PTW got creamed again in Gamespot

tjno2 · December 21, 2002, 22:08

After being shelled in most of the reviews, PTW hits rock bottom at Gamespot.

Check it out here

EDIT: Oops, wrong link, now it's corrected. Thanks Redstar and Taz.

Thrawn05 · December 21, 2002, 22:26

I'm not surprised, not everyone is a MP buff. I'm not big on MP either.

notyoueither · December 21, 2002, 23:12

Heh. People who know more than I about the problems inherent in getting a TBS working in simultaneous mode can explain it better, but...

When we evaluate a game, we set aside any preconceived notions about what that game is supposed to be or how good it should have been, and we review the game on its merits. However, sometimes it's impossible not to approach a particular game with a certain set of expectations; some games have such ambitious concepts or such good predecessors that you can't help but wonder whether they could have turned out differently...

So of course they have a hard time granting that a TBS in real time will not perform as well as a RTS...

Coracle · December 22, 2002, 02:22

Quote:

Originally posted by tjno2
After being shelled in most of the reviews, PTW hits rock bottom at Gamespot.

Check it out here

They were so very "disappointed"?? Gamespot actually liked Civ 3, which I thought flawed even after the fourth patch. This PTW mess was exactly what I expected from Firaxis, unfortunately. Yes, I told ya so.

It also got creamed in Gamespy which called it "a borderline disaster".

It's not just crappy MP and all the bugs, and the need for more patches; it's paying too much for too little SP - for stuff that should have been in the original game or come with a patch. After all the aggravation Firaxis gave us this past year they owed it to us.

notyoueither · December 22, 2002, 03:04

And you know this how? You have played it?

Franses · December 22, 2002, 04:41

I have lots of fun playing PTW with 1.14f but with SERIOUS restrictions. First, I play one to one games and secondly only with people that live nearby (but not on my LAN which strangely enough is often worse than playing via the Internet).

The potential of PTW still is great but Firaxis/Infogrames fully deserved this review result. The only thing I worry about is that they stop supporting it like Activision did with CTP2 (which I fortunately did not buy because of experience with this company). Now, if they do stop supporting it, I will never buy a Firaxis game again like I will never buy an Activision game again. If this will be the reacton of us all we will force these companies to deliver games that do what they are supposed to do.

Redstar · December 22, 2002, 05:29

that link goes to

Demonworld: Dark Armies

??

spartak · December 22, 2002, 06:59

I think THIS is the correct link.

MarkG · December 22, 2002, 07:34

check for latest prices on the worst of 2002?!?

Vlad Antlerkov · December 22, 2002, 08:49

@MarkG

Interestingly, the German sites all seem to be giving it fairly high marks (at least compared to Gamespy et al). Perhaps the German sites know something Gamespy et al doesn't know (or the other way around)?

FWIW, SimGolf was listed as one of the best SP strategy games (didn't win the honor, though)...

player1 · December 22, 2002, 09:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad Antlerkov
Interestingly, the German sites all seem to be giving it fairly high
marks (at least compared to Gamespy et al). Perhaps the German sites know something Gamespy et al doesn't know (or the other way around)?

Of course, they know for patches.

Gamespot on the other hand based opioion on unpatched PtW (or maybe with 1.04f).

Without 1.14f patch, MP was pretty bad, and it looks like that Gamespot only cares about MP and not SP additions.

So mark was understandable.

P.S.
But I realy think that instead of making all those extra & unused units (waste from money-making perspective), Firaxis made one extra unit set (instead of two) and several scenarios, I think that even with bad MP out-of-box, that PtW would get much better reviews.

Extra units were terrible drain of resources, and I bet that more then 80% of PtW owners haven't even seen them at all (since they are not implemented, exept maybe several of them in some MODs).

WarpStorm · December 22, 2002, 10:36

Quote:

Originally posted by player1
But I realy think that instead of making all those extra & unused units (waste from money-making perspective), Firaxis made one extra unit set (instead of two) and several scenarios, I think that even with bad MP out-of-box, that PtW would get much better reviews.

