare should have taken a year more and added more content to the world before launching it.

Wrong.  You clearly don’t understand the game which you clearly haven’t played, but insist on being an expert on it.  First off, the game’s progression is lacking on purpose.  This isn’t about min/maxing a character to death like some boring RPG, it’s about having a balanced PvP environment where your skill takes precedence over a skill tree.  You log in, and you're on an equal footing with a more seasoned player.  It’s casual at its finest, and there’s nothing wrong with that.  For some of us, we’d rather be gaming then spending hours at a time in a menu.  You don’t like it?  Fine.  I doubt you even own an X1 or a gaming PC to play it anyway.  Not every game has to be for everyone.  

I understand that, as do most people... and yet the main thing is most consider it a mistake.
It backfired on them, as I wrote above. It would have reviewed much better, and not had people out complaining about lack of content this early on, if there was some fort of meaningfull progression system in place.



Faelco on 23 March 2018
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Faelco said:

Phil Spencer has been head of Xbox for years now, and he was even head of the dev studios before that. The "it's not his fault, it's all because of the guys before him" excuse has stopped working a long time ago.

 

And if someone says "You can't recover from a launch fail", the PS3 proved that wrong. 

Sony already had those games planned before their financial issues started. Sony has always been more first party dedicated than Microsoft. Also, yes, I am willing to give Phil Spencer the benefit of the doubt (for now) because of the fact that he had to turn a ship around that was screwed up. Microsoft has never had or been known for great first party so a restructuring process has to take place. Phil has only recently been given access to the checkbook where he can gather studios and make new ips as everyone has asked. If you dont believe me, look it up.

He's been general manager of Microsoft Studios since 2008, so for 10 years now. He is responsible for the lack of new IPs and first party games. He was obviously involved in the launch of the XOne. He handled lately Tomb Raider, Scalebound, Crackdown, Fable... He canceled the new IP from The Coalition to get a new Gears instead. And now Sea of Thieves and the "games as a service" strategy. I know that some people still believe in him, but that's what it is: faith. It's not related to his achievements at all, but rather to his T shirts and Twitter PR. Until when will this faith hold? 



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 23 March 2018
Faelco said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Sony already had those games planned before their financial issues started. Sony has always been more first party dedicated than Microsoft. Also, yes, I am willing to give Phil Spencer the benefit of the doubt (for now) because of the fact that he had to turn a ship around that was screwed up. Microsoft has never had or been known for great first party so a restructuring process has to take place. Phil has only recently been given access to the checkbook where he can gather studios and make new ips as everyone has asked. If you dont believe me, look it up.

He's been general manager of Microsoft Studios since 2008, so for 10 years now. He is responsible for the lack of new IPs and first party games. He was obviously involved in the launch of the XOne. He handled lately Tomb Raider, Scalebound, Crackdown, Fable... He canceled the new IP from The Coalition to get a new Gears instead. And now Sea of Thieves and the "games as a service" strategy. I know that some people still believe in him, but that's what it is: faith. It's not related to his achievements at all, but rather to his T shirts and Twitter PR. Until when will this faith hold? 

Phil Spencer has only been given true power now. Hes only recently become executive vice president. His will for the division as far as gaming investment will be put into place next gen. He didn't have the check book back then. He had to work on the budget he was given. he had pull, but not as much as one would think. Spencer was only given a visible role By Satya Nadella once the last group of the last head of Xbox left the building. Spencer was tasked with turning Xbox around, hence why hes only recently been promoted.

I dont have faith in Xbox, but there is also being rational. I can only blame Phil Spencer for the plate hes set, not what he had to fix. Next gen is on him.

Last edited by S.T.A.G.E. - on 23 March 2018

Madword on 23 March 2018
Faelco said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Sony already had those games planned before their financial issues started. Sony has always been more first party dedicated than Microsoft. Also, yes, I am willing to give Phil Spencer the benefit of the doubt (for now) because of the fact that he had to turn a ship around that was screwed up. Microsoft has never had or been known for great first party so a restructuring process has to take place. Phil has only recently been given access to the checkbook where he can gather studios and make new ips as everyone has asked. If you dont believe me, look it up.

He's been general manager of Microsoft Studios since 2008, so for 10 years now. He is responsible for the lack of new IPs and first party games. He was obviously involved in the launch of the XOne. He handled lately Tomb Raider, Scalebound, Crackdown, Fable... He canceled the new IP from The Coalition to get a new Gears instead. And now Sea of Thieves and the "games as a service" strategy. I know that some people still believe in him, but that's what it is: faith. It's not related to his achievements at all, but rather to his T shirts and Twitter PR. Until when will this faith hold? 

