PDA

View Full Version : Pc Gamer 75%



FEARLESS
12th May 2005, 08:52
Great graphics etc. where did it fail?......................YEP! you guessed it....troop movement on the battlefield................they slated it, but did say a patch would sort this out and it would improve the game immensley. Don't say the forum members didn't tell 'em :( Take note Pyro!

Czar
12th May 2005, 09:33
Link to the review? (Please)

Now - not having read it I will not comment on review one way or the other but:

Were they playing the final retail version (or a beta with a list of things to be fixed supplied by Pyro?)

Computer mag reviews should be treated with caution.

Oststar
12th May 2005, 09:35
Any reviews shouldn't be trusted, the majority is the only thing worth noting. Hell i'd not touch EE2 with a twenty foot pole but Gamespy would have me believe nothing better had ever been made.

jaywalker2309
12th May 2005, 09:52
Great graphics etc. where did it fail?......................YEP! you guessed it....troop movement on the battlefield................they slated it, but did say a patch would sort this out and it would improve the game immensley. Don't say the forum members didn't tell 'em :( Take note Pyro!

Actually they gave it 72%. However reading the review its clear they've just taken RTW and compared it like for like. Theres a tiny tiny section about the naval battles, but this is most likely because RTW doesnt have it, so they dont know how to compare it.

Wait for more reviews to come in. :)

FEARLESS
12th May 2005, 09:56
OH! with out a doubt PC Gamer is pro RTW. But hell this game could really give it a run for it's money with a little tweeking of the movement in land battles.

jaywalker2309
12th May 2005, 10:07
OH! with out a doubt PC Gamer is pro RTW. But hell this game could really give it a run for it's money with a little tweeking of the movement in land battles.

We'll wait and see what the buying public think.. they are the people we want happy with the product :)

zzxxcc
12th May 2005, 12:37
Ahhh...that sounds like confidence to me!

If the people who make a game have pride in it, it takes more than a luke warm review or two to shake them.

And THAT gives me confidence.

Anyway...I don't play Total War, so weak or unfavorable comparisions to it are less than meaningless to my interests.

Razmul
12th May 2005, 14:01
do as i do, never trust PC gamer.. their reviews are like my sister to me.. i dont even want to look at them..

BabyShambles
12th May 2005, 15:44
do as i do, never trust PC gamer.. their reviews are like my sister to me.. i dont even want to look at them..

Actually PC Gamer is the most respected magazine in pc gaming . But which PC Gamer reviewed it ? U.S or U.K version ?

jaywalker2309
12th May 2005, 15:58
Actually PC Gamer is the most respected magazine in pc gaming . But which PC Gamer reviewed it ? U.S or U.K version ?

Magazines have a tough time now that the web has taken off properly, as they have lead times for printing etc, which means for them to get review code for release usually means they dont get retail copies, or they have to review it in a following months magazine. Whereas websites can get code the week of release and still make the review be on time..

BANANAMAN
12th May 2005, 16:44
And reviewers and pc game magazins differ very much from eachother, so that in one pc game mag a certain pc game gets 87% while in another pc game mag the same pc game gets 75% or even 65% score.

My favorite online pc game magazins are:

ign.com

gamespot.com

gamespy.com

Of which gamespy.com is the best in reviews in my opinion.

And Imperial Glory isnt even out yet, so what's this thread about a review? :confused:

Previews I understand, but reviews? :confused:

jaywalker2309
12th May 2005, 16:50
And reviewers and pc game magazins differ very much from eachother, so that in one pc game mag a certain pc game gets 87% while in another pc game mag the same pc game gets 75% or even 65% score.

My favorite online pc game magazins are:

ign.com

gamespot.com

gamespy.com

Of which gamespy.com is the best in reviews in my opinion.

And Imperial Glory isnt even out yet, so what's this thread about a review? :confused:

Previews I understand, but reviews? :confused:

Game is out in 5 days (US).. Reviews should be appearing around about now..

I personally read the reviews, then look at the reader review average. If its the same as the review score for the site, then i know the review is about right, but all to often you see HUGE variations.. Lego star wars being a classic one.. GS gave it 7.6, yet the average for readers is 8.8 after 450+ reviews (thats a big difference)

FEARLESS
12th May 2005, 16:57
The magazine is PC Gamer UK. I'm still going to buy the game as I am interested in the diplomacy & trade etc. I enjoyed some years back a game called Imperialism crap land battles but interesting micromanagement. The sound effects in IG are brilliant and I look forward to the naval battles. Think I'll go and watch 'Master and Commander' again to get me in the mood. :D

mob
12th May 2005, 17:16
thanks you open a discusion about a review and dont give us a link what was the point m8

jaywalker2309
12th May 2005, 17:21
thanks you open a discusion about a review and dont give us a link what was the point m8

Its a magazine review.. no website

The Penitant Man
12th May 2005, 17:22
thanks you open a discusion about a review and dont give us a link what was the point m8

The link is your local newsagent.

