Metacritic reviews

[Buzz]

Steve , "I don't think the few cranks out there STILL bleating on and on and on about CMx1 vs. CMx2 is "devastating". What would have been devastating is us being stupid enough to listen to them. Because I can promise you, without ANY doubt in my mind, Battlefront would have been out of business. Just like all the other wargame companies that refused the challenge of innovation in favor of pandering to an every shrinking pool of sycophants."

Adjusting to the challenge of innovation = Survival and Good Business.... and better games / entertainment for customers who purchase products they want.

I think it was Specialized Bicycle that had a slogan "Innovate or Die"? They are doing just fine with their business model.

Specialized Bicycles TDF 2008 Commercial Innovate or Die

Shrinking the pool of sycophants has Darwinian implications as well.

[Buzz]

"Soon" to Steve may mean some time around next April. You know, tax time. That always comes too soon.

Michael

Or Santa Time? Would a sweet New Modern CMX2 bookend to last Christmas CMSF Mac Bundle and am still playing and enjoying the heck out of it.

I know I said it before but the Battlefront "complete package" of Game and Modules makes the games feel so much more polished in play and possibilities of play with all the units.

[Michael Emrys]

Or Santa Time?

Okay, I am not going to play Scrooge and rain on your fantasy. I just hope you are able to handle disappointment without going to pieces. I mean, I really wouldn't want to read in the papers about how you threw yourself out a tenth floor window.

Michael

[A Canadian Cat]

Exactly. I can't count how many movies and TV shows that had poor metacritic ratings that I watched and think are the best things ever made. Which is why I don't look at those scores any more.

Yeah those homogenized numbers from thousands of users are basically useless. A much more productive use of reviewers is to look at the reviewers of moves / games / restaurants that agree with your opinions of same that you have experienced and then refer to those individual reviewers opinions for new stuff - if a review really matter to you. Some times it can lead you to new thinks you like that you might not have found before.

That's another thing. The CMBN that was reviewed by most of those guys is by far and away not the same CMBN that exists today.

Yeah, I read my review and loads of stuff I commented on as needing improvement are already better. Awesome stuff.

[JRMC1879]

The review score on a game's home page on Steam comes straight from Metacritic. So whether you like it or not it is a tool used by a lot of people to judge a product. The sites popularity is indicative of the influence what's written there has. Whether that's the way it should be or whether people should put stock in the comments posted there etc is moot. It's the way it currently is and if you care about CM it would be good to get on there and post it's praises.

IIRC BF has already said they wouldn't do Steam anyway.

-F

Well no - it matters to YOU. And I doubt in a big way its a tool used by anyone likely to buy CM.

And if you actually bothered to look there it has an average rating of 81 - so whats bad about that - and I am guessing it would be even higher if it werent for the two reviews posted by

1. Michael Dorosh

2. Wolverine 101

Know anything of those two and you will know how worthless their opinions of this game are.

So - you are basing your statement on just 25 review scores - two of which are so far at the other end of the rest that they hoplessley skew the results.

I would suggest that anyone who used that as a sensible guide to whether the game is any good has the intelligence of a labottomised monkey.

CM is for me the only game that delivers to all my expectations - it is in a league of its own as far as what is says its going to do matching up with what it actually does. I still play SF regularly even five years after I bought it.

The best thing is however - that the thing just keeps getting better.

[sburke]

I would suggest that anyone who used that as a sensible guide to whether the game is any good has the intelligence of a labottomised monkey.

You should be ashamed of yourself for making that comparison. I am betting the monkeys are highly offended.

[Fenris]

Again you guys are missing the point by taking an elitist attitude as it pertains only to your own very well informed opinion on the topic of CM.

If you don't understand the idea of baiting many and varied hooks to catch more fish, no point wasting anymore time on the point.

As to the thinly veiled insults JRMC1879 go **** yourself.

-F

[JRMC1879]

Again you guys are missing the point by taking an elitist attitude as it pertains only to your own very well informed opinion on the topic of CM.

If you don't understand the idea of baiting many and varied hooks to catch more fish, no point wasting anymore time on the point.

As to the thinly veiled insults JRMC1879 go **** yourself.

-F

LOL ... no need for that ... I have a young and very attractive wife for such things...

[Battlefront.com]

Again you guys are missing the point by taking an elitist attitude as it pertains only to your own very well informed opinion on the topic of CM.

If you don't understand the idea of baiting many and varied hooks to catch more fish, no point wasting anymore time on the point.