Dont forget that GAS has been a thing for a while, Lion-head were making Fable as a Gas game.... its a sad direction that ms have gone in, problem for them that the big AAA take 3-5 years to make and ok AA take at least 2-3, they are not going to be coming back that quick. I think 2020 is the start of it, but even then they are going to have to invest in lots of 2nd party stuff to achieve it imho. They won't be making their own studios...



Making an indie game : Dead of Day!

S.T.A.G.E. on 23 March 2018
Madword said:
Faelco said:

He's been general manager of Microsoft Studios since 2008, so for 10 years now. He is responsible for the lack of new IPs and first party games. He was obviously involved in the launch of the XOne. He handled lately Tomb Raider, Scalebound, Crackdown, Fable... He canceled the new IP from The Coalition to get a new Gears instead. And now Sea of Thieves and the "games as a service" strategy. I know that some people still believe in him, but that's what it is: faith. It's not related to his achievements at all, but rather to his T shirts and Twitter PR. Until when will this faith hold? 

Dont forget that GAS has been a thing for a while, Lion-head were making Fable as a Gas game.... its a sad direction that ms have gone in, problem for them that the big AAA take 3-5 years to make and ok AA take at least 2-3, they are not going to be coming back that quick. I think 2020 is the start of it, but even then they are going to have to invest in lots of 2nd party stuff to achieve it imho. They won't be making their own studios...

Its been said that Spencer has only recently been given the checkbook and has already begun courting three developers. Microsoft already has three new ips in development for the next two to three years (next gen). Spencer has finally been promoted to where he can start spending money. Xbox has hit their lowest point, but phil has a better ideal of how to deal with these things. Im not a big Microsoft fan and am one of their biggest critics, but Phil Spencer unlike Aaron Greenberg has admitted that he knows about Microsofts current perception among audiences. Hes a gamer and know what to do there. Lets see if he actually does. 



Seventizz on 23 March 2018
JRPGfan said:
Seventizz said:

Wrong.  You clearly don’t understand the game which you clearly haven’t played, but insist on being an expert on it.  First off, the game’s progression is lacking on purpose.  This isn’t about min/maxing a character to death like some boring RPG, it’s about having a balanced PvP environment where your skill takes precedence over a skill tree.  You log in, and you're on an equal footing with a more seasoned player.  It’s casual at its finest, and there’s nothing wrong with that.  For some of us, we’d rather be gaming then spending hours at a time in a menu.  You don’t like it?  Fine.  I doubt you even own an X1 or a gaming PC to play it anyway.  Not every game has to be for everyone.  

I understand that, as do most people... and yet the main thing is most consider it a mistake.
It backfired on them, as I wrote above. It would have reviewed much better, and not had people out complaining about lack of content this early on, if there was some fort of meaningfull progression system in place.

It’s an MMO, not an MMORPG.  I’ve played two betas, and the full game and I’ve yet to hear anyone care about deep progression.  That not this game.  What I have heard is like-gamers share in the thrill of PvP and discovery.



LudicrousSpeed on 23 March 2018
Faelco said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Thats the problem, Phil Spencer's true plan can only unfold at this point towards and onward towards next gen. All Phil could do was fix what the past leadership had done. Whatever happens with Gamepass and Xbox next gen is all on Phil. If Gamepass does succeed it will depend upon exclusives to hoist itself up because it will worth its own weight in gold (literally). It would be more profitable than selling games by themselves.

Phil Spencer has been head of Xbox for years now, and he was even head of the dev studios before that. The "it's not his fault, it's all because of the guys before him" excuse has stopped working a long time ago.

 

And if someone says "You can't recover from a launch fail", the PS3 proved that wrong. 

He was the head of the game studios, but that’s more like being the head coach of the football team. You still have a general manager who gets your players, makes all the financial movies, and dictates the direction of the team. I don’t think anyone can deny the strides the division has made since he took over.

The PS3 had a bad launch by Sony standards maybe, but it was still on pace from day one to outsell the 360. It’s only issue was price. Plus Sony has a larger presence in the industry, so it’s much easier for them to “recover”. Xbone was starting in a worse position plus had price, power, and image against it plus launched like a week after the PS4, which did everything right and even more at Microsoft’s expense leading up to launch. Not an apt comparison.