And the point was probably to let people know what mark PC Gamer gave IG.

For the record, the mag said IG was: Phoney; Fetching; Fiendishly Fast

It said it was not: Fields of Glory; Original; Beyond redemption.

jaywalker2309
12th May 2005, 17:24
The link is your local newsagent.

And the point was probably to let people know what mark PC Gamer gave IG.

For the record, the mag said IG was: Phoney; Fetching; Fiendishly Fast

It said it was not: Fields of Glory; Original; Beyond redemption.

To be blunt he was thinking

IG was: Not RTW,
IG was not: RTW

:) He welcome to his opinion tho.

BabyShambles
12th May 2005, 21:12
To be blunt he was thinking

IG was: Not RTW,
IG was not: RTW

:) He welcome to his opinion tho.

Well if it was PC Gamer U.K i wouldn't listen to them . I respect there reviews , but when it comes to strategy games like this they are too in love with Rome:TW . Because this game looks like a challenger for Rome they will say it's crap . They wont let nothing hurt there baby . So i will wait for a proper not biased review and that PC Gamer review wont influence me atall .

pawnsacrifice
12th May 2005, 21:25
Well if it was PC Gamer U.K i wouldn't listen to them . I respect there reviews , but when it comes to strategy games like this they are too in love with Rome:TW . Because this game looks like a challenger for Rome they will say it's crap . They wont let nothing hurt there baby . So i will wait for a proper not biased review and that PC Gamer review wont influence me atall .

Just Because IG is not RTW doesn't mean its crap. Just because you dont like RTW doesn't mean its crap. People everywhere need to keep their eyes open and make sure they are getting a fair view from the sidelines. People keep bringing up RTW because, and let's be honest, it did raise the bar a little on strategy games, just as Hearts of Iron revolutionized WWII strategy. If you don't like it , that's fine. I played it but have yet to complete a campaign because of many flaws it has. However, I still love playing it. Keep in mind that this is the IG official site. So no matter if the game breaks into your room, violates your pets, and steals your money, this site will still need to talk the game up because that's what the Mods are paid to do. Always remember with anything....The truth is lost somewhere in the middle.

(type name here)
12th May 2005, 22:20
Who said r:tw was crap?

Sieur_Drewry
12th May 2005, 22:22
Here is my thing.. WHO CARES IF IT IS LIKE R:TW. In fact that is what I want. Why not have it like rome total war, the reason is because they are two totally different time periods. Ancient Roman Warfare and Napoleonic 19th century warfare are two totally different concepts! What would be better than a game that was as good as if not better than R:TW but in the 19th century - my favorite period in war!

Dravin
12th May 2005, 22:58
Why not have it like rome total war, the reason is because they are two totally different time periods.


Wanting the game to share more game mechanics and design decisions (pause and give orders, routing units or what have you) is not the same as wanting them set in the same time period, I suppose the word' like' could be used both ways, but I think most people who want more similarities between IG and R:TW are not stating a desire to have IG redesigned into a game about the Roman Empire, I could be wrong though.

BabyShambles
12th May 2005, 23:09
Here is my thing.. WHO CARES IF IT IS LIKE R:TW. In fact that is what I want. Why not have it like rome total war, the reason is because they are two totally different time periods. Ancient Roman Warfare and Napoleonic 19th century warfare are two totally different concepts! What would be better than a game that was as good as if not better than R:TW but in the 19th century - my favorite period in war!

The only similarities i want with this game and Rome:TW is to have massive battles that dont lag , decent A.I , a solid and deep campaign game , a decent morale system and a multiplayer .

Oststar
13th May 2005, 06:48
To be blunt he was thinking

IG was: Not RTW,
IG was not: RTW

:) He welcome to his opinion tho.

Reviewers are all overpaid jackasses. You'd get a more honest score sending all the games to Maddox (Search for "the best page in the universe"...) and seeing which gets the least insulting review.

I wrote up a detailed post on dodgy reviews but scrapped it to say that basicly mindset of the reviewer changes everything, a few examples.

Gamespy review of EE2. It was rated highly because the reviewer wanted to be playing a classic style RTS and because he was put in just the right spot to see only the best of the game. He also knew the devs and so was kind on the faults.

