Thoughts on this Admiral's Edition "Review"?

[Sarconix]

So here is a reader review for AE at IGN:

http://rr.pc.ign.com/rrview/pc/war_in_t ... 910/108090

... actually the first "review" of any kind I have seen, apart from occasional comments here. This review is quite critical of AE, coming from apparently years of experience with WITP. Discounting the fact that a truly fair review of AE is not possible without a rather large investment of time (the game was just released), what do you think of these comments? Do you agree or disagree with the criticisms, and why?

Thanks!

EDIT: It should be emphasized that this is a reader review on the IGN site, not an official review from IGN.

[stretch]

he has no idea what he's talking about.

example..."new combat modeling that gives an even greater advantage to early-war Japanese airpower"

I guess the removal of the zero bonus went unnoticed.

that review has no credibility.

[Missouri_Rebel]

You must be an 'adamant apologists who have waited years for this disappointment, but have yet to accept the truth'.

What a crock review. I never got into witp at all and I love AE. I guess I am misled also....lol.

Which one of you dopes wrote that horrible piece. You need cigs put out in your naughty bits.

mo reb

[Avenger]

It is just a fan review, from someone who must be terribly disappointed.

After about a month of game play my turns have started going FASTER than stock WiTP. With Waypoints and Patrol routes I no longer have to check on things so often.

The AI is light years better than Stock WiTP. Either that or these are scripted events that are beating me.

Some games I buy and play for 3 days before shelving. This game will take me the rest of the year to finish. That makes it worth 90 bucks.

[JohnDillworth]

Disagree for the most part. Well worth the money, and the kind of person that has original WiTP know the type of time investment this will take over the next few years. Yes, years!. And new players will be overwhelmed but ultimately pleased.
One point I do agree on, and really feel was a mistake was the removal of computer-assisted theater control. To make the game so much bigger, and take out the one thing that made the original almost manageable was a huge disappointment, and irritates me every day. I will continue to play for the foreseeable future, and love the game, but I really miss computer-assisted theater control and will not get 'used to it" no matter what anyone in the forums tell me.

[darrenl]

Well...this is IGN after all.

Some of their top rated games are Street Fighter IV, Sims 3 and Bookworm Adventures. AE is not their type of game.

[Erik Rutins]

This seems like a "review with an agenda" - it's a 'fan' review, not an official one. We see these quite often with our games, someone with an axe to grind tries to get the first public review in and rate it low. In fact, I think I may know who wrote this based on the complaints it makes, but it's best if I leave that be.

I also think it's ridiculous to think that anyone can have reviewed the game already, most people who started playing it at release are no further than January. I think in a few months a fairly accurate review could be written, but not now. Take any purportedly accurate "reviews" you read with a grain of salt at this point is my advice, and don't believe anyone who says that everyone on a public forum is an apologist.

As others have noted, the review also has several basic factual errors on top of its unremitting negativity.

Regards,

- Erik

[Yamato hugger]

Wasnt me [:D]

[Sarge]

“what do you think of these comments”

Sounds to me the reviewer is grinding an axe, strange to see a review go out of its way to slam the forum members and developing team .

Probably had a run in with Terminus at one point ?

Half the posters on the thread are from the development team, and the rest are adamant apologists

[ckammp]

A more serious problem than the review itself is the statement under game details:
 
"This expansion pack requires the full version of 'War in the Pacific: Struggle Against Japan 1941-1945' to play."
 
This is not true; perhaps Matrix Games should so inform IGN?

[Canoerebel]

How can anybody review the game yet unless they had a copy in advance. I'm still on day one of the campaign game. It's a massive game that will take weeks or months for anybody to absorb and get a feel for. Barring that kind of immersion - or a combined effort by many revieweres - there's no way somebody could fairly evaluate this monster of a game. I don't yet know how the AI will rate (though early reports are very favorable), but there's no question that PBEM games will be even better than with WitP and that was by far the best wargame ever created (for moi).

Onward!

[Yamato hugger]

Personally I consider the source when someone doesnt put their name on a "review". That speaks volumes.

[Icedawg]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I also think it's ridiculous to think that anyone can have reviewed the game already, most people who started playing it at release are no further than January.

January? I'm not even past Dec 6th! I'm still planning and looking things over. This game is this grog's dream.

My dream, but my wife's nightmare! "Are you playing THAT GAME again!?"

I think I can see a modified version of an old fishing joke coming along - "My wife said she's going to leave me if I keep playing AE. I'm sure going to miss her." [:D]

[Andy Mac]

Ouch thats harsh ah well sticks and stones...

[John Lansford]

I agree with everyone's else's opinion of this so called "review".  The game's only been available for download for a week, and he now knows enough about it to decide it's a bad game?  That sounds a lot like someone who didn't get his favorite item added to AE and he's now all butthurt about it, and decided to tell a limited audience how angry he is.
 
 

[Erik Rutins]

If you disagree with the review, the best thing you can do is give it a thumbs down on IGN's site. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course, but as far as I can tell this review has a combination of incorrect facts, an apparent axe to grind against developers and community and was posted three days after release, in other words the reviewer is just plain uninformed. Given that, I'm reluctant to give this any more air time as it doesn't deserve any. If this were an official review or at least one that appeared to make an attempt to be accurate, I'd leave it up for discussion, but I'm locking this one up.

The original poster has had enough other replies from customers to form his own opinion by now. I'd encourage him to read the other threads or open up a new thread seeking customer opinions here if he's still interested in more feedback.

Regards,

- Erik