Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Supreme Cmdr

UC Review - Gamer's Hell

Recommended Posts

I can't belive he actually admits to "not" reading the manual first and then complains that he doesn't know how to do anything. I am getting tired of the "steep learing curve" phrase.

This game does has an intuitive interface that is less complicated then finding the admin tools in windows XP, I mean really give me a break. What's their baseline? every FPS that uses the sames exact keys for everything?? There are only 3 MFD's in this game and they are the same in every thing you can control yet you get no credit for that. Anyway, I guess he's entitles to his viewpoint, I just wish is had something more substantial in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Remo Williams

I would probably be upset if I gave a damn about the reviewer opinion. Obviously I do not because all could think about as I read the review was how clueless he was as to what he was attempting to review. I hope he has a day job because he has no future as a game reviewer.

The Following quote is from the review by Michael Bozich:

quote:

also was lacking any sort of extensive configuration, limiting me instead by allowing only the reconfiguration of certain core keys all relating to combat. This is simply unacceptable in any modern game, and is made especially worse when you consider the vast amount of keys Universal Combat requires you to remember.

First off he wouldn't know a modern game if it smacked him in the face. With all the options available in the game why in the hell would you even think about reconfiguring the key layout? They have already been documented for you. If you were allowed to do this you would have one hell of a mess on your hands. You would have to set there and re-document any changes you made; because if you didnÔÇÖt and changed every key assignment you wouldn't remember all the new assignments without documentation. These key assignments weren't just thrown together this was part of the development of the game. Allot of time was taken to make this layout logical and suited for the best experience in game play for the gamer.

He even stated it himself there are no other games out there like this series. On this point I will agree and there probably never will be ever. Considering the shear size and scope of this game it is kick ass and there is no way in the world you can compare it to any other game in the market.

Michael Bozich you should be ashamed of yourself for releasing this review! The only thing you have done is discredit yourself as a game reviewer. If you worked for me you would be on your way to the unemployment office this morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't be arsed about reviews any more, to tell you the truth. Back the day, I'd be as pissed as a hornet, but the reviews really do it themselves and there is no need for me - or anyone - to even attempt to point out review flaws.

Frankly, if reviews sold games, we'd all be out of business. Sure, some help convery to the reader some of sense of the game, whats right, whats wrong etc. If a review is well written, the score is meaningless and I have no idea why we [game industry] even still continue to use antiquated review score systems. Its just stupid.

btw, the shots are from the ones I have released on the Net. NONE of those shots were taken by him. Not a single one. I should know, I have a DB of every single shot I have released for my games. Every one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That review resembled a wish list more than an honest review of the game.

What is it with these guys?

Do they really expect to pull a game out of the box, throw it in the coffee holder, and find instant gratification?

It was clearly apparent he spent no time learning anything about the program beyond what he expected to see.

But I digress and I'll get into his mindset.

/thinking bubble on

Damn! it's Friday and the editor just dropped another game to review on my desk, and he wants the written review by the end of the day.

Ahh piss on it! I'll call my girlfriend and talk to her while I'm loading this thing and glossing through the manual.

"Hi baby.

"what am I doing right now?

"thinking about you and loading some POS game called Universal Combat."

"Yeah the editor just dropped it on my desk and the bastard wants a review by 5."

"no no sweetheart, don't worry, I'll just toss some crap together about it, turn it in and I'll be out of here by 4:30"

"You're wearing that red teddy right now?

"You're going to do what ? to me when I get there."

"OW! I can't get out from under my desk"

"That's right, it got hung on the drawer and you're going to pay for it when I get home."

"Ok snookums, see you at 5 luvya bubye"

"OK back to work"

"WTF is this crap?"

" How do you play this game without a tutorial?"

