[Kalshion]

I must be honest, wasn't sure if this is where I should post this since it is UC related

However, I find this sickening

Universal Combat - Gamespot

Look down at the Reader Review, and look at the rating.. notice something odd about it? Then click on the rating itself.. and notice only one person even made a review? Yet the other 9 people didn't have the guts to do so

Errr I swear, if your going to make a review about a game PROVIDE a reason for your low reviews!

Anywho review the game there if you want, GS still hasn't reviewed the game itself so I'm going to send them an e-mail asking if they by chance need a helping hand

[ 02-25-2004, 08:59 PM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

[Supreme Cmdr]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kalshion:
I must be honest, wasn't sure if this is where I should post this since it is UC related

However, I find this sickening

---

What the hell are you talking about? The only review I see there, has a 10.0 score. The average review score is what I have no clue about, since I can't see where that comes from.

[Charles Lindsey]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/readers.html

quote:

---

All ratings are used for the Average Reader Score, but only text reviews are listed on the Reader Review Index page. Only registered users can submit text reviews. Reader reviews must be at least 100 words in length to be published.

---

That's probably it. The only review long enough to be posted also had a 10.0 score.

[Extinct_Reptilia]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cmdr Chavik:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/readers.html

quote:

---

All ratings are used for the Average Reader Score, but only text reviews are listed on the Reader Review Index page. Only registered users can submit text reviews. Reader reviews must be at least 100 words in length to be published.

---

That's probably it. The only review long enough to be posted also had a 10.0 score.

---

Yeah, because if you notice there are about 13 Ratings, and only one of them is a text review. The others must of just selected some drop menu score or something real quick, and that was it...

[Kalshion]

The review in question is more than 100 words mind you. Still though, I wish people would review the game and provide there own reason's for liking it and disliking it

[LostInSpace]

On Gamespot they have two types of Reviews a generic fill out form just for marking Gameplay, Graphics etc.. The other one is an actual reader review that's where the 4.7 is coming from. Others filled out the generic form and I'm sure we all know who they were . If you notice, there is no In house review yet the guy is probably still trying to figure the game out without reading the manual bloody ten year olds .

[Olias7]

The reader reviews are almost always garbage anyway. More often than not, there will be a dozen reader reviews for a game prior to the game's release (or the release of any demo, movies, etc.) in which the "reviewers" will post a rating on their prediction of what the game will be like, or what the last game was like, or the particular shade of blue of the sky today. I'll give the one reviewer in this case credit though, he or she actually seems to have played the game before posting.

[Kalshion]

The reviewer from Gamerankings seems to know what he's talking about to. Smart guy, smarter than some of the people I've seen who review these games

btw, seems the bashing has begun again on the board there

*removed*

[ 02-13-2004, 06:08 AM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

[crazybama]

Review is up at GameSpot. "Their" review.

[Cruis.In]

top 10 lists are based on users searches, that's good.

[Kalshion]

Where do I start?

Apperently this 'Brett Todd' person didn't bother to read these boards or bother to even EXPLORE the game that much. Examples -

quote:

---

Added emphasis on action lets you jump right into combat in space, in the air, and on the ground. Unfortunately, none of these areas are as fleshed out as they should be.

---

Odd, everything seems just fine to me.. if anything this is how the SC wanted it if I remember correctly

quote:

---

Dogfights in space involve a lot of circling, and most of the time you can only see opponents courtesy of your scanners. This may be fairly realistic, though it doesn't do much to promote excitement or tension.

---

Apperently he's never been in a battle against 6 enemy fighers each firing missles at you, added in the fact that there using there main gun to also try and shot you down...

Trust me THAT is realistic, its also exciting and does cause Tension from time to time and in reality the fighters do sometimes perform circles (not always... but sometimes)

quote:

---

Planets are generally lacking in detail when seen from space. Earth, for instance, is a flat, featureless blue ball.

---

Ummm.. this guy has NO CLUE what he's talking about, did he bother to check the TACOPS display or bother to Hyper out a bit then back in?

quote:

---

Poor collision detection on planets allows you to drive vehicles right through foliage and animals.

---

Lifes to short to argue, he didn't read this board

Parhaps, these guys should let the REAL BC players review these type of games

[Mano Faber]

Action Trip

http://www.actiontrip.com/reviews/universalcombat_
2.phtml

Gamespot

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/universalcombat/review.html

"There remains great promise in the core concept--and in many aspects of the design--but even the most dedicated followers of Derek Smart and 3000AD must be wondering (by now) if this promise is ever going to be fulfilled."

Hmm, show me the alternative. Since bc3k i've not seen other sims try this. (maybe BF1942 or better yet OFP). I think it just needs to be polished.

[Supreme Cmdr]

heh, I'm not in the least bit surprised. Gamespot has always rated BC games low. BCM got 6.0, when it was reviewed by Scott.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mano Faber:
I think it just needs to be polished.

---

Yep. But we all know that at $19.99, thats just not gonna happen. Right now, all I'm doing is fixing bugs. And since I always said that BCG was the last one, this is the last one. It would have been nice if it wasn't rushed out and we had time to polish it, but thats publishers for you, what can I say?

[ 02-14-2004, 08:05 AM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

[Mano Faber]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mano Faber:
I think it just needs to be polished. Yep. But we all know that at $19.99, thats just not gonna happen. Right now, all I'm doing is fixing bugs. And since I always said that BCG was the last one, this is the last one. It would have been nice if it wasn't rushed out and we had time to polish it, but thats publishers for you, what can I say?

---

heh, i know now i'm glad i bought UC even it end here. I'm sure you're doing the best you can. I'm sorry it's just $20 and even more so when i see them available this/next week for EUR 30 to EUR 44 in the dutch shops (checked online).

I 'm just sad i see less and less (good) sims being released. Nothing like the scope of UC anyway. And it's 2004 and somehow UC is unique cos i don't have 5 UC-clones on my shelf. (do have a coupla flightsim though)

[Spindoktor]

I for one am quite sad to see the series come to an end. I was sort of a late comer to the series (2002) and BCM and UC represents everything I look for in a computer game. Thanks to the SC and all at 3000AD for providing so much fun for such a small price.

So not to derail the topic too far , I'll say that this review (Gamespot) unfortunately represents what most in the mass gaming media think of the series, which is not much. They just don't get it. Oh well, what can you do.

[Pedro Pablo Laracuente]

But hey, there still isan add-on on the works, its not anothere game but it's another product. Or am i talking nonsense?

And yes, that gamespot review is stupid, and the actiontrip one is nonsense. Pure b***shit in my opinion.

[Grizzle]

"Herrrrreee cooommmmmeesss annnnother one! "

Gamezone

"And now...the sound of John Denver being strangled..."

(Quotes from: Monty Python's Contractual Obligation Album)