Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Dunedan

BCM Receives 77% @ PC GAMER

Recommended Posts

PC gamer is a little odd in their ratings. I beleive they recently rated Operation: Flashpoint (another great game with a outstanding concept) in the mid to low 70's. They knocked if for being TOO realistic, having clumsy controls, and buggy multiplayer. Granted, the multiplayer that I've seen with it isn't that stable yet, but the heart of the game, the single player campaign, is an EXCELLENT gaming experiance, in fact, I don't think I've played a game as much since the original X-COM.

As for clumsy controls, in this reviewers mind, it was a FPS that didn't act like the standard, and therefore was clumsy. I think that he was a bit jaded and upset that he couldn't run and jump like a counterstrike monkey.

"...combat is very confusing, and you often get shot without knowing where your attacker is coming from...". Absolutely true. In my opinion, this is an amazing accomplishment for a computer game. It's realistically depicting infantry combat at a glorious level of realism. Once you get the concept of the game (in a way, it's not a "hero" sim, you're not killing a tank with your M-16 no matter how cool you think you are.), everything makes sense. That is EXACTLY why I play the game. It just seemed like this guy missed the point of the game altogether, and in the process decided that the game was a FPS clone that didn't play like a good FPS, and therefore was medicore at best.

The bit about being "too realistic" bugged me a lot, and really shook up my opinions on PC gamers reviewers. This reviewer seemed to be rating the game as to how he personally enjoyed it, claiming it was just not fun. That's great, if I reveiwed most sporting events, I'd say they weren't fun either...but that doesn't stop millions of people from attending events. I want to know if the game delivers as promised, not if this guy finds it personally satisfying. The SC has stated several times that some people will want NOTHING to do with this game, seeing that it requires a subsantially deeper investment in time and effort to fully explore. I don't think game reveiwers can spend the required time playing the game to really get the most out of it. I mean come on, if you don't waste money for a cool intro video to stare at, how can it be a good game anymore? :-)

Anyways, I wouldn't rely on PC Gamer to really ante up and give a revolutionary game concept a well thought out, non-mainstream, thorough review the first time around. I guess I'd consider them the MTV of game reviewers.

SgtVor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main thoughts I had when I read the review (the issue showed up in my mail yesterday), was that it read EXACTLY like a student trying to fake a book report from just reading the dust jacket, with perhaps a brief glance at the Cliffs Notes.

It's hard to pin down. Some reviews simply feel like the author worked hard to trim them down in length. This one felt like he struggled to add enough filler--the first two paragraphs alone are almost a third of the article, and could have been cut out almost entirely. Lots of different vehicles--how do they handle, in comparison to each other? Barely a word. How's that first-person component work out? How about that interface? Range of commands? Good flavor-example-anecdotes of space and planetary operations? Sorry subscribers, not in this review.

Maybe I'm just cranky, but I maintain that even if that review wasn't written based solely on the back of the box, and maybe a quick skim of the manual, it sounds very, very much like it was. And that's pretty unfortunate--I generally expect a better crack at things from them.

It's still set for the 29th, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

It's still set for the 29th, right?

Last time i checked it still was for the 29th.

Back on the topic: reviews most of the time are inacurate and that is dangerous because if somebody buys a games magazine he/she will read it and see what the reviewer has to say and then the game starts gaining a reputation it doesn't has.

Laracuente out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also agree many times in the past I have seen games given quick shot reviews and scores that have marked the game as average or above average and yet when the buying public try the game it becomes imensely popular a classic example was Starcraft most magazines gave it an average review and passed it off as another RTS game(which basically it is I suppose) but it obviously had more because it was one of the most popular games at the time of its release.

I Used to subscribe to PC zone but cancelled my subscription when I realised that they were glazing over alot of good titles and prefer to use judgement, some research, demos and word of mouth if I can before buying a game these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think that the review was quite positive, I just don't think that the reviewer understood what BCM is, or particularly likes the style of gameplay.