" I'll make this simple and get some screenshots off the net and throw a pragraph or two together about Derek Smart and a few paragraphs about how crappy his games are, oh and a very brief synopsis of what i've seen on my screen here for the last ten minutes, then I'm done"

"that was easier than I thought it would be"

" I'm going to get soome more coffee and a donut"

/thinking bubble off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to see him use this word-"budget game"....

Well..reviewer..some good,some bad..

especially for a reviewer that didn't see the manual first...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just deleted a post.

Lets not insult the reviewers, OK? Take a shot at the review if you want, but personal attacks - as you all know by now - are absolutely out of line on these forums.

If a reviewer actually plays a game, then writes a credible review of same, the score is irrelevant because the context and content of the review is what is important. For e.g I've known the PC Gamer UK guys (and pretty much all the old school media guys) for a very long time, and if I had a problem with a review, I'd pick up the phone. I've never had to do that because even with a score of 65% (in PCG UK), a well written review is just that, a well written review and doesn't mean I'm going to start insulting Tim Stone because of a 65% score.

If you read the Gamer's Hell (I pick this one because of the score relativity) review and Tim Stone's PCG UK review, you immediately see what separates the men from the boys. Its called experience and objectivity. In the GH reviewers' defense, these games are NOT easy to review - and not by a bloody long shot.

So, everyone, play by the rules please, we're already under siege (so what else is new?) as it is and I for one, am glad that everyone now sees what a bad idea rebranding and refocusing this game was. I take 100% responsiblity for it because after all, I could've just said no and there isn't a darn thing that DC could have done about it, since I own the IP. But quite frankly, the game is not about a Battlecruiser any longer and hasn't been since Q4 1999 when I started developing BCM (released in Q4 2001), so it was a good idea to rename it, but not refocus it.

The problem with UC is what I've already said, the time that was better spent finishing up my original design, polishing things up etc, was spent on this action focus charade and the end result is that the game suffered in some parts because of that. Lessons learned. And for me, there is and always will be, a next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:

...But quite frankly, the game is not about a Battlecruiser any longer and hasn't been since Q4 1999 when I started developing BCM (released in Q4 2001), so it was a good idea to rename it, but not refocus it.

Exactly SC, you refocused the game a long time ago... I have nothing against renaming it, as it fits what you changed so many years ago quite well.

But still you have the wankers who think that you're trying to persuade the public into thinking its something totally different. ::shrugs:: what can ya do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys (and of course Derek ). I do not usually get into messageboard discussions about why and what the hardcore fans don't like in our reviews as in 99.9% of the cases it's pointless. But in this particular case, I had to answer this.

First of all, we like Derek - he's a really nice guy as matter of fact, no matter how rough & tough he makes himself look . As a matter of fact he e-mailed us saying that he has review copies of UC a week or so before the release date, and trust me, for this job I've put one of our best guys - ones that actually play space sims. One that actually wanted to play UC and requested it on our internal "wish-lists" (he's never played the BC series, but he likes games like elite and x - "intelligent" space sim games - unlike freelancer, starlancer, etc... ). So you could probably agree that of course hs is no paid PC Gamer UK reviewer (yep, we're just an online indie games mag with *0* support from major companies), but he probably knows what he's doing when it comes to space games.

Now I could swear to you on anything that is dear to me that Mike played the game for around 5 days before the review was written. To answer some of your questions (please freel to reply to me too )

Originally posted by Remo Williams:

First off he wouldn't know a modern game if it smacked him in the face. With all the options available in the game why in the hell would you even think about reconfiguring the key layout? They have already been documented for you. If you were allowed to do this you would have one hell of a mess on your hands. You would have to set there and re-document any changes you made; because if you didnÔÇÖt and changed every key assignment you wouldn't remember all the new assignments without documentation.(/QUOTE].