This is probably true. Had they included a Japanese scenario that goes with the units they would have done better.

Cartouche Bee · December 22, 2002, 12:09

Quote:

Originally posted by player1

Gamespot on the other hand based opioion on unpatched PtW (or maybe with 1.04f).

Well you can't knock Gamespot for that, Infogrames released it in that state. We also can't blame reviewers for not waiting long enough for patches after a product goes retail. If you put a product on the shelves you have to be prepared to accept customers "out of the box" experience.

Yes, they should have made a few scenarios for users like WW2, Japanese and being able to play against 31 AI since that capability was put into the game.

Boris Godunov · December 22, 2002, 12:15

Yeah, even with MP fixed, the outrageously cumbersome way of adding custom units and managing mods, plus incomplete scenario-making ability, makes the low marks reasonable. That being said, I've enjoyed a lot of PTW elements.

Franses · December 22, 2002, 12:17

I think it is fully acceptable and needed to review the boxed product. Mind you... I am 100% sure there will be people buying this game without ever patching it (because they have no Internet or do not know there are patches or do not know how to install them). Does Firaxis/Infogrames ever think about these people?

We all know the answer. It took me a long time to get angry at these guys but PTW and especially, the patch incompatibility of 1.14f did it for me.

Thrawn05 · December 22, 2002, 13:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Franses
Mind you... I am 100% sure there will be people buying this game without ever patching it (because they have no Internet or do not know there are patches or do not know how to install them). Does Firaxis/Infogrames ever think about these people?

Oh those were the days. The days of yore where thy had to call and order a patch via 5 to 10 floppy disks.

I didn't get the internet until 1997 I think, perhaps '98.

bobbo008 · December 23, 2002, 00:47

I'm quite disappointed, as well. I, however, didn't buy the game for the multiplayer.

I bought it for the new features, units, and civs (the vikings were the big push). I think that since the civs are usually quite similiar, they could easily make sh*tloads. Anyways, i get a couple more units, and the 9 civs. For some reason, when I start the game for the first time (in relation to when the computer was turned on), it takes THREE minutes for it to start as opposed to basically non for Civ3. Some features are more annoying, like the change in the preferences. My mods on Civ3 are worthless being I can't add the new civs. There is no decent manual and they don't even have the decency to give me a f*cking jewel case.

$30 and 400 MB wasted because I'm to stubborn to do anything about it.

player1 · December 23, 2002, 07:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Franses
I think it is fully acceptable and needed to review the boxed product. Mind you... I am 100% sure there will be people buying this game without ever patching it (because they have no Internet or do not know there are patches or do not know how to install them). Does Firaxis/Infogrames ever think about these people?

And those people play INTERNET MP?!?

PtW SP mode is pretty bugless, so there are no really problems for those people.

aahz_capone · December 23, 2002, 07:41

It's pretty obvious from all this that RoN is gonna kick everybodies' a$$.

Inverse Icarus · December 23, 2002, 12:52

RoN or MOO3. either way

WarpStorm · December 23, 2002, 17:38

Quote:

Originally posted by aahz_capone
It's pretty obvious from all this that RoN is gonna kick everybodies' a$$.

If you like RTS. If you aren't into them (and a lot of TBS fans aren't), I doubt if it'll do anything for you.

WarpStorm · December 23, 2002, 18:00

Quote:

Originally posted by bobbo008
My mods on Civ3 are worthless being I can't add the new civs.

Why not? I did it in mine. It took me about an hour or so to do it. This was to bring one fairly radically changed mod up to PTW rules. One with less than a dozen changed units should be quicker.

Franses · December 23, 2002, 19:00

Quote:

Originally posted by player1

And those people play INTERNET MP?!?

PtW SP mode is pretty bugless, so there are no really problems for those people.

YES! They do. Read all my arguments please, not just one

BTW who would buy PTW if you tried CIV3 out of the box?

Odin · December 23, 2002, 20:00

I don't give a crap about ratings since most of the PC game magazine and website reviewers aren't stratagy game fans. Those bums are addicted to the shoot-ems and sports games.