First Impressions here please.

[Warpstorm]

Oddly enough, I'd have given Victoria a 2 star myself. Boring. Which is a shame, because I really wanted to like it (sad to say, I keep saying that about Paradox's games).

[bluemonday]

ORIGINAL: Banquet
So, while I agree there are reviewers around who understand our love for these kind of games.. it is generally the case that games like CoG don't get the credit they deserve in mainstream reviews.

I understand where you're coming from - my only response would be to say that the original comment by Reg specifically referred to "the mags." In the US there are three main PC gaming magazines, and all three have regular reviewers who generally take on wargame reviews and are quite capable of appreciating a good wargame. CGW, Computer Games, and PC Gamer all have editors who know exactly whom to go to for wargame reviews. Heck, William Trotter reviewed wargames in PC Gamer for how long? The idea that "the mags" are going to discount a game like CoG because it is "turn-based and not in 3D" is not only incorrect, but gives the appearance that wargamers don't really care for or appreciate the attempt to review these games fairly. Even if a knowledgeable, credible reviewer reveiws the game, it's going to get dismissed as uninformed because it's "in the magazines." Even though these magazines have been publishing credible wargame reviews for years. PC Gamer and CGW both even had separate wargaming columns until recent redesigns (and the retirement of Trotter from PC Gamer).

If wargamers are just going to blow off years of attempts to review such games "right," what's the point of "the mags" even trying? No non-wargamers are going to care if Korsun Pocket gets trashed, so if the wargamer readers don't care either, why bother?

That's depressing.

[ravinhood]

Here's Gamespys recent review on Gary Grigsby World at War:

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/gary-grigsbys- ... 404p1.html

Just an inkling of what I expect to come for COG as good as it may be, when it's complex, and requires reading the manual, most of the "well known" review sites might burn it like GGWAW.

Oh he really cut ole Gary to the core with this statement. Heh

" As it is now, World at War is the work of an ambitious developer whose ideas are bigger than the capabilities of his game. "

[bluemonday]

I agree with the reviewer - it's not a very good game.

And the reviewer who wrote that review gave Korun Pocket 4/5 stars in Computer Games. So it has nothing to do with having to read the manual. In fact, that reviewer wrote a full AAR of GGAWAW in Computer Gaming World.

[bluemonday]

Lastly, to bring this back to CoG: you had better believe this game is going to get hit for the opacity of the economic system. Any reviewer who fails to mention that isn't doing his job. And there's no falling back on "ah he didn't read the manual" because as you can see, it isn't in there.

[Warpstorm]

I just read Tom Chick's Gamespy review and I must say, he gave intelligent reasons for what he didn't like. He didn't say "Dude, like they actually expected me to read the manual before starting. And there's no pixel shader support for my new GT 7800." His primary complaint was that it was too detailed for the presentation and marketing (the A&A crowd), but not detailed enough to pull off what Gary was trying for. He also complained that the combat was too dicey for his tastes and that the AI was very weak. He also complained that the game was predictable because the game forces you to follow the historical route. These are valid opinions.

Incidentally Gamespot gave it an 84% and PC Gamer gave it an 83% (both considered Great by their standards)

Battles in Normandy got an overall compostie rating (all known ranked sites and mags) of 89%

[GreenDestiny]

WTF... I would not compare GGWaW with CoG.[:-]

[bluemonday]

ORIGINAL: Warpstorm
These are valid opinions.

Exactly. They're not childish dismissals born of frustration. My point is: if you get people like Tom Chick or William Trotter or any of the other regular magazine guys (I won't name everyone) writing the CoG review, you'll get a fair, thoughtful review. They may not love the game the way the forum members do (after all - these are the ultimate fans: people who will pay for and download the game essentially sight unseen) but they will give it a fair review. And no one is going to complain that they had to read the manual.

[ravinhood]

WTF... I would not compare GGWaW with CoG.

It's not comparing GreenDestiny, it's showing what the reviewer of Gamespy is looking at and for in wargames. I think each reviewer looks for different things, some complexity, some easy of interface moreso, some the graphics, some a bit of all 3, no two reviewers are ever alike that's for sure. I wonder who wargamer is going to use to review this one? Aaron would be my choice he's good at drooling and sugar coating a game he likes. heh

[Reg Pither]

Sorry, didn't mean to start a fight about magazine reviews.

I was speaking from the UK magazine perspective, which isn't as mature as that in the US. I did put CGW in brackets, and should have mentioned Computer Games (is that what it's called nowadays? Used to be Strategy Plus or some such). PC Gamer over here is obviously a very different animal to the US version, so I shouldn't really have lumped them together.

I really hope it does get good reviews from those three mags, but I'd be very surprised if any magazine in the UK gives it above about 60%, if they review it at all. Deep wargames for grognards are still seen as the last refuge of the computer nerds over here. But I'd be very happy to be proved wrong on that score.

Sorry for the confusion. [:)]

[Warpstorm]

ORIGINAL: Reg Pither
Deep wargames for grognards are still seen as the last refuge of the computer nerds over here.

You mean, we aren't computer nerds? I'm glad that's cleared up. I was under the misconception that I fell smack in the middle of that demographic.

[Moltke71]

ORIGINAL: waynec

I haven't even played the game properly yet because I can't read the manual via alt-tab and have no clue what is going on. Maybe I'll have gone and stocked up on printer cartridges by the end of the weekend. Maybe other things as well [:@]

burn the manual on a cd and take it to office depot. got game manual and tutorial printed (b/w single sided), both in one "book" with a separator, spiral bound with clear plastic front and back for $13.00. took about 2 hours. sitting here going though the tutorial and listening to 1812 overture.

Great minds run in the same vein. I did the same only it cost me only $10, took 20 minutes and I had my wife take it in and bring it back. (The trick there is to make her think she chose a cheaper copy shop.)

[SLTxDarkknight]

hehe gonna try that now [:D]

[SuomiKp]

I really love this game , but it will take ages me to learn how to play it [:(]