duncanthemad

The trouble with game reviews... Maybe it's just that I have a laid back attitude to life, but I've noticed something quite disturbing with game previews and early reviews (i.e in the days after the game's released). One of the problems I see is that people are reading 'opinions' and seeing 'fact'. For example, I was interested in a game called Cold Zero. It looked like a couple of other titles I enjoyed and so I did some research. Some of the criticisms were pretty scathing. Bad camera, LOS issues, CTD's, clipping, interface issues etc. There were considerably more 'this game could have been so much better' than there were constructive balanced reviews with well thought out arguements and analysis. Well, I ignored the naysayers, bought the game, played it and loved it. The only criticism I would have for this tiltle was it's brevity. That is the game was shorter that I would have liked. But other than that, I really enjoyed playing it, it had some nice ideas and the criticisms I had read were in some repsects true, but wildly overstated. And here's the problem. A top game for one person is a pile of garbage for another. I appreciate that it's a really obvious thing to say, but we're all different, and we're all interested or excited by different things. We all want a certain special something from a game we play, so how does someone you don't know qualify them to tell you, whether you should buy a game or not? I don't like mindless FPS's as I much prefer the ones with extra elements to involve you (as in I'd rather play Deus Ex and I'll ignore the likes of Quake/Doom/Unreal etc.). Half-Life is funny. I have yet to find any review that says this is just an 'OK' or 'average' game. According to most reviews, it's the best thing since sliced bread and no gamer should be without it. Heh heh I played it and thought it was mediocre at best (what was all the fuss about?). The aformentioned Deus Ex, Thief series, System Shock etc. in my opinion make Half Life look pretty tame in comparison. Yes, it's a perfectly acceptable game, but it didn't last a fraction of the time the other's did on my HDD. I'm a TFTD veteran, played it to death and there's not may games that lasted as long as this one did. I actually 'missed' the relase of UFO:AM, must have escaped my radar, but I saw it on the shelf, picked it up and thought, "hey someone remade an X-Com game", bought it without hesitation. I have been playing it ever since and it's got what I want in a game. I love the style, the gameplay, the emotions it generates and it's one of the most stable games I've had in a long time (no crashes at all). In short it's my kind of game, it does the things I enjoy doing and it takes me back to my TFTD days. At this point in time, I have nothing bad to say about it. Yes, the difficulty step-up when I hit the Russian mission was 'interesting' but easily solved with a review of tactics. Yes, I admit that there are things which are not perfect, the balance needs a little work,... and? The day someone makes a 'game that is perfect in every way' is the same day a certain someone gets very, very cold. Like I said, maybe I'm just too laid back to care (but I care enough about this game that I'm sitting here writing this when I should be working ), but when so much weight is given to 'issues' and 'problems' and 'personal opinions' are being presented as 'the facts' I'm getting really fed up with so much rubbish being spewed by so many people who think they know what's good and what isn't. My advice, make up your own mind. If you read a game review that scores a game 58% just remember, the person playing the game wasn't you and has no idea what you want or like. They're making assumptions on what they think is important. I can forgive games faults becuase on balance they give me the experience I'm looking for, so who gives a stuff if some reviewer thought it was a miserable attempt. If it keeps me happy why should I care? Apologies for the rant, but whatever anyone says, I think this is a cracking game. That is, for me. It might not be for everyone, but when then tell the world what a pile of doo doo they think it is, what are they actually trying to achieve? 2p <ker-plink> DtM.

Indeed, you're absolutely right. Playing some more last night (damn this is addictive ) I shot down three UFO's in more or less the same area, map was near-enough identical for two of them and it was the one where I started right next to the green teleport square again... If it is indeed, only the one map that's got a problem, should be fairly straight forward to fix, I'd think (or was it done on purpose? ) ...it's just a shame we can't go 'up' and 'down' like TFTD... DtM.

Killing ALL the opposition would have auto-completed the mission for you, no need to even go to the pilot or exit square then... Bit late now maybe though... DtM.

(my first game...) Recently downed my first large battleship, somewhere over the Russian Steppes over terrain which was mountainous (wilderness location)... After arriving at the site, I located the UFO sat atop a large rocky outcrop. When I asked a sqaud member to make his way to the green square (to see the route), he replied that he couldn't make it. After clearing out all the resident aliens, I studied the map to discover that there was no path to the teleport zone. There was a single line of tiles I could not enter becuase the gradient of the rock face was too steep to enter. I would have assumed that becuase the map generation is random, that there would need to be an accessibility check for cases like this? I tried reloading before I got there, but it looks like the location map is fixed as soon as the UFO is shot down. Sadly I don't have the save as the location dissapeared once the mission was deemed as failed (although I made sure to pick up all the goodies which the plethora of aliens left behind before leaving!) Mind you, the game obviously felt sorry for me, as I started right next to the green square during my next downed UFO encounter Cheers, DtM.