Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

There is a review up at Gamespot. They rated it poorly, but primarily due to the difficulty. I personally love the game, been playing it hotseat and been lurking here quite a while.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Can you pop a quick link to the review? Just to save us searching

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

Never mind

[ January 21, 2004, 16:39: Message edited by: Aikamun ]

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

Boooooo....

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

Any reviewer who doesn't LOVE this game needs to go back to playing starcrafty dreck and let someone with actual historical sensibility write the review.

This game is wonderful now... , and once it is completely moddable, will be as close to perfect as one could plausibly imagine, within a MP-inclusive paradigm. It's simply awesome.

[FLAME]

Not for stupid clueless hotkey-impaired clickfest-loving twitchies though, apparently.

Moron idjut lazy reviewers suck.

And while I'm on the subject of things that make me angry... GWB is a vile microcephalic illegitimate cryptoplutofascioligarchic... monkey-boy!

[/FLAME]

Rabe the Incensed.

[ January 21, 2004, 17:08: Message edited by: rabelais ]

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

Actually the "downgrade" points he made gives me the impression that he hasnt done alot of reviews for games built as PBEM. For a review comparing Dominions to stuff on the shelves of the computer stores, this aint that bad.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">FWIW, the reviewer of Dom2 on Gamespot is a wargamer who wrote a very good review of Highway to the Reich from HPS, which I thought demonstrated that he did have some "historical sensibility." While I disagree with the review (I think Dom2 is the best game I've played in at least five years) I can understand where he is coming from, and I thought his complaints were reasonably presented. The only complaint I didn't understand was the micromanagement comment. He didn't like the game, which is a shame, but he is entitled to his opinion.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">He did not seem to even try to present any of Doms's positives. It was not "A game with good gameplay plagued by these problems", but "A game characterized by these problems." Nothing in his article made it sound fun or enticing in any way. I do not consider him qualified to review deep or strategic games.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'll have to disagree with you, there. I thought his comments, like "This is a game that can satisfy the dreams of fantasy strategy gamers everywhere" did mention the positives quite clearly. The reviewer was a long-time editor at Gamecenter, and has reviewed any number of deep strategic games. He just didn't like this one. It's too bad, because he's missing out. But what can you do.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">FWIW, the reviewer of Dom2 on Gamespot is a wargamer who wrote a very good review of Highway to the Reich from HPS, which I thought demonstrated that he did have some "historical sensibility." While I disagree with the review (I think Dom2 is the best game I've played in at least five years) I can understand where he is coming from, and I thought his complaints were reasonably presented. The only complaint I didn't understand was the micromanagement comment. He didn't like the game, which is a shame, but he is entitled to his opinion. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I apologize, I should have clarified. I meant historical sensibility in the computer-gaming-what-has-come-before sense, rather than the more general western-civ-mapped-to-wargames kind.

Dominions is an amazing accomplishment, whether a garage shop product or not. Most of the people on these forums, (and countless time-sinkers beyond them), would have stapled kittens to have had this game available growing up.

The interface may be mildly obtuse to the neophyte, but given the amount of material it allows you to manipulate...the ratio of clunky to admirable complexity is still very low...

Of course he is entitled to his opinion, I just find it frustrating that the incredibly benighted opinion in question is as carpishly, troglodytically ungenerous as it is prominent. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

I admitted quite explicitly to ranting. Don't get me started again, my wife will make me switch to decaf.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Rabe the Indignant

[ January 21, 2004, 17:56: Message edited by: rabelais ]

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

Honestly, I didn't think it was that bad a review at all. The game didn't score a 4.5 out of 5, but he fairly characterized the very obvious flaws of the system while presenting the very obvious assets.

Furthermore, the "compartmentalized" Ratings at the front of the review give a fairly good indication of how they arrived at their scores. Honestly, I am stunned that the "graphics" and "sound" categories scored as highly as they did (both at 50% whereas I as a reviewer would have put them at 3 or 4). At the same time, i feel that the "gameplay" score is a bit low, given what he says in the review. The "value" Category has been debated in another thread.

I am very happy that Dom2 is getting all the press (because otherwise I never would have found it), but you have to remember that this game will never be a mainstream product - it is aimed very narrowly at imaginative wargamers who can look beyond graphics and interface to see the game-play beneath. Game reviewers are writing for the mainstream.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

I think it was a fairly decent review. It stated the potential of the game and the game system, while at the same time saying that potential is not realised fully. Maybe it could have gone a bit further in where the potential lies, but overall it reflected the view of a person new to the game that is not uncommon, judging by many new people's Posts here.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

I don't think it was a bad review either...it scored over 5, and anything over 5 is generally 'decent'

Remember, Dom2 is not for the average ff7-era gamer, and it never will be. With that in mind it is a fair review for what would be the majority of their readers.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

This review made me discover this game. It was enough to make me curious and download the demo and discover by myself that, afterall, it was not that bad. The difficulty, learning curve and micromanagement are not that bad.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

[repost from same topic 1/25/04]

I found out about Dominions 2 on Gamespot and, after playing the demo for 20 hours and loving it, still agree that the review was reasonable.

