Bite My Review

Dark Light
Champions Online Counter-Review
Review Score:
Champions Online Counter-Review5.0102009-09-23 10:44:18Eevi

Metacritic lists the average critic score for Champions Online as 74. Scores for the game range from 40 (GameSpy) to 87 (Vandal Online). The GameSpy review is ridiculous. Not because I necessarily disagree with their score, but because the review reads as though they didn’t even play the game. And in fact, they barely made it half way through. I skipped the Vandal Online review and went straight to one from HonestGamers, where they award Champions Online a score of 90%, making me wonder whose ass they’re trying to crawl up.

With a name like HonestGamers, one might expect a review to be… honest. Clearly the author of the HonestGamers’ Champions Online review enjoyed their time in Millennium City, but I have to wonder if they are still playing the game two weeks post-review.

I don’t feel its fair to brandish it as a ‘WoW killer’ at this early stage. However, the game does provide a tonne of unique traits that should ensure its future survival – even on today’s cut-throat MMO market.

How ridiculous does one have to be to even use the words “WoW Killer” in a Champions Online review? The only things CO and WoW even have in common is that fact that they are both considered a part of the MMORPG genre. Yes, CO does have a lot of unique traits, because of its superhero theme, but its “future survival” is grim at best unless Cryptic releases one hell of a content update before the first month’s subscriptions run out. They do have plans, but as things stand, there are enough quests to run you [almost] through to the level cap once. Repeating the process would be nothing short of torture.

I assume many of you have played MMOs before. I’m a WoW veteran of 4 years myself. In spite of sticking with the game for most of half a decade, I only possess one maximum level character. Why? Because I’ve always despised the grinding process.

The [so called] HonestGamer likely did not make it to the level cap before writing his review. During the first half of CO, mob experience is non-existent and grinding would be futile, but I find it difficult to believe that HonestGamer did not have to grind at all during the latter half of the game.

CO’s levelling system is quite contradictory to what you may expect from an MMO. 3 or 4 enemies of higher experience can be taken on simluateously and health regenerates almost instantly.

This is assuming that you have done everything right in the game, that you have not made a single error in your power choice selections. Screw up once and it’s back to the drawing board, or plans to spend the entire game in groups where others can cover your weak ass. Champions Online is not an easy game. If you make uninformed decisions they will come back to haunt you at a higher level. If your intent is to purchase this game for your child, please think twice as you will shatter their little superhero dreams. Yes, they will get a very cool travel ability, such as flying, but they will get creamed in every battle beyond the tutorial. Champions Online is a very adult game, perhaps even of the mensa variety.

Players are no longer left to guess where the item they have to acquire drops or where the monster they must kill spawns. Completing these quests is rewarded heavily and within five minutes of playing competent gamers will have easily filled their experience bar.

Did he actually say that? So the highlight of Champions Online is that you know where your mobs will spawn. Great. Yes, completing missions yields the highest rewards in the game, but gaining a level within FIVE MINUTES of playing? Now I’m just angry. Perhaps from level one to level two, but beyond that, five minutes my ass. Not sure what he’s been smoking, but that is very much incorrect. And to add insult to injury, completing the missions is not the BEST way to go, it is the ONLY way to go. There is simply no other option. As I said earlier, grinding mobs yields little experience initially. The biggest problem with Champions Online is that it does not offer the player any options beyond character customization. There are enough quests to basically make it through the game, but that is it. If you want to roll another character then you must take the exact same path as you did the first time.

Upon achieving my first level I was given an opportunity to pick new traits. This works like a mix between Oblivion’s skill system and Final Fantasy X’s sphere grid.

Really? You got to choose new traits at level two? We must have been playing different games, because I didn’t get to choose new traits until I visited the Powerhouse in Canada or the Desert.

The control scheme for CO is without equal.

Disagree. I found all of their pre-configuration options to be awkward, thumbs down on control scheme.

Older interfaces were never designed with such innovations in mind, so trying to play as a traditional style makes for an awkward experience. Even setting up the camera properly can be a pain, especially when the movement keys don’t correspond to where my character is facing.