Any recent space simulation game *I* (and probably Mike) have seen, had re-assignable control buttons. And considering that UC doesn't even include a quick printed "controls map", the only way a for newcomer to the BC series, but one that has spent some time with other space simulations before ( X2: The Threat Review @ Gh for example, by the same Mike Bozich), to learn the game controls is sit and spend some serious time in the manual and force "foreign" combinations into himself. This in itself creates a barrier. But he has done it. He has definitely not put the 1000+ hours like some of the beta testers here did, but as you might understand that reviewers can never do so much time in the game - and 5 days for someone familiar with space sim games cannot be too bad.

@ Wolferz - everyone in GH including Mike actually had a good laugh about your impression of Mike.... While it's not exactly so (he still has spent 5 days playing the game, and I think he's a geek with no girlfriend ), feel free to e-mail me, as we're looking for some people to write ideas for an upcoming GH comic project, and I think you've got skills in the satirical field

Now - Mike liked the space sim part, but he was highly disappointed with air, marine, and land combat. What happens in a review of a game of this scale, is that every part of the game is reflected in the final rating. That goes for the infantry combat in UC. Or naval combat. Or air-to-air. Mike felt that that developing so many sides to the game at the same time has caused all of them to be underveloped in the gfx / audio comparison to their peers (ok, compare the graphics and sounds of marine combat vs. enigma: rising tide, infantry combat vs ut2003, and space combat vs x2).

So.... You've read so far. Bottomline? Mike felt that including so many sides to the game detracted from its final score. If the game was shipped as Battlcreuiser: Generations with space combat alone, I could see it getting anywhere from 7.0 to 9.0. But as Universal Combat is striving to compete in all genres but captures perfectly none apart of the space aspect, it's definite that the other 3 underdeveloped game features will detract from the game.

Nevertheless, our review was aimed at the general public, preventing them from buying the game, getting mad with it and coming here yelling at DS (...and getting banned of course) - it was not meant for consumption for fans of BC . Furthermore our ratings system in this case was used to compare UC with the leading games of different genres (all of which UC has included) - it might be stupid like that, but that's how the system on our edge works.

Finally, as Derek said, the only real 'problem' is the 're-branding' thing with inclusion of air, marine, and land game-modes. And as I said if we got to review Battcleruiser : Generations it'd get anywhere from 70-90% I'm pretty sure

Now, please feel free to flame me or give corrections in regards to the review - if we indeed f**ked up, please let us know where (quite frankly, we do not claim to be perfect - on the other side, we would like to learn from our mistakes so we wouldn't make them in the future, and I, for one, would like our staff to learn from prior mistakes). I'll make sure Mike will read this thread too

[ 03-03-2004, 06:51 AM: Message edited by: Dennis S. ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Dennis S.:

Hi guys (and of course Derek ). I do not usually get into messageboard discussions about why and what the hardcore fans don't like in our reviews as in 99.9% of the cases it's pointless. But in this particular case, I had to answer this.


heh, hi Dennis

quote:


First of all, we like Derek - he's a really nice guy as matter of fact

No I'm not!!! I resent that!! Are you trying to ruin my image?!?!

quote:


Any recent space simulation game *I* (and probably Mike) have seen, had re-assignable control buttons. And considering that UC doesn't even include a quick printed "controls map",

uhm, UC does include a keyboard sheet, printed on the reverse of the map.

Also, if you take a look at that keyboard sheet - trust me, you won't want to remap the keys.

Fact is - and guys who played BCM back in 2001 know this - there was an option to remap all the keys in the game. I simply disabled it because it was more trouble than it was worth. In fact, looking at the BCCONFIG.INI or UCONFIG.INI file, sees some remnants of this (in fact, I think some of those can still be remapped and they would probably work).

Fact is, after taking up so many keys on the keyboard, mapping would be a major nightmare.

Apart from that, when I revised the UC keys (from the BCM Gold version), I used several industry standard key mappings (e.g. WSAD).

I really don't see what the big deal is. I mean, I see reviewers *****ing about ALT+Q. Fer crying out loud, Q = Quit. ALT = system usage key. What is so bad about ALT+Q?!?!