As to the thinly veiled insults JRMC1879 go **** yourself.

Watch it, because your insult there doesn't give me any room for doubt. Do that again and you'll be taking a time out from the Forum for a while.

As for your main point, I think we've covered it quite well. Using your analogy, it's like baiting a hook and throwing it into a mud puddle in the hopes of catching a salmon. It's not going to happen, so why waste the time and bait? It's not elitist at all... it simply pragmatic.

If you want to continue on with the baiting analogy, if you're trying to fly fish you don't put a massive worm on your hook. Just like if you're ice fishing you don't put an expensive hand made fly on your line. Even I know this and I don't fish

For sure we can make CM more appealing and easier to use over time. We already are doing that, and have been since 1999. Just look at where we started:

So no way are we sitting back on our haunches and expecting things to always be sunny. We've taken a lot of crap from past customers for exactly that reason. To us there are no sacred cows.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

I would suggest that anyone who used that as a sensible guide to whether the game is any good has the intelligence of a labottomised monkey.

As an aside, I do think the logic based recommendations from places like Netflix and iTunes are quite good. I actually do use them as a first line of defense against crap. If I have doubts then I look at a couple of the good reviews and then a couple of the bad ones. I then assess, based on what I know about the product, how relevant I think the criticism and praise might be.

For example, if I look at a new release from a band and the criticism says "this is utter tosh!" I dismiss it as having no value. If the criticism instead says "I've bought all 6 of their previous releases and loved the direction they were going in, but this seems like it's gone off the rails" then I start to pay attention. If I'm very familiar with the band's work then I can very quickly see patterns in the criticism and praise. People saying "this is worse than X release" means something to me if I also have an opinion of X release. Sometimes I love it and that probably means the criticism drives me to make a purchase

I also put far more faith in professional reviews than end user reviews. But again, if they conflict with my understanding of the product and how I intend to use/enjoy it, then I give it less weight in my decision.

And of course I sample what I'm about to buy. That is, after all, the ultimate test. Movie trailers, 30 second music clips, first 10 pages of a book... whatever it is, that's the single most important thing for me. And with games, it's the demo. If I don't like the sample then I usually move onto something else. If I do, I buy. Doesn't matter what the reviews say if I am able to form my own opinion.

Metacritic scores, themselves, mean absolutely NOTHING to me. Not for games, not for Amazon products, not anything. They are not useful.

Steve

[MikeyD]

For me CMBN is CMBO with better graphics but a clunkier interface and RTS.

Translation: "My present girlfriend is like my first girlfriend in high school, though nobody could ever compare with her."

[Mord]

Well no - it matters to YOU. And I doubt in a big way its a tool used by anyone likely to buy CM.

And if you actually bothered to look there it has an average rating of 81 - so whats bad about that - and I am guessing it would be even higher if it werent for the two reviews posted by

1. Michael Dorosh

Dorosh's "review" is misleading by design. He purposefully leaves info out so he can support his bogus arguments. It's lying by omission. He's good at it...it's been his M.O. for a decade. He knew full well that CMBN would be released with the module design (as CMSF was before it) but he made sure not to mention that. THAT way he could focus on how "Normandy" was lacking all these different things; nations, units, weapons, and vehicles. With all that missing how could BFC DARE call it Normandy? It's a petty tactic and he KNEW exactly what he was doing. What cracks me up the most is how he went out of his way to harm the game and then comes here and uploads mods...it's so bi-polar and bizarre—it makes you wonder about his mental state.

Mord.

[Childress]

What cracks me up the most is how he went out of his way to harm the game and then comes here and uploads mods...it's so bi-polar and bizarre—it makes you wonder about his mental state.

Yeah, he's a piece of work. With his insidious, 'I really wanted to like this, but...' 5/10 reviews. Maybe Battlefront made a mistake in banning him. On Lyndon Johnson's principle: ' it's better to have 'em inside the tent p*ssing out than outside the tent p*ssing in'.

[Rosseau]

Another publisher recently released a couple of hard core wargames with UI's much less intuitive than CMx2's. Despite this, they are solid hits in their core market. Surprise, surprise. And they don't compete with CMx2 directly, so for us, variety is the spice of life.

The publisher also released a couple of more mass market games. Sales of these games have got to be frightening, and they seemed obvious failures before they even released. So yes, it can be dangerous to stray from your core market. I do not know the publisher's strategy in releasing them.