Hold up. Didn’t you just say that the control scheme is without equal? I guess you meant “equally bad”.

As soon as I stepped into the main city it became immediately evident that it took a lot of work to create such a lively environment. The colourful and detailed buildings made for an ideal backdrop while I spent hours fighting crime on the streets.

You spend hours fighting crime on the streets, yet earlier you clearly stated that a competent gamer could level up within five minutes. There is only so much you can do in the tutorial before having to move on from Millennium City. By your own estimations, you should have been in Canada or the Desert in about 25 minutes.

Conclusion: An almost-perfect addition to the MMO genre. I’d grade it a perfect 10 if it wasn’t for the odd repetitive mission and the wonky controls.

No information about the zones beyond the tutorial? Nothing about builds. Nothing about the lack of content or what happens once you reach the level cap. Nothing about the Nemesis system. Nothing about PvP. Nothing about the mission types. The list goes on. Clearly HonestGamer reviewed the game based on a brief stint in the Millennium City tutorial. A true douchebag move, but HonestGamer is not alone. As mentioned previously, GameSpy pretty much did the same thing to come to their 40% score.

Clearly a lot of work went into Champions Online. It looks good, it sounds good, and it plays relatively smoothly. But there is the issue of content, or the lack thereof. If you want to be truly objective about Champions Online then you have to admit that the game does not play like a MMO. In MMOs you have choices in the quests that you do, and in the zones that you start out in and play through. In Champions Online there is no choice, you must do every mission and play through every zone in order to reach the level cap. The thought of doing it against is so painful that I cannot bear to put much thought into it.

Champions Online is a great single player game, try it, enjoy it, and then put it away. Use your free month and get as far as you can, because chances are that your days in CO will be numbered based on boredom and tedium. In fact, I’d rather stab myself in the face repeatedly than play Champions Online again.

With that said, I did have fun at times. But the fun didn’t usually last long, it was always quickly replaced with intense frustration bordering on disgust. It is for those fleeting moments of fun, the decent sound and graphics, overall decent performance and the great travel powers that I give Champions Online any points at all.

Final Score: 5 out of 10.

VN:F [1.7.2_963]
Rate This Game
Rating: 7.0/10 (53 votes cast)
36 Comments
  • Rock72
    September 24, 2009
    #1
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    I’ve played all sorts of mmo – wow, eve, eq, daoc and several others. I agree on the content front , this game seems limited, for now. Otherwise it is a bit premature to pass judgement on any mmo at this point….I personally find this game a blast. While it may lack the depth of the bigger games out there it is fun for those of us who do not have hours a day to waste and do not want to spend unholy amounts of time trying to find a group to finish lengthy quests. If you are tired of elves and orcs it is worth a play and if you have an attention span longer than a gnat I think it’ll grow into something infinitely more complex than it is right now. It’s only been release around a month now (if that)….all mmo’s start out wonky and with their share of problems, this one is a blast, at least for me. JMO.

  • Eevi
    September 24, 2009
    #2
    UA:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    I’m basing my opinion on the game “out of the box”, what it is now; not what it can be a few months and patches from now. I understand that fans prefer to think of it in terms of potential.

  • Chris
    September 24, 2009
    #3
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Almost all game reviews nowadays seem useless. It’s all about what company/game had the biggest media blitz or schwag bags. Seriously, what is wrong with most of these reviewers?

    At this point I find sites that have customer reviews like NewEgg, Amazon, etc., to be much more telling of what a game will be like as opposed to many of the supposed ‘reviewers’.

  • dan
    September 24, 2009
    #4
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Pretty much agree with what you said. I’ve played quite a few MMOs (starting with Meridian 59) and while this one is okay, its nothing special.

    My main toon is only level 24 and I’m already bored to tears. Normally my main toon is maxed, or close to it, before my first month expires but I can barely bring myself to click on the game icon knowing that I’ll have to grind on repeatable missions to hit level 25 (I’ve done all the level 25 & 26 missions already).

