Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert
I used to subscribe to Maximum PC back in the day. It is a magazine aimed mostly at hardware verses an actual gaming software, though they reviewed 2 games a month. They reviewed FB quite highly (9 out of 10 if I recall). I was surprised because it was so out of the ordinary to see a simulation reviewed in that magazine. People will recognize quality.
|
A single instance does not an effective argument make. Most review magazines/sights are paid to review a game, and what they get paid makes a difference on how well the game is reviewed. I did make a point to say "mainstream reviewers." There will be exceptions to every rule, and pointing out one such exception does not prove a contrary point. They don't recognize quality in most instances they recognize what their readers will enjoy over what is quality. I am not saying that everyone without exclusion will say Cliffs of Dover is not fun, but most will at VERY LEAST say it is not for the average gamer, and therefore most will review it poorly for being "too complex/hard" to be enjoyable.
I hope I am wrong in this regard, but I've been gaming long enough and reading reviews long enough that I know that filler garbage like Halo, Call of Duty, and World of Warcraft get excellent reviews while quality complex stuff like Rise of Flight and X3 Terran conflict (both of which are simmy, and have the developers hearts and souls in them) get horrible reviews.
VVV Cool I just wanted to be clear. X3 Terran Conflict is a Space sim pretty comprehensive might be worth a looksy for guys here, but it's as much empire building as it is combat oriented. Made by Eggosoft (I don't work for them in anyway shape or form).
VVV