@ggregd: Oh Snap!

"Wait this is a free to play? Oh! Well then the B grade polish and average game design is worthy of praise. 10/10" - IGN

You what know I agree with this review. 6 is a decent number for this game. Being free to play shouldn't net you "brownie points" that bolsters your score. As a game the reviewed should be placed on the same scale as any other. While its nice to see a free to play MMO done with such visual aesthetics the MMO landscape is now such that F2P is now becoming the norm. Blade and Soul does nothing visually or design wise that steps above the rest. This isn't Black Desert.

"I was quite thoroughly bored having spent 15 hrs trudging through each forgettable fetch only to unlock more quests. This quest game play clearly was enough punishment as my end reward was glorious PvP that required skill and lots of juicy ping. 5/5" - Giantbomb

Let me say this. Any game that will make you suffer through a beginning portions just so you can enjoy the game and to be clear when I say suffer I'm not talking about difficult game play like Dark Souls. Suffer as in having the soul sucked out of you till you wonder " I'm I playing this to have fun or to have a reason to go outside?" Any game that puts you through that should never get higher than a 7. That's a clear sign bad game design. Its either one of two things. The dev is padding the game in order to stretch it out, which if that's the case F them , or its a poor game that has got got some decent areas or concepts, in which case I hope they learn from this. For me the classic example is the old Unreal 2 shooter. Tons of long boring sections mixed up with lack luster game play only to be given the baddest gun ever given in a shooter. A black hole gun. Your so OP it is improbable that you will even die. Finally you don't rate a game on the only part that it does well and you don't rate it cause it satisfies one group really really well. Unless you want a bias review?

"What I found was a game that was clearly targeted at a niche audience who are only concerned with the end game PVP but marketed for all MMO players to play and enjoy. I would complain but as xxxIPlayPvP24hrsxxx told me "What? 10 hrs in and your salty? You should have watch game play videos. The game is literally 2 years old." 5 stars" - Gameinformer

Blade and Soul is for a niche crowd very similar to that of the soon to come Black Desert. Most of the people here defending Blade and Soul are MMO players who like MMOs with end game PvP . New comers who come for the MMO experience will be disappointed and become frustrated but don't you say anything because the MMO community will tell you to "suck it up" or you should have know better. That's ridiculous! Sure no game dev wants to say "Well our game is designed for a very very specific type of gamer". They try to cater to as much people as they can. Take Destiny. Activision tries its hardest for it not to be called an MMO and downplays the RPG experience because they don't want to turn away anyone from buying the game. Yet when you actually play Destiny instantly you'll know whether this is your type or who this game is clearly made for. So stop bitching at gamers and reviewers who bailed because they couldn't be bothered to reach the end game.

**NOTE** The quotes used are fictional. They are just for the added effect of showing a review pandering to the argument at hand and how absurd it would sound when given a perfect score.

@Mogan: I just want to repeat something I said bellow

"I guess my rant is that its all word play. Is a bookstore that sells snacks a restaurant because it has snacks? Is coffee shop a library because it has few books you can read while you sip your coffee? You see what I mean. Just cause you give item a label means we must spend time re-evaluating the label to match the item. That's putting the cart before the horse. Its like calling a whiteboard in a classroom a chalkboard. Do we spend time re-evaluating what makes something a chalkboard? No we have the word chalkboard for a reason and we have whiteboard for another reason. We acknowledge that while both facilitate the very same function they are inherently different objects.

I find it just an exercise in fruition to always redefine gaming when it has a clear definition."

@Renunciation: Yeah but I guess my rant is that its all word play. Is a bookstore that sells snacks a restaurant because it has snacks? Is coffee shop a library because it has few books you can read while you sip your coffee? You see what I mean. Just cause you give item a label means we must spend time re-evaluating the label to match the item. That's putting the cart before the horse. Its like calling a whiteboard in a classroom a chalkboard. Do we spend time re-evaluating what makes something a chalkboard? No we have the word chalkboard for a reason and we have whiteboard for another reason. We acknowledge that while both facilitate the very same function they are inherently different objects.

I find it just an exercise in fruition to always redefine gaming when it has a clear definition. At least we both agree the purpose of redefinition often has an ulterior motive beyond making something "different".

@xabbott: Free speech. Love it or hate it. Some part of what basiliscus say is right but its mostly wrong. While games don't need to be fun to be games. They do need to still be games to be called a game. New experiences and gameplay needs room to become expressed and take gamers on great journeys even if the journey is a depressing one but I will be the first to admit a game where you just keeping X to progress isn't a "game". Its more a visual novel. Games always have some form of engagement and mental process and when calling them a "game" should always remain that way. I don't see why this can't still be appreciated as a visual novel but I guess we need to have this so we can say " games can be art". Sigh

@Aaronp2k You wasted an entire paragraph when you could have simply said "uhhh COD sux, Battlefield r0x0x" LOL.

Any gamer with a brain and especially one who plays FPS know that there is social and rank gameplay. you play in social and you get n00bs. Now all games have n00bs and the games that sell more will have even more. I assume with your 15.0 k/d greatness that you would know this and this 15.0 k/d is from rank playlists (hope to see you at MLG) or did you just come to bash COD? I personally could careless about your preferences but there is something sad when someone tries to sound like they have a individual thought but then regurgitate the same drivel everyone else says.
You can get on a high horse and call people who buy the games you dont like sheep but they'll be too busy having fun but if calling them n00bs helps you sleep at night then cool.

@PS2fweak now at least your trying to think it out. COD is a crappy FPS in many different ways but it excels in two things, entry and scale. The entry level to COD is low. bottom of the barrel low and thats not a bad thing, It ensures that almost anyone can pick it up and play. So Modern Warfare released in 2007 is still as accessible today as it was back then. Secondly the game can scale. There are really good players that play this crappy game and having the MLG helps keep them there. So n00bs have a goal to aspire to. This combination is like cocaine and heroine. So I understand why the game is rated well and sells well.

I like many am open to new FPS but im not that closed minded or sheepish to look a gift horse in the mouth.

@brunod_f Because this is M$ aka Microsoft. you know the other company that everyone loves to hate. If M$ had released Heavy Rain as an exclusive you and I and even your grandmother would have heard about how it had a child being kidnapped. that's just how things are. Sony could release a game where you vaginally rape prostitutes and house wives in a game wrapped inside a open world story driven type game and it would probably go under the radar. LIke many things M$ probably saw the potential for bad press over the potential for sales.

@megakick Yellow Light PS3s said HI.

its amazing that everyone says they follow M$ when its simply complying with publishers. I think that publishers like Ubisoft and EA had clear plans for next gen and it was up to Sony and M$ to comply. I think in this business Sony can not afford to not comply as this could mean blacklisting. Sure gamers could rise up and say we wont buy the X1 or crave the blacklisted games but id doubt it. all it takes is a publisher like Activision saying no COD on ps4 if there is no DRM or EA saying no FIFA or Ubisoft saying no Assassin's Creed to cripple the system. Gamers are fickle and impatient.

@Squiretrev because in both of those games have stronger communities on other systems. now i will say the WiiU has great netcode for COD but the ppl who play CoD on the wiiu is small and very n00bie. great for first timers, horrible for long time players. the same thing for Assassin's creed.