    Maybe in a year this game will have enough content to be fun, but right now I think I’m going to have to cancel when the free time is over.

  • annoyed
    September 24, 2009
    #5
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    First of all, why not compare this game 3 weeks old to WoW 3 weeks old if you’re going to compare level of content, bugs or anything else an MMO is subject to (especially areas that always need tweaks after launch). Second, write your own review instead of just trashing someone else. I expected a thorough review from this site, and I got little more than the one you thought was so terrible! After reading this I wish you would stab yourself in the face instead of playing anymore, so hopefully I’ll never have to run into you in game. Good riddence… keep judging MMO’s 3 weeks after launch and let me know how they stack up.. ever lol.

  • Thomas
    September 24, 2009
    #6
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Hey, “annoyed”, bite me.

    Now, I didn’t write this counter-review, but it is a counter-review, and not a review. Had you actually read the article, you can see where she’s gone to great lengths to describe why the game got the rating that it got.

    And, sure, let’s compare this to WoW 3 weeks out of the gate. Let’s take it a step further, and compare it to WoW in beta 1 year prior to release. WoW still wins.

    Let’s compare apples to apples, and stack it up against Aion, which has been out a total of 2 days, and Aion wins.

    Champions Online is crap.

  • Chris
    September 24, 2009
    #7
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    I’m so tired of people like annoyed making excuses for games that ‘have only been out a few weeks.’ Bullshit. Attitudes like that are the reason why game vendors don’t have a problem releasing games months before their ready in all ways.

    Yeah, Champions is polished and looks pretty, but if you’re an MMO and you have crap for content, you shouldn’t release. C’mon already, hold game companies feet to the fire when they release crap too early instead of coddling them and saying, “It’s ok, I know you’ll be fun after a few patches…”

  • TJ
    September 24, 2009
    #8
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Eevi’s thoughts on the game echo what I’ve heard directly from other people.

    The game is what it is right now. I’m fine with someone saying “the potential is there”, but please explain to me how I play potential. Oh wait, I can’t play potential. A game with potential is a game I buy from the bargain bin (or after 3 or 4 content patches) a year later. There’s nothing wrong with that, either!

    But that isn’t the game that’s on the server right now. I expect a MMO review to tell me about the game I’d be playing if I logged in today, not the theoretically game I might be able to possibly play after the 2012 Mayan apocalypse.

  • Dave
    September 24, 2009
    #9
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    “not the theoretically game I might be able to possibly play after the 2012 Mayan apocalypse.”

    hahaha Priceless!!!

  • annoyed
    September 24, 2009
    #10
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Hey Thomas,

    You obviously didn’t play wow when it released if you think there was a lot of content. There was nothing more to do in wow than there is now in CO. PVP was almost non-existent, a few BG’s and no open world content. (hrm sound familiar?) Raids didn’t exist in the current form. At most there were large mob fights, but it was several months before molten core and then BWL were released. There were no PQ’s that CO obviously copied from WaR, but that’s what all MMO’s do is build upon what others have done if it works well. I’m sure not going to fault them for doing that.

    Lets look at something Eevi didn’t mention or counter-mention (whatever). What about server stability compared to wow? I think I was able to play for like a total of maybe 4 hours wow’s first week because their servers were so terrible. How about customer service, or feedback from devs? Both laughable from blizzard until they got their shit together (a year later). Cryptic beats them hands down in this are already.

    The major complaint I hear is about lack of content and the game “not being what you expected”. Again, maybe you should allow time for content like every other successful MMO out there has had before it was considered a “success”.

    3 weeks out of the gate, and since you were probably in beta (so was I for the record) and you got to level 40 because you played one character. Oh that’s right, if you have to redo a quest you’ll stab yourself I almost forgot. I don’t know an MMO that’s out that you wont redo some quests if you play multiple characters, and if you’re not the type that plays alts, good for you! It shouldn’t be an issue for you then. If it’s that “painful” to play while doing quests, put the F’n game down and move on before you’re level 40! What kind of super genius can’t tell when they aren’t having fun by about level 10?!

