I think it’s great too! Its focus is VERY different from Dominions 2’s, though…
Is that so? Funny, I’m having a blast with it. And I don’t even own elvish spreadsheet software!
Wait… can you even hear me over the grinding of your board on those poles? :roll:
Let’s talk about X2: The Threat in this thread too.
He’s a nice guy. The games are uninventive, uninspired rehashes of the same XTREME KEWL D00D SK8R concept over and over, though.
Just my opinion, of course. If Tony Hawk 3 is the ultimate iteration of the Tony Hawk game experience, then power to you for favoring it. If you’re into skateboarding video games, I imagine it’s the best you’ll get.
That’s my point with Dominions. If you’re into boardgame-like fantasy TBSes, Dominions is probably the best you’ll get. I just think it’s retarded that one “best” gets a 10, while the other “best” gets a 6.2. It’s a sign of the times, buds. And a sign of advertising bias.
That’s what the text is for, to give the rating context.
You guys seemed to hit the nail on the head… Dominions 2 is a legendary game for TBS buffs, a solid, deep game for regular TBS players, and a mediocre game for everyone else.
In essence then, it should get three different scores.
Why does a game get only one score, anyway? How about multiple scores per game depending on player profile?
Yeah, that sounds reasonable.*
*Not
Alternately, why not a seperate review for every individual gamer on the planet? After all, everyone has different tastes.
The text is kinda weak. It sounds like there wasn’t alot of time spent with the title–It offers only the most obvious complaints and praises.
This is why, in a perfect world, there would be no scores. People would be forced to read the reviews to see if the game fit their desires.
There’s a degree of objective evaluation to any review, and a smart, experienced reviewer can generally gauge the desires that the majority of the readership will have for a game.
But in the end, one man’s 6.8 is another man’s 9.2.
because a reviewer’s job is to posit a hypothetical reader, and then write the review based on his speculation about what the hypothetical reader would think about the game.
I wish my wife understood that line of reasoning with regards to all sorts of measurements. [bu-dum-bum…ching]
I hereby call for a forum category devoted entirely to review scoring so that when this quarterly discussion arises it will be easy to access the reasoning we repeat every four months.
We could make Lord Ebonstone the moderator, he’s already got his symbols of power.
[size=2]Ahem… four months is one third of a year.[/size]
Or maybe it’s just a sign that the reviewer really didn’t like the game.
Oh no no no. My symbols of power aren’t worthy enough. Matt should be the moderator. [size=2](He’s in the industry, ya know!)[/size]
I mean, come on! Matt works for a company who asks you to pay for advertiser-influenced content! So not only do you get all the purty bias of a sellout circle-jerk of gaming moronics, YOU GET TO PAY FOR IT TOO!
G4|/|3$p0T 4 l1F3!!!111111
As an “average” gamer (I’m in no way as smart as you guys, I don’t work in the business of games at all, and I have an old shitty computer that I make do with), and I didn’t like the Dom2 demo at all.
I had no fucking clue what to do AT ALL. And don’t say I didn;t like it because I’m a graphics whore, I have a GF 2Ti, Call of Duty on my computer doesn’t look much better.
I think I got as far as picking my units, and then I saw the map, And then…what? I didn’t know what to do.
So I gave up. Yea, I could put hours in and get it and it could be great, but I could just go play XMP instead. Took me five minutes to figure that out, and it’s fun. Ok, it runs like ass though.
So I go play Rachet and Clank. Nooow I’m having fun. Ok, noew I’ll play VF4: Evo! Whee!
You can keep Dom2, and maybe when I have the time and the smarts I’ll go back.
Now I’ll gonna go outside and play with the mailbox.
This simply isn’t the case, Lord.
First, GameSpot doesn’t do this. You can say what you want about whether or not you agree with an individual review, but that review has nothing to do with whether or not the publisher of the game is advertising on GameSpot. Frankly, it’s obvious. I guess you need some justification for why the games you think deserved better scores got low scores other than “the reviewer didn’t like the game” but the one you came up with is wrong.
Second, freelancers do not work for a company, they sell their work to companies. If the company doesn’t like their work, they don’t tell them to change it; they just don’t buy it.
This simply isn’t the case, Lord.
First, GameSpot doesn’t do this. You can say what you want about whether or not you agree with an individual review, but that review has nothing to do with whether or not the publisher of the game is advertising on GameSpot. Frankly, it’s obvious. I guess you need some justification for why the games you think deserved better scores got low scores other than “the reviewer didn’t like the game” but the one you came up with is wrong.
Second, freelancers do not work for a company, they sell their work to companies. If the company doesn’t like their work, they don’t tell them to change it; they just don’t buy it.[/quote]
I know you feel obligated to defend yourself against an insult-by-association, but this is not the way to deal with trolls.
Heh, actually I’m pretty sure he believes what he’s saying.