Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Delta228

PC-Gamer Review

Recommended Posts

sfhand,

My experience is that the people who say that the Marines don't have much new to offer the game experience aren't the ones actually playing with the Marines :D From the people who purchased and play with Marines I usually see comments which state the exact opposite.

...

Steve

I should have been more clear, i.e I feel he was undervaluing the module and I haven't even gotten to the T 90's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

akd,

...and Boo can play the part of the Hamstertruppen or whatever.

Thanks. Now I expect to wake up at 3 in the morning screaming "noooooooo" and then in the morning forget why until I read this thread again ;)

sfhand,

I should have been more clear, i.e I feel he was undervaluing the module and I haven't even gotten to the T 90's.

I got that... no problem :) I was talking about the reviewer seeming to undervalue it because he isn't really interested in the setting to begin with (or so it would seem). It's pretty unlikely that someone will see the value in an expansion when the interest level in the basic game isn't solid. So far the people I've seen complaining the most about the Marines Module adding nothing are the ones who don't like the base game. But those who do like CM:SF *and* have the Marines Module seem to like it a lot. Since we can't please everybody, so as long as we please more than we expected we're happy. We're very happy :D

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes up the game:

1. Vehicles.

2. Fighting men.

3. Weapons.

4. Maps.

5. Scenarios.

6. Campaigns.

What was added with CMSF Marines:

1. New vehicles.

2. Marines.

3. New weapons.

4. New maps.

5. New scenarios.

6. A new campaign.

With the addition of some bug fixes and enhancements such as new sound effects, looks like there is at least 100% more "toys".

The reviewer probably had to write the review on a deadline and did it in between playing WoW and playing with all the free little pc-related desk toys on his desk. Not a good review, whether you love or hate the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reviewer probably had to write the review on a deadline and did it in between playing WoW and playing with all the free little pc-related desk toys on his desk. Not a good review, whether you love or hate the game.

Agreed. Didn't seem like he put a lot of effort into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. Didn't seem like he put a lot of effort into it.

Somebody tell his editor that...

Yeah, that was (one of) the laziest game review I've ever read, despite the praise. Maybe just to be safe or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortunately for us, reviews have been less and less important for us with each passing year. Back in the old days, before the Internet, the opinion of reviewers often times had an impact on sales one way or another. Not always, though, since there are some great examples of games which were trashed by reviewers but still sold VERY well. Sierra On-Line's Outpost is a game that I have some inside dope on and I can tell you that the much ridiculed "Outhouse" (as it was nick-named) was a HUGE success for Sierra. They even made a sequel that was almost as bad and it also sold very well.

Back in the old days customers had to rely upon the opinion of others (usually reviewers) to balance out the marketing hype. This required the reviewers to be "professional" in order to have the widest possible fan base, which in turn drove sales for the game magazines. Reviewers that had a track record of not having their finger on the pulse tended to be ignored and, theoretically, lowered the interest of the gamer in buying that particular magazine. Now the game magazines are largely out of business and even the online ones are shells of their predecessors in terms of content and importance within the gaming community. Again, why should I pay for someone's opinion when I can just download the game and see for myself if it is any good? After all, the only opinion that really matters is my own since the game is for me and not anybody else. Demos are, therefore, the best thing that ever happened for gamers and the worst thing that ever happened for game magazines (generally) and game reviewers (specifically).

The other thing that happened was game magazines losing the ability to break news to its audience. Game developers used to fight to the death to get a game magazine to write an article about their games because it was the only way to get the message out to their users (a few game companies had propaganda newsletters, but they were the minority). Now game developers don't need the magazines much at all since they can publish whatever they want, whenever they want, with 100% creative control over their message. Only the games trying to sell into the mass market need game magazines because it's so competitive that they need every venue possible to get their message out. Us little guys... we were pretty much ignored before, now we're almost totally shunned. There's no money to make off of us.

One thing is for certain... we've all lived through some pretty amazing times, even if we as individuals aren't always aware of how fundamentally things have changed. Not just gaming, but commerce in general. The Internet completely turned things on its head. And we, for one, are very glad about it since we little guys were always on the wrong end of things under the old regime :D

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What makes up the game:

What was added with CMSF Marines:

1. New vehicles.

2. Marines.

3. New weapons.

4. New maps.

5. New scenarios.

6. A new campaign.

The new campaign was actually a broken campaign that was not fixed for months. I must have missed the official apology for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The new campaign was actually a broken campaign that was not fixed for months. I must have missed the official apology for that.

Yes, you're right. But at least a fix was made available. Fortunately, there were enough scenarios to keep me busy until the fix came out.

As far as Steve's comments on the importance of reviews:

You have a point, but at least some sales are made because of reviewers' opinions. While they may be relatively few, it still means money that never made it to your pocket. Even if reviews are less important, "official" reviewers still hold some sway with people and should still be responsible with those reviews. I have purchased or not purchased many games because reviewers brought to light a major feature or problem.

Aside from that, BFC caters to a narrow group of people. And any reviewer would know that. I believe that since this is the best game of it's type in existence, the reviewer should factor that into his review. It's not like he's reviewing an RPG about a group of people (and creatures) who go around with swords, bows, and magic spells gaining experience points. If this were the case, he has dozens of other games to compare it to. For example, Baldurs Gate II: Shadows of Amn recieved a 95 back in 2000 (6th highest rated pcgamer-reviewed game of all time). If that game were released today, it would get a much lower score because there have been so many other great RPG's released since then to compare it to. Instead of criticizing what it isn't, they should tell the reader what it is and make darn sure to at least make a note (especially in the bullet points at the beginning or end of a review) that for people looking for a tactical warfare simulation-type game in a modern setting, it is a must have, without equal.

On a side note: Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin is the 95th best rated pcgamer-reviewed game of all time. ;) Combat Mission: Shock Force lies at a (now-undeservedly) low 1399th place :(, but is still the BEST in it's class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was having a problem with v1.10, the original release...

That's a problem with the original Army campaign (which I and many others have never encountered). If I'm not mistaken, we're discussing the current state of the Marines campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was having a problem with v1.10, the original release...

That's a problem with the original Army campaign (which I and many others have never encountered). If I'm not mistaken, we're discussing the current state of the Marines campaign.

The fine difference between the Marines campaign working and the (older) Army campaign not working might not be apparent to a reviewer. In particular to a reviewer who reviews CM:SF without the Marines modules ;)

In all seriousness, I suggest that known-broken campaigns in patch <n> are guarded by a warning in patch <n+1> to the effect "be aware that this campaign might get stuck" if the bug cannot be fixed.

Some of the attitude shown here is directly responsible for bad press. Everybody knows software has bugs, but at least you should limit the time wasted on part of the customer as much as you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The release notes do say to that saves from previous versions may not work with the new patch. However, that warning is traditionally ignored by gamers around the world :D They try to load and if it appears to work they keep playing. I suppose we could version check and 100% prevent loading up of earlier saves, but often times the older ones will work so it seems a bit draconian.

As for the problem with Night Stalker in the original campaign, we're looking into that. If we know of a problem then we fix it. So far we haven't had a reproducible bug linked to specific save files go unfixed. For whatever reason this is the first time I've heard about it. We're looking into it now.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...