DISCLAIMER: This is not directed at you Dennis or anyone in particular.

/rant mode on

Fact is, most people are just *****ing for hell of it. In fact, its actually a sociological problem. Why? Well because all it takes is for one or two people to say ...hey, the key mappings suck! and then next thing you know, like Lemmings to the slaughter, most start to adopt this frame of thinking. And in the case of reviews - especially those by UNPROFESSIONAL fly-by-night* websites - they tend to start regurgitating the same nonsense for fear of bucking the trend. Its stupid. Its ridiculous. Its ludicrous.

The game was built on the premise of a sim. The game is highly complex and I make NO apologies for it. And anyone who has a problem with this, can go screw themselves and go play Pong because they're the #1 reason the industry is littered with mass market rubbish.

I designed and develop my games for like minded gamers who are used to this type of game. I don't owe ANYONE a DAMN thing. I don't need their money. I don't need their support. All I want is for them to STFU and play the game. Sure, I have an exceptionally high IQ and I'm an eccentric artiste, but the fact remains, there are quite literally hundreds of thousands of people playing these games and enjoying. For ANYONE to think that I'm going to keel over and cry just because a bunch of people can't grow a brain or muster the patience to play this kind of game, is foolhardy and they NEED to read up on Derek Smart. Frankly, I don't give sh*t. If I did, I won't have shipped five games (and yes, there WILL be another inside of two years) in the series so far and which remain true to the series.

My ONLY regret with UC is that when DC came to me with their idea of refocusing the game in order to appeal to the action gamer (which I knew was just STUPID from the word go), I should've told them to piss off. Sure, the name change won't have been a big deal, but I should NEVER have altered my original design. I KNEW that the minute I did that, the game would attract a bunch of people outside of the niche category it has always catered to and cause a backlash. As always, I was right.

The time I took to do that, I could have remained focus on fine tuning and polishing what I had and getting the game to ship on time. I will NEVER make that mistake again. Like my neural net technologies, I'm a quick study.

Imagine what would happen if Atari took Falcon 4, updated it, called it Fighter Attack, repositioned it and stuck it in a box. Thats what has happened to Universal Combat.

And lest we forget, if it wasn't for MY efforts back in November, the game would have shipped UNPLAYABLE out of the box when DC tried to ship it while in RC status - to the extent of manufacturing 30K units which had to be destroyed due to my legal action. That, in itself, would have been a much bigger problem had it shipped.

The flight sim market is dead because gamers outside of that niche market, CANNOT play those games. The space sim market is no different, yet, people wonder why games from these two genres are not only dying, they're DEAD. Let me repeat that, DEAD.

And there is a damn good reason why - to date - NOBODY has even come close to developing a game that is even 25% of what BC games going back to 1989, have done. Why? because it takes a LOT of effort, time, resources and TALENT to do that. And then it becomes risky as a commercially viable property. Lucasarts shipped Star Wars Galaxies WITHOUT a space flight component - the STAPLE of a Stars Wars game. And people wonder why. And when it does come out, it will - and I can 100% guarantee this - NOT be a seamless integration with their planetary stuff.

Last time I checked, Freelancer was a RETAIL FLOP of epic proportions. But it sure looked purdy The same goes for IWAR2, X and from looking at the sales numbers, X2 isn't going ANYWHERE. Again, it sure does look purdy, doesn't it?

Release after release of a BC game, the sentiments are the same in that everyone is wondering why its still complex, why the interface is not what THEY want it to be etc. And most of all, they wonder when a game with this feature set would come along with a less than complex premise, better interface etc. Here's a tip. IT CANNOT BE DONE. Period. Until someone actually comes up with one, Derek Smart is IT. End of story.