[Redwolf]

Another publisher recently released a couple of hard core wargames with UI's much less intuitive than CMx2's. Despite this, they are solid hits in their core market. Surprise, surprise. And they don't compete with CMx2 directly, so for us, variety is the spice of life.

Are those 2D hex games?

[Rosseau]

One yes, and one definitely no

[Buzz]

Steve.... "....And of course I sample what I'm about to buy. That is, after all, the ultimate test. Movie trailers, 30 second music clips, first 10 pages of a book... whatever it is, that's the single most important thing for me. And with games, it's the demo. If I don't like the sample then I usually move onto something else. If I do, I buy. Doesn't matter what the reviews say if I am able to form my own opinion.

Metacritic scores, themselves, mean absolutely NOTHING to me. Not for games, not for Amazon products, not anything. They are not useful......"

Delightful summation of how being FREE to sample and make decisions based on real experience = practical contact with and observation of facts, events and products makes more cent$ than simply relying on another's opinion.

[Battlefront.com]

Yeah, he's a piece of work. With his insidious, 'I really wanted to like this, but...' 5/10 reviews. Maybe Battlefront made a mistake in banning him. On Lyndon Johnson's principle: ' it's better to have 'em inside the tent p*ssing out than outside the tent p*ssing in'.

Yes, but there is a footnote to that saying... "unless they are likely to p*ss on themselves. Then better to not have them do it on the carpet". Fortunately his, and his few remaining minions, have no impact on us at all. Except for the occasional reminder that they're still irrelevant, as this sort of thread proves once again.

So yes, it can be dangerous to stray from your core market. I do not know the publisher's strategy in releasing them.

A mass market game development team would have just as much luck making a successful game we wargamers would like. A development team that makes side scrollers would have a tough challenge making a FPS. So on and so forth. Successful developers are those which have a passion for something specific. It's rare when they can switch to something totally different and not flub it up. Heck, it's hard enough to just repeat success within the same exact genre!

Steve

[Whiterider]

I don´t believe in metacritic scores, who´s behind them? It´s important to distinguish between market and quality. The true of the common sense is quality the true of the trader is money. For a trader the best book is a best-seller.

The only way to get a good game is following the path of reason, never the path of fan boys, metacritic scores and ignorants. Basically these are the reasons why there´s a lack of quality in most of the games nowdays.

[Myles Keogh]

What cracks me up the most is how he went out of his way to harm the game and then comes here and uploads mods...it's so bi-polar and bizarre—it makes you wonder about his mental state.

Mord.

The man had over 14,000 posts and lives with a mannequin! That's really all you need to know about his "mental state."

[Michael Emrys]

Successful developers are those which have a passion for something specific.

I think that when these kinds of discussions come up, each of us would do well to have a brass plaque mounted above our monitors with these words engraved. A large measure of the success of CM is due to the fact that it began as and continues to be a game that its designers would want to play themselves. In fact, IMHO you can apply this to every area of life. I believe that one of the main reasons that so much of contemporary life is the stuff that comes out of the back end of a bull is that so many people are doing things that they don't really care about, but only are in it for the money. Ah, the stories I could tell...

Michael

[sfhand]

I personally find metacritic to be very useful. However,I don't make decisions based solely on the opinions (both professional and gamer) one finds there, but there is a lot of information there for many games and I like a wide variety of games so the site is useful for me. I want to point out that I and many others found CMBO after reading a gaming magazine review of it (PCGamer?, I don't remember), so I wouldn't dismiss the idea of someone looking for a cool new game checking to see how it fairs on metacritic.

[SpeakEasy]

I too was drawn to Combat Mission games by a PC Gamer article. It was basically an AAR and a review wrapped into one for CMBB.

[Redwolf]

Reviews matter, no matter which way you turn it. Unless you don't want any new customers at all but that's a dicey proposition as there's always customers dropping out.

[JonS]

Reviews matter, no matter which way you turn it. Unless you don't want any new customers at all but that's a dicey proposition as there's always customers dropping out.

IFF one accepts the proposition that you put forth - that reviews are the only way to gain new customers - then sure; reviews are important.

Of course, your proposition is as usual complete balls, and therefore so is your conclusion.

Besides, no one here is saying that well written and insightful reviews /are't/ useful, and even poorly written reviews /can/ be useful if they're used with caution and as part of a broadly based lit review.

So, not only is you proposition balls and your conclusion wrong, you aren't even addressing the conversation that is actually occuring. 0 out of 3 - that might be a new record for you, Red.