Counterpoints to the recent review.

[erichswafford]

I think these pictures say more than I ever could about the veracity of the recent Command review over at SimHQ. Specifically, it appears the author willingly disregarded the map features and kept adding every possible info label until it looked cluttered, then zoomed out and took a very small screen cap to emphasize his conclusion. This example is very much in keeping with the rest of the "review": Selective and Deceptive are the operative terms.

More examples to follow.

The picture of the "cluttered" map from the review:


And now a screencap of the nearly exact same situation, but with many of the unnecessary labels turned to "Selected Unit Only" and Range Rings set to "Merged" (and a reasonable screen size):


Looks pretty clean to me, but you'd never know that from the "review". I have no idea why anyone, for instance, would turn on every single label (especially on what appears to be a very low-res monitor). Unless, of course, you were trying to score points, rather than write an honest review.

I'll address the other Selective/Deceptive "conclusions" after I get home from work tonight. It won't be hard - I did this in 5 minutes in between seeing patients.

[$trummer]

Well done, Kondor. Monitoring this thread.

[Primarchx]

Huh? Are you saying that review had a slanted bias toward portraying Command in the worst possible way? I'm shocked! [;)]

[SilentHunter]

ORIGINAL: Primarchx

Huh? Are you saying that review had a slanted bias toward portraying Command in the worst possible way? I'm shocked! [;)]

Herman is that you? [:D]

[erichswafford]

I decided to take this more substantive approach to demolishing the SimHQ Review/Hatchet-Job since several people on the SimHQ forums didn't approve of the ad hominem "attacks" on the Hermanator, however meritorious they may have been.

Instead, I feel it's best to take on his various criticisms and demonstrate that, in many cases, they are not only incorrect - but reflect a willingness to distort the truth to achieve a foregone conclusion.

This small example demonstrates (IMHO) a willful attempt to make the game look bad by configuring the screen in a very strange way, especially using what looks like an 800x600 or so resolution. I'd say that most games look horrid at these low resolutions, and it certainly (over)emphasizes the effect of the various text labels. He then appears to have intentionally cluttered up the display by every means available.

This sort of thing doesn't happen by accident. The settings that Herman used are most assuredly not the default settings. And what is Herman's deal with not using NTDS symbology? Those little cartoon-looking icons also serve (IMHO) to further clutter and "cheapen" the display. About the only trick he didn't apparently use was Photoshop.

[SilentHunter]

I still think devs here should acknowledge Herman's review and ask that their response be included/tagged to the review on the simhq site. "while we may not agree with all the reviewers points in the review, we would like to address those we believe are valid and clarify those we feel were reported incorrectly. We are committed to our fans, our game, our reputation."

[JRyan]

Excellent! I think those of us that know would rather move on and let the Dev's do the magic they do...however, new folks will wonder...

I like what you did hear kondor999 +1 to you...

[mikmykWS]

Guys we appreciate the time, effort and showing people how the game is normally used.

[erichswafford]

Next I'm taking a look at what was called "Command's Greatest Failing": The Formation Editor. I'll see if maybe I can get it to do a little more than what the other reviewer thought was possible.

I think one problem was that he seems to be running everything at 800x600 on a CRT. And his PC is state of the art, circa 2005. That certainly puts a damper on things.