Gamespy review of CoD:UO. Rated lower than it deserved because the reviewer was given free reign to run around the levels, best or not. Also the reviewer didn't know the devs and was beaten by the game a few times. Because his mindset was all wrong an unbiased opinion wan't given.

PC Gamer review of IG. As jay said, he was looking for a Napoleonic era version of RTW. He didn't get it and so wasn't pleased. You can also see his conflicting mindset because while he wanted a TW game he also didn't want to see a TW carbon copy. I think it shows that the reviewer was a strong RTW fan, and so tried his hardest to rate IG low.

Joe 98
13th May 2005, 06:54
[QUOTE=jaycw2309]
We'll wait and see what the buying public think
[\QUOTE]


But, like watching a movie, you have to hand over the money BEFORE you know whether you like it.

Dravin
13th May 2005, 07:08
But, like watching a movie, you have to hand over the money BEFORE you know whether you like it.

True, your best bet is to find somebody else willing to take the risk who you are reasonably sure has the same taste in the game you do, this is why forums are wonderful, if you stick around long enough you can get a feel for what various people are expecting and use that as a better measuring stick than any 'official' review, though sometimes it doesn't take long, for instance I figured out rather quickly I shouldn't weigh Bananaman's 'review' of the game all that heavily.

P.S. Not trying to insult you Bananaman, just acknowledging that we have very different ideas of just what this game needs to be like to be worth buying.

jaywalker2309
13th May 2005, 07:46
[QUOTE=jaycw2309]
We'll wait and see what the buying public think
[\QUOTE]


But, like watching a movie, you have to hand over the money BEFORE you know whether you like it.

Thats true, but theres always the forums to seek opinions, and then theres the demo to get a taster.

saddletank
13th May 2005, 08:24
[QUOTE=Joe 98]

Thats true, but theres always the forums to seek opinions,

:p


and then theres the demo to get a taster.

:cool: ;)

No review can be truely unbiased, they are all subjective to a degree. The person reading the review is also biased of course :)

The IG demo seems to be from a build that has significantly changed by the time of the main release that it seems not to be that much of a taster at all.

jaywalker2309
13th May 2005, 09:27
[QUOTE=jaycw2309]

:p



:cool: ;)

No review can be truely unbiased, they are all subjective to a degree. The person reading the review is also biased of course :)

The IG demo seems to be from a build that has significantly changed by the time of the main release that it seems not to be that much of a taster at all.

But to those who never go on forums so only have seen the demo, it at least lets them know a little bit about the game, its not 2d sprites etc etc :)

Oststar
13th May 2005, 10:47
Will Pyros ever make an updated Demo? It seems a wise choice to do so, because i've known many to test a game purely on a demo and not full game reviews etc, and they may get the wrong impression of IG because of the limited demo. Even a one map demo, say Cyrenacia (It's harder and has a greater variety of units), would be better than the current demo, once the game is released.

Villaret-Joyeuse
13th May 2005, 12:38
I would suggest that as well.....

Duke of Marlborough
13th May 2005, 12:42
I would also like to see a MP demo before I take the plunge to buy it, as I would like to play this v's other players not a dumbAI - Players are so much more likely to make a mistake - rather than a pre programmed response.

Bring it on...........

saddletank
13th May 2005, 16:07
[QUOTE=saddletank]

But to those who never go on forums so only have seen the demo, it at least lets them know a little bit about the game, its not 2d sprites etc etc :)

Well, fair point, but how many gamers don't have internet access these days?

BANANAMAN
13th May 2005, 18:58
True, your best bet is to find somebody else willing to take the risk who you are reasonably sure has the same taste in the game you do, this is why forums are wonderful, if you stick around long enough you can get a feel for what various people are expecting and use that as a better measuring stick than any 'official' review, though sometimes it doesn't take long, for instance I figured out rather quickly I shouldn't weigh Bananaman's 'review' of the game all that heavily.

P.S. Not trying to insult you Bananaman, just acknowledging that we have very different ideas of just what this game needs to be like to be worth buying.

Apologize accepted Dravin. :D

BANANAMAN
13th May 2005, 19:39
And by the way.. like I was trying to say in my previous post on this topic: if you are a smart buyer first you look at the reason why you want to buy Imperial Glory in the first place. If you like the TotalWar style of play but in a Napoleonic scene then Imperial Glory will make you very happy indeed despite of some design differences like gamespeed, hold/stand ground option & maximum amount of units on screen.

Cinematic pc games is Pyro Studios style although they never said the word cinematic in their interviews. And their pc games being cinematic is what attracts all kind of gamers not just the mainstream gamers.

While Imperial Glory has its limits its still a very charming pc game that will drag you into the sphere & mood of expanding empire รก la good old Napoleonic times.