Like most, I consider myself to be a highly talented individual and having written close to 90% of the code for my games, I have had a LOT of practice. So, if it could be done and within the scope of the game, I would have done it by now. WHY would I go out of my way to ship a game that isn't easy to get into or which uses only 10 instead of close to 100 keys? I don't. The game remains complex because of its high end nature, EXTENSIVE feature set and which unfortunately require similar interface structures and key commands to match.

Fact #1 - In the US alone, UC has sold more units in its four week stint, than X2 has sold since it was released almost two and half months ago. BCM and BCM Gold, again, sold a LOT more units than the previous X game *and* Freelancer (the last time I checked).

Fact #2 - The BC games have CONSISTENTLY sold more units than almost 68% of the games (most of which are triple-A quality) released in their period. Why? Because my games have a DEDICATED and UNCOMPROMING user base. Its called BRAND LOYALTY and I almost lost that when a bunch of capitalists with NO regard for gamers, caused me to - for ONE fleeting moment - almost destroy my game for the people who have been BUYING these games ALL these years.

I never set out to cater to every goddamn gamer and their one-eyed dog. When I started creating these games, I had a CLEAR focus of what I wanted. Even back then, technology wasn't even there to match my ideas. This is why, over the years, I have added a little bit at a time as technology played CATCH UP with my ideas. I'm a forward thinking person and that comes from being a focused, highly ambitious b*stard.

Looks, screw it - there is reason why games are rated, why there are children's games, adult games, games for impatient losers etc. MY games are for a dedicated and niche group of people who - like me - have an IQ greater than they waist or collar size and their comprehension skills exceed a Beagle's. Impatient, incompetent, intelligently inferior gamers, NEED NOT APPLY. Its really THAT SIMPLE. If I had my way, the game's ESRB rating won't be T, it would be T+100 - the numeral being the minimum IQ requirement, since most people's IQ (on a scale of 40-160) is between 70-130.

Goddamnit, this makes me SO mad its not even funny. I sit down and play my game - like most who do - and wonder wtf the furor is about. I simply don't get it, and I'm not stupid. Why does every mother****er without a fully functioning brain, sit around and think that I - Derek Smart - am designing a game for THEM?

There is a damn good reason why people shouldn't buy, nor play games they can't comprehend. Its the same reason you can't drive a car at thirteen or do drugs in class (oh wait, they probably do. Nevermind). If its beyond you, accept it - ITS BEYOND YOU - and move the hell on. Insulting me or those who enjoy these kind of games, isn't going to do a damn thing, except make me just want to develop another one; which, in itself, is the ultimate f*ck you b*tch, grow a brain.

/rant off

quote:


@ Wolferz - everyone in GH including Mike actually had a good laugh about your impression of Mike....

heh, yeah, ol'd Wolfie gets carried away once in a while. Pay him no mind, he's patently harmless and just ranting as usual.

quote:


Now - Mike liked the space sim part, but he was highly disappointed with air, marine, and land combat.

That is quite understandable and I 100% agree. Fact is, if I had spent half as much time resolving issues in those aspects of the game, polishing etc, as I spent ****ing around with this stupid shit I found myself doing, it would have been a different story. And just to PROVE it, wait for Christmas and see what I'm coming up with.

quote:


What happens in a review of a game of this scale, is that
every
part of the game is reflected in the final rating.

Absolutely! And thats the way it SHOULD be. No question about it.

quote:


Mike felt that including so many sides to the game detracted from its final score. If the game was shipped as Battlcreuiser: Generations with space combat alone, I could see it getting anywhere from 7.0 to 9.0. But as Universal Combat is striving to compete in all genres but captures perfectly none apart of the space aspect, it's definite that the other 3 underdeveloped game features will detract from the game.

And this - again - is 100% understandable and quite CORRECT. As I've always said, ignoring the score of a review, a well written review should be able to give the gamer ENOUGH info with which to make up their mind. For example, a space simmer would still pick up the game and NEVER have to screw around with any of the planetary aspects (except to mine). THATS why I designed the way I did. You can do what you want, when you want, how you want. The complexity reveals itself based on how you progressively introduce yourself to it.

quote:


Nevertheless, our review was aimed at the
general public
, preventing them from buying the game, getting mad with it and coming here yelling at DS (...and getting banned of course)


Gee thanks. Like I don't already get yelled and *****ed at.