First off, there wasn't a single mention of any kind of bug. Period. That's a cudo for derek, not the reviewer.

The only thing the reviewer said about the graphics is that they're tame. That's it. He didn't say crappy, he didn't say excellent, tame.

The biggest complaint was lack of multiplayer. Personally I think it's like taking points away from the sims for not having multiplayer. And he didn't like the single player campaign, he thought it was 'uninspired'.

But he thought the bridge interface was surprisingly clean and intuitive. He says the game has incredible depth, and tremendous potential, calling it a sci-fi fans gourmet buffet.

He also tips his hat to Derek, saying that he's proven himself durable.

I too thought it should have had a much better score, but overall it's a totally acceptable and positive review. My big fault with it was that he was comparing it to Starlancer, when in fact, he should have been comparing it to Elite, or Privateer. The phrase space sim has been misused far too long. Indy War 2 tried a failed. Finally a game comes along that delivers on all fronts, and the world has no idea.

Anyone up for an e-mail campaign? Nothing too harsh, or dramatic, just a gentle reminder from the fans of BCM some of the things he missed in his review?

[ 10-18-2001: Message edited by: Kush ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Anyone up for an e-mail campaign?

Now there's an idea... I haven't read the review yet, so I can't really comment on most of it, but when I do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Anyone up for an e-mail campaign? Nothing too harsh, or dramatic, just a gentle reminder from the fans of BCM some of the things he missed in his review?

I don't think that would be necessary. One person's refuse is another's treasure. And BCM wasn't his refuse anyway. I think he gave it an honest score to his criteria, which is what he should be doing. If he starts letting other people (ala YOU GUYS) help him create a criteria, his reviews would be worthless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Kush:

My big fault with it was that he was comparing it to Starlancer, when in fact, he should have been comparing it to Elite, or Privateer.


I disagree. He wasn't comparing it to Starlancer. He was refering to the fact that unless you are hardcore, you'd go back to Starlancer due to its structured nature. He was still in the mindset that its too open-ended.

Here, I have scanned and uploaded it here temporarily.

Email campaign. Now there's an idea.

[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by aramike:

I don't think that would be necessary. One person's refuse is another's treasure. And BCM wasn't his refuse anyway. I think he gave it an honest score to his criteria, which is what he should be doing. If he starts letting other people (ala YOU GUYS) help him create a criteria, his reviews would be worthless.


True. But an email campaign isn't out of order. After all, they'd just be opinions. Besides, they are expecting an email deluge anyway am sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it seemed to me that he was un necessarily harsh on the single player campaign.

Personally I thought it was because he was looking for a Starlancer experience, and it seemed as if he was saying that BCM's doesn't play like your averaged canned response space shooter (which it doesn't), and that this is a 'bad thing' when in fact, it's a 'Good Thing'.

I'm already working on an e-mail response, and basically I'm going to say that I thought the review was positive, (which it was) but missed out on the fact that BCM is not a space shooter, but a space SIM. And that knocking it for not having multiplayer is ignoring what the game has already achieved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm... A 77%? Let's see.....

quote:

79% - 70%

GOOD

These are pretty good games that we recommend to fans of the particular genre, though it's a safe bet you can probably find better options.

I really think it should have gotten the 80-89 percentile though. Look at the part I highlighted.

quote:

89% - 80%

EXCELLENT

These are excellent games. Anything that scores in this range is well worth your purchase, and is likely a great example of its genre.
This is also a scoring range where we might reward specialist/niche games that are a real breakthrough in their own way.

Hmmm...... Tell me: How is this not a breakthrough game?

Boy. My first recommendation would be wait until multiplayer. Then the second, would be to have them review the game on different configurations. (At least without the V5, please!) Sorry, but I'm too tired, to join your little E-Mail campaign.

Oh, and a quick question. What did they review it by? Was it a beta version? (if so, how recent?) One of the Demos? Or Gold?

Post 600!!!!! w00t!