    Lets stop comparing things to wow unless it’s advertised as “like wow” like Aion is (which for the record was released in China on April 16, 2009) The only thing they are doing to bring it to the west is localization. Give CO the 6 months your Aion argument has before you use that as a comparison either. CO isn’t trying to be wow, it’s an MMO yes, it fits all the requirements to be called an MMO, but that doesn’t mean it has to be a wow clone. Game reviewers and some of you players are idiots if you can’t think outside the wow-model box and allow a game to fit as well as grow into it’s own skin.

    PS. Thomas I re-read that comment about wow 1 year prior to release…haha fail. You weren’t there if you think this is true.

  • Thomas
    September 24, 2009
    #11
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Hey, annoyed, you may continue to bite me.

    Indeed, let us stop comparing this game to WoW, if that’s really want you want to do. You spent the majority of your post comparing this game to WoW, and your inaugural post on this thread began with a comparison to WoW. I’m not sure your right hand knows what your left hand is doing — unless it’s giving hand jobs to homeless guys, again.

    No one is asking for Champions Online to be a WoW clone, they’re just asking for some effort in the way of making it a decent game at the point of release — not 3 years later. I get the feeling you were one of the people sucking at the teat of Anarchy Online, when it came out.

  • annoyed
    September 25, 2009
    #12
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    @ thomas

    Actually no, AO was killed by technical difficulties before it ever got off the ground IMO. I played it in beta, tried to play upon release but the server issues were so bad I didn’t stick around long enough to give it a shot the rest of the way.

    I made a comparison to wow a couple times yes. To show drastic contrast between each games genre as well as to point out how almost NO mmo gets released with enough content for a community with a spoiled perspective of what ‘needs’ to be in a game upon release. Spoiled because after setting down an MMO that has had years do develop content, anything else you pick up will ’seem’ lacking, it’s inevitable. Players should be realistic and look at the content that is there. I did not (like many others do to many MMO’s) compare it to WoW in order to point out where it lacks compared to a much older game. So use context when you try to make an argument next time.

    People want to de-emphasize potential, but in the world of MMO’s that’s what you get on release day, a game with potential or a game without period. Much of that potential exists in the continued effort of the dev’s to enhance the game AFTER release. So if you’re ready to throw in the towel 1 month in, you’ll never be satisfied with another MMO until you stop comparing them to existing titles that have had time to grow. If you can’t see that I don’t know how else to help you understand.

    I see now from the rudeness of both of your posts, you’re an internet tough guy flaming people because you get beaten with valid information. And yes, that’s exactly what what’s happened to you if you resort to name calling and shit talking, it means you ran out of valid arguments, and you’ve failed to make a logical point in any of your posts thus far. You fail at debate.

  • Thomas
    September 25, 2009
    #13
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Annoyed: Bite me.

    As it stands, I’ve played every AAA title MMO that has been released. I played every MUD I could when I was younger. I’ve played each type of MMO at the time of release, and for many of them, I kept my account (press or purchased) for up to a year. Hell, I even kept my Asheron’s Call account active for a year after I stopped playing.

    Comparing apples to apples, Champions Online is crap. Three weeks out of the gate, and all anyone can point to is “potential.” That’s like saying: “You know those furries that Annoyed dates? They have wonderful personalities.”

  • Eevi
    September 25, 2009
    #14
    UA:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    I stand by my decision to rate the game based on launch content. Why should MMOs be treated differently from other games? Other genres are rated based on content out of the box. Don’t forget that in addition to paying for the game itself there are the monthly fees. Should a company expect people to fork out month after month while waiting for new content to arrive? I don’t think so.

  • Chopstick
    September 26, 2009
    #15
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    As a champions player at the moment I enjoy the game as I play it and always look forward to content updates but I’ve gotta agree with Eevi for the reasons shes given here. As a gamers we look look for the potential in games we enjoy but as a reviewer you’re supposed to look at a game as out of the box content and what you’re paying for.