*EDIT: When I posted that the eToyChest review was nothing but an attack piece, some probably thought I was just saying that. Read the review again, now see this excerpt Michael "Cuthbert" Parks, posted on their forum and draw your own conclusions.

quote:


I had actually planned on editing the review in regards to this, the morning after it was posted. Of course, when I got in to work, I saw the shitstorm he was brewing up here, and on his website, and decided to leave it how it was.

Like 99% of the gaming community, I was barely aware of who Derek Smart was before I started writing the review. I had played his other games, but I never paid attention to his hijinx. If I knew then what I know now, the review would have probably been more caustic than it was. The guy's a sociopathic bully, and that's the main reason why he can't get a good game released.

Oh, well. None of this even matters, really. The release of this game is a non-issue. Nobody cares. The only interesting thing that can come from this game's release is seeing how many lawsuits he ends up filing to cover up how bad his game is. That does seem to be his M.O., after all.


[ 03-03-2004, 08:32 AM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, Dennis!

I am both impressed and honored by your reply to my post above.

My apologies to Mike for being so satirical about his review, since he and I share the same first name.

I guess we can only lay blame for any shortcomings of UC squarely on the shoulders of Dream Crusher for their greedy shortsightedness.

If Mike grabs a copy of BCM and plays it for a month and then plays UC. I'm sure both of you will agree about the sheer magnitude, not only of Derek's dream, but the brilliant execution of it that resulted.

/Opinion mode on (my opinion and only my opinion)

Today's publishers can be lumped into one category. Greedy SOB's with no regard for the customers who purchase their products.

They don't care if the developer has finished the work or not. They just want to snatch the code away from them as soon as they possibly can, stamp it on a disc, put it in the retail pipe, make a wad of cash off of it, and drop it for rhe next cash cow they culled out of the pasture. I have seen it over and over all too many times. Grab it, sell it, leave the customer dangling. It's sad really.

For reasons of Copyright I won't list them all here. But they know who they are.

Those publishers are on my permenant boycott list.

There is a saying in the sales trade:::

"If you lose one customer, you have lost one hundred" Because people are more prone to relate a bad experience than a good one.

Mike's review of UC is a prime example.

/opinion mode off.

Dennis I would never flame you on any message board, especially this one.

Can you say

I have fried my share of trolls and they all smell really bad when toasted.

As for correcting a faux paus, I can only suggest that your reviews be written in a Joe Friday manner.."Just the facts m'am, just the facts"

In my personal view, the review came across as rather hateful, but that's just my view.

Maybe Mike was just having a bad day, I dunno.

Also, Comparing a game to others is wrong wrong wrong, Focus only on the one you are reviewing.

Why would you want to aim your reviews at preventing people from buying a game? We're talking lawsuit territory here. Defamation is not a becoming trait for those who should be looking at something objectively.

Just state the facts and let the general public make up their own minds. If they buy the game and don't wish to invest the time it takes to learn it fully, they are free to return it to the store.

I'm sure From Derek's point of view, UC was meant for BC fans to consume.(Correct me if I'm wrong Boss, I'll be over here in the Airlock))

It was DC that wanted to widen the audience,

(On very short notice BTW). For the sole purpose of trying to take advantage of the fans of other gaming genres.(again a greedy attempt to make more money)Making more money is not a bad thing, but you should not do it by screwing your customers and the people who create the product.

I have literally quit many a job because the management wanted me to put forth falsehoods to screw a customer and make their bottom line a little fatter.

All of the elements within UC were not something that could be slapped together in a month or two or three, But Derek was forced to do so And like he has always done with the BC series, Even in the face of adversity, he continues to work on improving it. How many developers do that?

