Republic: The Revolution

Well, the first review I have seen has been so-so, with a 81 in PC Gamer UK (a nice score, but the game is really big and ambitious, so the feeling with such a score is mixed). However I don´t put attention to scores, and the review had some points about I´m not really sure I´m going to share.

I´m stil pretty excited as the game looks nothing I have played before, and the concept looks interesting enough for me.

What are you feelings about this title?

Is the game even done yet? I think we’ve got a preview copy in the mail or something.

I believe we got a preview copy too, but suppose that if they have reviewed is because they have a finished copy.

A UK mag reviewing an unfinished game? Preposterous!

:wink:

The buzz is that the UK review was definitely for a late beta, and the developers have said that the issues brought up in the review have already been addressed (or will be addressed) for the finished release.

We’ll see, I guess. I want this game to be good.

Same thread. Dated July 1st.

I guess the first of every month we can meet here and talk about that one review until it gets published in Q1 2004 or whenever the release delays finally cease.

EDIT: speeling

LOL. PC Gamer (UK) have an open policy of reviewing late betas (or ‘review copies’ as they prefer to call them) and use print deadlines as an excuse. They even once went so far as accusing mags that say they don’t review betas of lying.

If they were accusing console games mags, they’d be right on. No way they review finished copies all the times since often the review is printed before the game is on the shelves.

I´m sorry Tyjenks, should have checked it.

However, I have good feedback from the reviewer (Kieron) and people who knows him say it´s a very professional guy. Find really odd they reviewed the game with a preview code without the authorization of Elixir (specially since that type of things use to drive to break relationships between a mag and a studio).

An aquaintance of mine writes for them. Every time I accuse PCG of reviewing betas he accuses me of not knowing the difference between beta and review code. Like there is any.

You’re joking, right? The UK mags (PC’s Zone and Gamer) are locked in a death embrace with each other to get the exclusive first reviews of the big games. They’d both review the technical design documentation of a game if they could get away with it.

And PCG UK reviews games on-site (i.e at the publishers expense/hospitality).

They could at least wait for the game to go gold before reviewing it.

I agree, that’s what they should do, but they’re not just competing with each other, they’re competing with online mags which effectively have a 0-day lead time on publication (not that every article should be written minutes before going online, but the facility is there). Print mags are never going to be as popular again as they were in their heyday, because there’s nothing they provide that you can’t get online, faster. The big exception is of course, the coverdisk, but even the importance of that is declining every day as more people have their houses equipped with a modern electric internet, and can d/l demos and patches with the same convenience they now get their game journalism.

Yes, I know, I used to work for a printed magazine and now am working for an online one. What you said is sadly very true, and I say “sadly” because the gaming press, at least here in France, suffers from that. Bad press on the gaming press does not help gaming journalists as a whole. The sales were hurt by the emergence of Internet, and many printed publications stopped party because of that. Since we all agree that online you can get information faster, one has to wonder if the printed gaming press should not rethink, at least in part, its operation. I think the both (off and online) can be totally complementary, if only we lost the “news/previews/reviews” formula, and went to something more… suited for the printed page. Something that the online press cannot do. Big reports, in-depth articles, full pages of artworks and design docs, etc.

This is the same magazine that reviewed Braveheart way before it was released and gave it 90%…

Yes, I know, I used to work for a printed magazine and now am working for an online one. What you said is sadly very true, and I say “sadly” because the gaming press, at least here in France, suffers from that. Bad press on the gaming press does not help gaming journalists as a whole. The sales were hurt by the emergence of Internet, and many printed publications stopped party because of that. Since we all agree that online you can get information faster, one has to wonder if the printed gaming press should not rethink, at least in part, its operation. I think the both (off and online) can be totally complementary, if only we lost the “news/previews/reviews” formula, and went to something more… suited for the printed page. Something that the online press cannot do. Big reports, in-depth articles, full pages of artworks and design docs, etc.[/quote]

Admittedly, I can only speak from the perspective of an online writer, unlike some of the others here; but it’s always seemed to me that the print magazines need to focus on what they can do better than online magazines. CD/DVD preview discs are a good step. Large glossy expansive in-depth coverage seems like another good way to distinguish themselves. They’ll never get the information first. Ever. There’s just no
fucking way. Even when they get an exclusive, it’s leaked before they go to print, or the information is availible from a variety of sources before the magazine ever comes out.

What they can do is provide in-depth portable reading for people, something entertaining and informative enough for them to take with them on the train, or in the cab, not just to the restroom. Whenever I see magazines focusing on lots of short little three and four paragaph reviews, I always think that they’re blowing it. There are specific advantages to the print medium that are unavailible to online journals. More magazines should be leveraging those specific advantages, not trying to compete with the Internet. That’s a losing battle, and always will be.

Just my opinion, of course.

Or the magazine gets scanned and the pictures are disseminated trough the Internet in 10 minutes…

There are specific advantages to the print medium that are unavailible to online journals. More magazines should be leveraging those specific advantages, not trying to compete with the Internet. That’s a losing battle, and always will be. Just my opinion, of course.

An opinion I totally agree with.

No worries. If I had not been so surprised about it when it came out a month ago and commented in that thread, I would not have remembered or checked. I recently saw the link on gamerankings as a new review.

My irritation was aimed at the delays. If it came across as me bitching about duplicate threads, I apologize. The part about re-visiting this topic once a month was intended to be sarcastic. Hmmm, I guess you cannot really distinguish my tone in the written word. :) We can have a new thread every week for all I care. I like to link back to the old one’s so people can see what was said before. I’m providing a public service rather than some kind of thread policing.

There are around 8 threads on this game, but I thought I would resurrect this one since no one is really talking about any recent titles in this forum as of late.

Are we really going to see it next week? Any murmurs about it? Is it different good or just different for the sake of being different and will get old after a week?

I don’t trust the gushing previews.

I have yet to read a preview (and I admit I’ve only read a few) that gave any kind of clear indication what the actual gameplay in this game was. Sure, I read about “recruit, set policy, etc.” and I’ve seen various shots of polygon people walking around East Polygonograd, but I still have no idea how you actually interact with the game.

I’m very intrigued by the idea of this game, but I’m definitely going to hold out for some opinions.