[ 10-18-2001: Message edited by: Cmdr Nova ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Velocity, Nova, couldn't of said it better myself. So I put what you said in the e-mail. I should probably give you guys credit, but I won't. Heh heh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another spin on the issue.

I am sure the reviewer was playing a beta copy. As such a complete review would be pragmatic at best.

Hopefully the game mags will review the gold version with an open mind, and more than an hour of playtime.

I would recommend that they spend at least a week of actual game time and get some better equipment to run it on. I mean c'mon! Trying to rate a game on your word processor is totally unfair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 cents:

I don't know what you guys are complaining about. I think that it was a great review, very honest, and useful to the average (read wimpy) gamer. I just read it and, like every other time I read about BCM's features, was drooling over my keyboard. If I had never heard of BCM before reading it, I, as a hardcore (read geeky) gamer, would run out and buy it. Normal gamers however probably won't like it and shouldn't be expected to waste their money on a game they won't enjoy; I know a LOT of people who would consider BCM more work than play. That is what this review accomplishes.

As far as giving it negative points for not having multiplayer YET, get over it. Yes we all appreciate the fact it is being released now (thank you thank you thank you SC), but I can see how it might appear tacky to leave MP temporarily out to someone who hasn't been waiting for months for this game to be released.

Personally I just think you don't like the 77%. But it is true; there are a lot of people who will have a much better chance of ENJOYING themselves with the purchase of a different title.

That’s just what I was thinking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Wolferz:

Another spin on the issue.

I am sure the reviewer was playing a beta copy.


No he wasn't. He was sent the first Gold candidate and then the second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then, if that's the case, I really don't think he took his time with the game at all. I just assumed he was in the beta. I assumed he had a long period of time with the game. Obviously he didn't. It's really too bad.

And I know it's kinda ridiculous to argue about the review. For crying out loud, he didn't slam the game, not at all. And to be honest, if he had given the game a 98%, and knocked it two points for lack of multiplayer, I'd still be here *****ing about it.

But I really wish he had told the public the real essence of the game that makes it so precious. That's kinda what bugs me, there's so much to this game that he just kinda glossed over. Yes, it's more like a flight simulator. A flight sim that you can play like a 3d real time strategy, or first person shooter. I won't go on, I know I'm preaching to the converted, but I just have to say, the review bugged me, even though it was a very positive review, it still bugged me.

I guess such is the human condition. Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to pipe in and agree with Aramike's post regarding the E-Mail campaign, albeit for a different reason. Those of you who have NOT played the FULL GOLD VERSION of BCM really have no basis for rebuttal. Andy Mahood has more information than you do at this point. If I were him, I wouldn't take a single one seriously as the game has not even been released yet. The beta testers may have a leg to stand on but then again, they may be viewed as biased. You guys may want to wait until the game is released before any kind of E-Mail barrage begins or you risk being discounted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. As soon as I get it, and play it a little bit, I'll revaluate the game. It just seemed like he was missing some of the major points of the game. There was barely any mention of first-person, though I liked the Kirk analogy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True krazor, I'm one of the testers and I liked the game as it was a lot, but I think you guys should wait until you have your own opinion.

I KNOW I like it and will send my own email when I have my own full version on my sweaty hands, but no earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I've played the demos, I've played the original, I doubt there's anything in the full game that will make me hate the game, or change my opinion about the gameplay.

I think it's a pretty sure bet that I will like the game.

I hear what your saying. You've made good points, I still feel that Andy was judging the game based on the average Space Shooter type game, and from what I already know about the gameplay, it should be compared to Elite, or MS Flight sim, or even Privateer. And it should be compared favourably. And so I sent a very respectful e-mail saying just that. It wasn't a rant. It wasn't insulting, I just wanted to express my opinion.

Okay, maybe I'm a bit of a fanatic. So sue me.

Sheesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'll sue you for being as honest you can be, is that right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:

No he wasn't. He was sent the first Gold candidate and then the second.


"I see," said the blind man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×