Now that you know this in the back of your head :D .. you should look for as many as possible reviews on Imperial Glory not just one or two reviews. And you should look if the downs or negative points of the reviewers on Imperial Glory is your downs or negative points also. If not then Imperial Glory should be okey by you. But dont make your conclusions yet. :D

After reading as many as possible reviews you should come back here at this forum and see for yourself what the general game experience is on Imperial Glory. That's what this forum is realy for, so that you wont just depend your decision/opinion entirely on the opinions of those reviewers of pc game mags only.

So, you have three decision makers of buying Imperial Glory.. or not :D :

* Your own pre-set opinion.
* The opinions of the (pc game mags/online) reviewers.
* And the general opinions & game experiences on this forum from the buyers of Imperial Glory.

PC Gamer's review is just one pc game mag review, so to base you entire opinion on PC Gamer's review is stupid. So, dont panic :eek: :D yet because you still have fase 2 and fase 3 to go through.

On the other hand you always have (of course) some gamers like me who has already decided to buy Imperial Glory. :D

BabyShambles
13th May 2005, 19:50
Extremely well said post ;)

BANANAMAN
13th May 2005, 19:51
Extremely well said post ;)

Thank you, BabyShambles. ;)

pawnsacrifice
14th May 2005, 17:25
[QUOTE=BANANAMAN]And by the way.. like I was trying to say in my previous post on this topic: if you are a smart buyer first you look at the reason why you want to buy Imperial Glory in the first place. If you like the TotalWar style of play but in a Napoleonic scene then Imperial Glory will make you very happy indeed despite of some design differences like gamespeed, hold/stand ground option & maximum amount of units on screen.

But how will I know if they add the things needed to make the game enjoyable?

BANANAMAN
14th May 2005, 18:43
[QUOTE=BANANAMAN]And by the way.. like I was trying to say in my previous post on this topic: if you are a smart buyer first you look at the reason why you want to buy Imperial Glory in the first place. If you like the TotalWar style of play but in a Napoleonic scene then Imperial Glory will make you very happy indeed despite of some design differences like gamespeed, hold/stand ground option & maximum amount of units on screen.

But how will I know if they add the things needed to make the game enjoyable?

Then just do as I adviced: after release come back at this forum and ask directly to those who already have played it or are playing it so you can get a better picture of Imperial Glory. It's the safest way.. should you like to play it on safe. :D

Gelatinous Cube
14th May 2005, 20:22
[QUOTE=jaycw2309]
We'll wait and see what the buying public think
[\QUOTE]


But, like watching a movie, you have to hand over the money BEFORE you know whether you like it.

Sick seems to enjoy the preview build he got. That's enough for me. 'though I'll probably steer clear if it gets something like .0002 reviews or something, but I doubt that's likely.

saddletank
15th May 2005, 02:15
[QUOTE=BANANAMAN]And by the way.. like I was trying to say in my previous post on this topic: if you are a smart buyer first you look at the reason why you want to buy Imperial Glory in the first place. If you like the TotalWar style of play but in a Napoleonic scene then Imperial Glory will make you very happy indeed despite of some design differences like gamespeed, hold/stand ground option & maximum amount of units on screen.

But how will I know if they add the things needed to make the game enjoyable?

That's an interesting comparison. As far as periods of warfare go my interest in the period covered by R:TW would rate at about 4/10. My interest in the Napolenic period would rate at 8/10. However my enjoyment of R:TW would rate 7/10 and my enthusiasm for IG after being here for a while playing the demo and studying reviews, preview, movies and screenshots is currently sitting at 2/10 simply due to errors in historical accuracy and mis-selling by the publisher.

The period covered and genre of game is not enough to satisy the customer. It might be enough to get him to buy it though, which is another thing entirely.

BANANAMAN
15th May 2005, 15:14
[QUOTE=pawnsacrifice]

That's an interesting comparison. As far as periods of warfare go my interest in the period covered by R:TW would rate at about 4/10. My interest in the Napolenic period would rate at 8/10. However my enjoyment of R:TW would rate 7/10 and my enthusiasm for IG after being here for a while playing the demo and studying reviews, preview, movies and screenshots is currently sitting at 2/10 simply due to errors in historical accuracy and mis-selling by the publisher.

The period covered and genre of game is not enough to satisy the customer. It might be enough to get him to buy it though, which is another thing entirely.

You have the right to form your opinion on Imperial Glory and I and many like me have the right also to form an opinion on Imperial Glory and Imperial Glory RULEZZZZ!! IT'S JUST AWESOME! :p :cool: