Flanker15 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Just got my latest issue of PCPP yesterday and it had a review of CM:SF. 5/10... not very good considering they gave all the other CM games 95-100% scores. There key gripes were: Bad and unresponsive AI. Lack of the Righclick menu. Interface being too clunky for RT. No ability to customize forces in QB. They said they patched to the latest version too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinetree Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Hmmmm....They.Just.Don't.Get.It.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spindry69 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I guess there wasn't enough shiny things for them to go wow over.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Originally posted by Spindry69: I guess there wasn't enough shiny things for them to go wow over.. Maybe you missed the list of negative issues they provided as reasons for their review score? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Simmox Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 no, i think they get it alright 5 is a fair score for my mind lets hope the *new* overlord is tad more impressive than this one. not a patch on CMx1 titles it would be fair to say,im not a fan on this theatre,however,i bought it along with all the earlier stuff,to support the team,for the upcomming WW2 stuff. just doesnt have enough scope to keep my interest,and is a tad clumsy. sorry fella,s 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochet67 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I browsed PC Powerplay last week and read the review too. Given reviews are usually written a fair amount of time before printing, perhaps the "latest patch" wasn't 1.04? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spindry69 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Originally posted by molotov_billy: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Spindry69: I guess there wasn't enough shiny things for them to go wow over.. Maybe you missed the list of negative issues they provided as reasons for their review score? </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omenowl Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 After 1.04 it has turned out pretty well. Yes, my soldiers sometimes seem to go backwards before going forwards, but overall I enjoy it a lot more. Still the AI is better and my soldiers do prioritize who they shoot (IE target arcs don't mean anything when the squad has javelins and sees a tank). The interface is a bit clunky, but considering you have hotkeys and can map them this seems a lot less reasonable, and once you get used to what the pictures mean it is pretty easy. I do admit the QB has some problems (which is getting better with CMMODS website), but I also admit cherry picking units is pretty gamey. I think the lack of maps provided with the game and lack of the modding community for sounds, skins, etc is what I miss the most. Right now I give the game a 7 or 8 out of 10. Good game and I don't mind the fact I bought it, but it is still too immature to whole heartedly recommend it to my friends. One more patch and the ability to mod and I am sure I will bump it higher. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Originally posted by Spindry69: I agree with some of the negative issues they highlighted but CMSF warrants much more than 5/10. I disagree entirely - the majority of reviews have been in that range. What it has to do with "shiny things" is what I'm missing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spindry69 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Actually 50% is on the low side of reviews, one was 95% and 67% being the average. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzermartin Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Fair points but 5/10 with latest patch? If they mean 1.04 they are way off. Even gamespot gave it a 4.5 when practically CMSF was an unplayable beta. Its a 7/10 for me. Despite some impressive simulation moments, game still seems rather short lived and limited and the TCP multiplayer part that I had hoped it will keep it alive is totally screwed right now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixxkiller Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 And most reviewers have no real military experience to find the stuff that CMSF does do right. And now most of the stuff that completely ruined the fun for most of you has been fixed. I havent seen a tank drive backwards instead of forwards for a while now. Also its hard to compare this with previous titles, but I suspect that it will continue to be so compared. It's getting better with every patch. Just hang in there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Originally posted by Spindry69: Actually 50% is on the low side of reviews, one was 95% and 67% being the average. Reviewer average is 61%. User average is 19%. http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/combatmissionshockforce But the point - lack of shiny objects? [ October 23, 2007, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: molotov_billy ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Originally posted by Sixxkiller: Also its hard to compare this with previous titles, but I suspect that it will continue to be so compared. It's getting better with every patch. Just hang in there. Reviews are a tool for users to evaluate possible game purchases - allows us to measure the value of Shock Force versus other games on the market, as well as other previous, similar gaming experiences. It's completely fair and expected for shock force to be measured against it's predecessors. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Right now I give it about a 6 of 10. I love playing with all the toys I played with when I was in but continuing gameplay issues are killing me. I average at least 2 WTF's and 5 G--Damn It's a battle. Right now it is just good enought that I haven't just given up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimguy Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I'll tell you - I just don't get it. I think CM:SF is pretty awesome in it's current state, marred only by some bugs and missing features. I don't think it's perfect, but I'd give it 8/10 in my opinion. It's a lot of fun to watch the guys run around . . . that's worth a point in and of itself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius359au Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 The thing you have to remember is that PCPP does their review's up to 3 months before it gets printed in the issue ,so that could be anything from 1.01 to 1.03 but not likely that its 1.04 - reading the review it seemed to me the reviewer expected an RTS. I had to laugh at the statement where he said he didn't think even a whole lot more patchs would help Shockforce , Every patch since release has made it better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spindry69 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Now this is a review. http://www.armchairempire.com/Reviews/PC%20Games/combat-mission-shock-force.htm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Withstand Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I give CMSF an 8 too after patch 1.04 of course. Before at vanilla I would give err 5. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochet67 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Damn. Where's my on map mortar team? http://www.armchairempire.com/images/Reviews/pc/combat-mission-shock-force/combat-mission-shock-force-2.jpg 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaMaGe.InC Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Originally posted by Flanker15: Just got my latest issue of PCPP yesterday and it had a review of CM:SF. 5/10... not very good considering they gave all the other CM games 95-100% scores. There key gripes were: Bad and unresponsive AI. Lack of the Righclick menu. Interface being too clunky for RT. No ability to customize forces in QB. They said they patched to the latest version too. As long as the core issues aren´t fixed (LOS/LOF, Multiplayer, etc.) 5/10 might even be too high. When was this marvel of programming skill released ? 6th August ? That makes it about 12 weeks for not getting the core issues fixed ? Maybe people "just don´t get it" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 CMSF as released: 5/10 CMSF 1.4: 6/10. I dont think any patching will make this game good in my eyes. I just hope things will be sorted for the WW2 game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InvaderCanuck Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Originally posted by Panzer76: CMSF as released: 5/10 CMSF 1.4: 6/10. I dont think any patching will make this game good in my eyes. I just hope things will be sorted for the WW2 game. I agree with your comment. For me as released the game is an abortion of epic proportions. The reputation BF has garnered for the CMx1 games is partially responsible for the scope of my disappointment. What I see are a score of fundamental problems with the engine, yes I said fundamental, that I will consider fundamental until someone can prove otherwise. The line of sight issues seem fundamental to their pre calculated tiles. The path finding issues, if big studios with infinitely larger resource pools can't make quality path finding for simplistic RTS's, I don't see how BF is going to pull it off with one guy being the brains behind everything and the game itself being something "slightly" more than a basic RTS. The standard stance that "We are something more than a basic RTS" is not an excuse. That does seem to be a pre-canned response to criticism by the way. That because our game is so complex these things are to be expected. I think part of the issue is that Charles is the only guy coding the game and providing solutions to problems. Two heads are always better than one and I am sure there have been instances in the development where having more programmers to tackle a problem would have provided more points of view and ultimately more and in some cases a better approach to solve that problem. You have to understand my disappointment with SF is as great as it is, due to my love of the CMx1 games and my lofty expectations for CMx2. At the end of the day my question is this. You haven't invented a hover board, so why the hell did you try to reinvent the wheel. Everyone would have been very happy for the same functionality with modern graphics. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Said with tongue in cheek...you don't get it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.