    Many gamers have described champions in various ways. Due to the maintenance time it is sometimes described as “Champions offline”, thanks to the many nerfs it has been called “Sidekicks Online”…et cetera.

    Anyways, gotta agree with this review based. Standards for MMO makers should not be dropped and excuses should not be made for them.

    Thanks for the fair review Eevi!

  • raptor
    September 27, 2009
    #16
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    i think it did well for a launch game considering ive played wow, coh, aoc, eve and other numerous mmo’s from beta to launch and i can tell you this it was very good for a launch game coh was horrible at launch wow was horrible at launch very bad XP slow lvling slow questing everything was slow the controls are 3 styles it gives you an option but whatever you think is cool i enjoy it

  • raptor
    September 27, 2009
    #17
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    btw every mmo you have to wait for content not 1 mmo is complete ;)

  • Requiemcliff
    September 27, 2009
    #18
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Eh, I don’t find Champions Online so bad, I do believe that it does have a content gap needed to be filled. I do like that next month that there will end up being a new content patch (Bloodmoon, with apparently a new power set and the like).
    It definitely needs work, and I do agree that Eevi is right mostly. I don’t plan to cancel my account though, just going to check out how it turns out after a month or two.

    (Oh, and Aion was first released in Korea in November 28, 2008, so I would say it better be damned better than Champions :P )

  • Durp
    September 27, 2009
    #19
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    What a counter-review. Is it because you have a place to write that you somehow feel entitled to pretend your word is better than someone else? You have the review of someone who hates this game but the predictable score that makes you look like an apologetic bitch.

    “decent performance and the great travel powers that I give Champions Online any points at all.” So the below average performance(Improved a little bit in a not-so-recent patch) and travel powers(which were slowed down, I grapple hook like gravity doesn’t exist and I’m stuck in a vat of molasses) is enough to give a game 5 stars? You suggest someone spend $50 bucks to grind repetitive quests for a month? I realize you’re a shitty little review site but don’t pretend to be above HonestGamers.

  • Thomas
    September 27, 2009
    #20
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Last time I checked, we didn’t need a license to be a shitty little review site. I do, however, have a certificate here that states my opinion is more important than yours, Durp.

  • Durp
    September 27, 2009
    #21
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Your certificate was probably signed by Derek Smart at which point it’s already invalid and no one cares.

  • Thomas
    September 27, 2009
    #22
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    My certificate is signed by my ass. I only have troubles with him when he starts writing checks.

    In direct reply to your comment: I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Are you saying that the game is worse than Eevi scored it, or are you saying that it’s better? Or, are you fighting for the brave souls at “Honest” Gamer, who go through the tutorial missions of an MMO and then rate the game 90%?

  • Eevi
    September 27, 2009
    #23
    UA:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Durp, I think you’re confused. I said that gameplay was smooth for me, and that I liked the travel powers (pre-nerf). I listed graphics, sounds, performance and travel powers as pros.

    The cons were the lack of content and the fact that you cannot choose your path. Since there is only one path this means the game has a low replayability value; and when you’re dealing with MMOs the replayability value is crucial.

  • Chris
    September 27, 2009
    #24
    UN:F [1.7.2_963]
    Rating: 0.0/1 (0 votes cast)

    Its been a while since i read somthing thats really just smear campain on another reviewer. While I will agree his review isn’t the best and inaccurate at times its a guy who enjoyed champions (believe it or not he wasn’t the only person) and a review that is based on his opinion. Just like his review your is just an opinion, not better, not worse just another opinion. Makes me sad when I see ridiculous stuff like this posted on the internets but each to there own I guess. I Also feel the need to link this video which really just sums it all up.

    http://www.giantbomb.com/video-thing-2human/17-29/

  • Durp
    September 27, 2009
    #25
    Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 33554432 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 491520 bytes) in /home/biteme/public_html/wp-content/plugins/gd-star-rating/code/t2/templates.php on line 154