None, Nada, Nicht, other than 3000AD.

Mike I read your review of X-2 and I again got the feeling that you were not on the outside looking in.

At the beginning you seem to be looking for what you want the game to be( like all of us) instead of reporting what it actually is. Which you do later in your diatribe. Kudos on that one bud.

/removes finger from Satirical Bugnor missile launcher button.

/roleplay on

Commander Wolferz:"Helm, set course for the Mars gate."

Nav Officer:" Aye sir, course plotted and laid in."

Commander Wolferz:"Engage."

Commander Wolferz:"Engineering, get someone up here to fix Mike's Coffee holder and lower his chair an inch."

Engineering officer:" Aye sir."

(an hour passes)

Commander Wolferz:"Engineering, Where's that Tech I asked for?"

Engineering Officer:"Apologies sir, someone stuffed Resnig in the garbage disposal again. It's a bloody mess down here sir, I'll have a tech there in a few minutes."

Commander Wolferz:"Medibay, How's the cloning of Resnig coming?

Medical Officer:" He will be done in about an hour, Sir."

Commander Wolferz:"Doctor, Can you make Resnig just a little bit more intelligent this time?"

Doctor:"Sorry sir, that is impossible."

Commander Wolferz:" Why is that?"

Doctor:"We've cloned him so many times,that we don't have much left to work with."

Commander Wolferz:"Damn! Ok Doc, when he's out of the goo, put him in the transporter and beam him to whatever is within range. We need that garbage disposal for all the intruders we kill."

Medibay:" Aye Aye sir, with pleasure!"

/roleplay off

OK, Dennis, PM me with what you have in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW! SC You beat me to the punch. I'm heading for the Medibay to get these burns treated.

Patently harmless???

He don't know me vewy well do he?

Like the Hairy Timber Wolf I am so named for, my bite is worse than my bark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Wolferz:

Also, Comparing a game to others is wrong wrong wrong, Focus only on the one you are reviewing.

Why would you want to aim your reviews at preventing people from buying a game? We're talking lawsuit territory here. Defamation is not a becoming trait for those who should be looking at something objectively.


Sorry that I didn't have the time to check this thread until now - we've got an emergency with the main news editor quitting , so not much time.

But just to reply to the above comments - as a matter of fact, according to some surverys we've ran on GH, most of our 100,000 daily readers are in the 14-25 age group, which means most probably students. Those guys have to worry about beer & food money - so what we try and do, is give a realistic image on each game. We never claim to be professional, we're just trying to be.

Maybe Mike's expectations were too high for the game, or maybe he was out of canned food again and was really realy hungry. Thing is, I think the score is essentially right, taking all the aspects of the game in pro portion. Most of the criticism is spot on too. I'll suggest him to write more cheery reviews in the future, but for now it's just his personal style... His affection to the title is reflected in the score, not in the amount of things he wishes were better in the game

[edit] And comparisons are essential in the terms of graphics and sound. Otherwise there would be no difference between Wolf 3d and Doom 3 (rough example), as the gameplay factor rating will be the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dennis S.,

In response to your most recent post, there will be no response due to the strict decorum we try to maintain here on these boards.

"Turn the gas off back there Charlie."

"As much as I want to, I'm not gonna fry this one."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Dennis S.:

Maybe Mike's expectations were too high for the game, or maybe he was out of canned food again and was really
realy
hungry. Thing is, I think the score is essentially right, taking all the aspects of the game in pro portion. Most of the criticism is spot on too. I'll suggest him to write more cheery reviews in the future, but for now it's just his personal style... His affection to the title is reflected in the score, not in the amount of things he wishes were better in the game


Understood. As I've always said, if a review is well written, the score is largely irrelevant. At least to me it is. And reviews are yes, based on an individual's opinion. As such, is it up to the reader to decide if they trust or reject that person's opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×