Reviews

[Imperial Dane]

It's IGN.. they don't know good gaming journalism even if it was given to them.. expect something stupid and half arsed from them and from gamespot.

[pkt-zer0]

Originally Posted by sinava

and i don't know how he expected it to be like might and magic games, rather than being like the heroes game.

I have the feeling that he actually did mean HoMM by that "Might and Magic" reference. Just consider the rest of the article - "hex grids" in the M&Ms? I don't think so.

Originally Posted by sinava

I mean look at the stuff written "After you win a battle, you may be dismayed to know that your dead troops don't come back to life"

That was good for a laugh. Though it's a bit scary, actually. Some do mistake these people for professional journalists.

I don't get how he manages to consistently call the game an RPG, either. And compare it to Diablo, of all things. That might be because almost anything that uses gameplay mechanics not among those wildly popular nowadays scares and confuses these people, so you end up with strategy games labeled an RPG because they have character advancement. *sigh*

Originally Posted by The IGN review

The "normal" default difficulty may overwhelm even the most seasoned RPG gamer.

What the heck. The "RPG" nonsense aside, from all accounts I gather that Hard mode is a good challenge for the seasoned strategy gamer, but nowhere near impossible.

Originally Posted by The IGN review

After several hours into the game, I realized that I could set points and take notes on the map.

I would say "read the bloody manual", but even if the manual is worthless, there are tooltips that let you know about this functionality.

Originally Posted by The IGN review

On the visual front, King's Bounty's graphics engine is not going to impress anyone. Models are low in polygons and look outdated. The art direction isn't anything special either.

Generic fantasy? Yes. Superbly executed at that, though, and I feel it fits the more light-hearted nature of the game. Sure, I certainly wouldn't have minded if they took a more serious route instead, but what they've set out to do, they've done very well.

[sinava]

Originally Posted by pkt-zer0

I have the feeling that he actually did mean HoMM by that "Might and Magic" reference. Just consider the rest of the article - "hex grids" in the M&Ms? I don't think so.

yeah but he was surprised the over the top view of the games wan't he ? I though he was expecting a first person mdoe like migh and magic games

Originally Posted by pkt-zer0

I would say "read the bloody manual", but even if the manual is worthless, there are tooltips that let you know about this functionality.

yeah, and it really doesn't takes a genius to figure these things out. Probably another gamer used to lots of spoon feeding

Originally Posted by pkt-zer0

Generic fantasy? Yes. Superbly executed at that, though, and I feel it fits the more light-hearted nature of the game. Sure, I certainly wouldn't have minded if they took a more serious route instead, but what they've set out to do, they've done very well.

I think many of the things wree on purpsose and done to make fun of the cliches in fanatasy genres. still amny things were knew like living items etc

[sinava]

Originally Posted by pkt-zer0

I don't get how he manages to consistently call the game an RPG, either. And compare it to Diablo, of all things. That might be because almost anything that uses gameplay mechanics not among those wildly popular nowadays scares and confuses these people, so you end up with strategy games labeled an RPG because they have character advancement. *sigh*


What the heck. The "RPG" nonsense aside, from all accounts I gather that Hard mode is a good challenge for the seasoned strategy gamer, but nowhere near impossible.

.

Yes i was surprised he said that this game should be only played by hardcore rpg gamers at normal and above difficulty, as if all rpgs have this kind of combat.
Comparison to diablo must be because both are over the top isometric games. jeeez reviewers these days

[Sleeping Sun]

Oh my God, who is the reviewer? Burn in hell

[Imperial Dane]

No one in particular.. just another one among many.. many that are not good.. sad but true..

[Sleeping Sun]

Originally Posted by Imperial Dane

No one in particular.. just another one among many.. many that are not good.. sad but true..

I guess no one checks their 'reviews' as well. Disappointing because many people will rely on the opinion of some newbie gamer that played the game for 5 minutes on easy, lost to everyone and started reviewing it

[LiveInABox]

I dont even think of it as an RPG, more like a strategy game. I kinda agree with him on the maps and the quests...it can turn into a memory thing sometimes, and the story and production values are definitely nowhere near Blizzard quality but what is.

After you win a battle, you may be dismayed to know that your dead troops don't come back to life.

wtf?!? would suck if they did come back to life..

It's like trying to buy milk from the local grocery store, except that they're all out.

also a plus in my book.

when you utilize the right mouse button, which lets you gauge the strength of an opposing force and allows you to check out how strong classes are within shops. However, the tutorial never introduces you to this functionality. If I didn't tinker around with the controls, I might not have found out about this much-needed function.

jesus christ!!! wonder how long he spent tinkering to figure that one out..

While there are a wide variety of creature types, the art direction is nothing you haven't seen before; however, I did really like the game's strong use of bright colors. Everything looks rich, varied, and radiant. There are also some decent particle effects represented through spell casting.

surely that IS the art direction?

[Zhuangzi]

Yeah, it was a crappy review all right, but it's not the end of the world - he still gave it 81% even though he/she has no f*cking idea.

I especially liked the bit about the game being too hard on medium, because you can't win every fight you see on the map at level 4.

Someone should tell Metacritic about the other two reviews - the Gaming Retards or whatever it was and the other one. Four reviews is enough for a Metacritic rating - probably around 85%.

[pkt-zer0]

Originally Posted by Zhuangzi

Yeah, it was a crappy review all right, but it's not the end of the world - he still gave it 81% even though he/she has no f*cking idea.

It's not the end of the world, but when you put things in context, namely, review scores ranging from 50-100% nowadays, it's not so good. On that scale, it's a 6/10, not much better than average. Even with all its flaws, I'd say the game is easily one of the best PC games recently released, and for that, it deserves better, should be a 90%+ game easily. But since it seems that "mainstream" gaming sites have some sort of hive mind, I fear it won't be getting reviews too different from 80% ones.

Maybe this just reminds me of the GameBanshee interview with a slightly depressed Kevin Saunders, the lead designer/producer of Mask of the Betrayer. Great game, but received similarly lukewarm reviews (even weirder that it was praised as vastly superior to the original NWN2 campaign, but got lower or similar scores anyway). Basically, if you make an excellent game, it doesn't need to be reviled, people simply just not caring too much for it is bad enough.