Why? Because to the vast majority of people, graphics, slick user interfaces, and a lack of complexity will be their preference.

Any diehard TBS gamer who reads that review and hears about the free demo will give it a look and love it.

The typical GS user who loves to ROXXOR UR SOXORS in counterstrike would hate this game and they make up GS's primary readership.

What they said about the graphics and interface are true: they are far below even something like Disciples II.

On the other hand, what they said about micromanagement being too much was totally off-base. ALL TBS games have a ton of micromanagement. They all are, at heart, management games.

All that being said, what shines about Dominions, and what makes it one of the best TBS games in history, is hard to quantify. The thought and care put into the game and the flexibity and depth that come into playing it are simply amazing.

The guy did say that more games should have the depth of Dominions II, and in that regard, he is certainly correct

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

No worries. Whenever I read a Gamespot review I always look at the reader review score. On this particular one it's an 8.9 ATM. If I recall correctly, it was that page that made me check this game out in the first place. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

And you can always do as GP has done and post your own Gamespot review of Dom2. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ January 29, 2004, 03:52: Message edited by: Targa ]

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

I agree with the recent Posts and actually am very very thankful for the Gamespot review (although disagreeing with the rating): Otherwise I would never ever have heard of this great game...

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

There is a review on IGN, whatever that is, as well. It follows gamespots pattern of a so so score by the reviewer and high reader review score, in this case 8.8.

Johan O, just to confuse you.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">IGN.com is one of the "Big Three" Online videogame sites that is now the "Big Two" since IGN and Gamespy merged. (The other "big" is Gamespot.) This review spends a lot of time on the interface setup issues, and very little on gameplay. Plus it makes a couple minor but not unimportant factual errors.

EDIT for link: http://pc.ign.com/articles/489/489136p1.html?fromint=1

[ February 03, 2004, 22:19: Message edited by: ceremony ]

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

I'll have to read this review. I cannot imagine this game being described as having too much micromanagement. Maybe these people don't play turn-based strategy games much, but it's blatantly obvious that the micromanagement was stripped to the barest core to allow for smooth, swift multiplayer play without sacrificing diversity of options.

And I have to say, Illwinter, you succeeded perfectly. In almost every way I am staggered by the subtle and precise game balance.

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, yes, for the first 50ish moves the micromanagement is no more than other TBS games. However, the time can come by turn 50-75 that the amount of STUFF you have to twiddle with becomes pretty intense.

Simple solution: use smaller maps.
Another solution: play PBEM and plan on spending an hour a move later on.

Since there are ways to play that don't take more micromanagemnt than other TBS games, I agree that this critique is a bit weak.

[ February 03, 2004, 22:49: Message edited by: diamondspider ]

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

The gamespot review is much more "fair" to the game than the IGN one imho, although they mostly end up with a similar score (the reviewer do stress the stonger points of the game, despite beeing irritated by the weaker points).

I guess it is just a matter of perspective ... If the films did not exist, how would one judge the Lord of the Rings books nowadays ? A deep, immersive and epic adventure, depicting a living and detailed imaginary word, but unfortunately, the story is way too long, there are too many secondary characters, the storyline is too complex, the author spend too much time dealing with useless hobbits in the Shire (horrible "reading curve" ! where is the action, where are the orcs ?), and those interface issues (I mean, olde english, not to mention elven language and poems, come on, just use plain english, its so passe ...) !

Okay that was an exagerated bit of irony http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (and the critisisms against Dom2 interface and learning curve are valid, not my faked critisism against Tolkien's masterpiece) but it's just to show that the reviews are kind of missing the point. Yes, the game has flaws (it's an independant game made by two passionate gamers, after all, many seem to forget it), but it's not the point. It's a classic. The question is how lower can small (heck, even large http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ) details bring the score of a classic ?

It's all about the difficulty of judging a game (and I am not blaming those reviewers here). Example : at this time, I am playing essentially two games : dominions 2 and spellforce. Spellforce is a game I enjoy a lot : superb graphics, interesting storyline, immersive blend of RTS and adventure game (and it comes with all the crunchy bits too : a good tutorial, a nice UI ...). However it has a quite large flaw : neither the "RPG" nor the "RTS" part are deep, and up par with other games. Despite this flaw, I am just enjoying a lot, and it is definitely worth buying and playing.

So, how would I give a score to both games ? For dominions2, I would say that the game is incredibly deep, rich, with tons of options and strategy, but unfortunately, the note will be brought down by interface and tutorial issues. For spellforce, I would say that the game offer rich graphics, a great interface, an enjoyable blend of RTS and RPG, but the note will not be a perfect one, because, in the end, neither the RPG not the adventure part are completely satisfying and rich.

So, if all factors were considered equally, we'd have both games, with an overall positive impression, definitely worth buying/playing, but with some (not minor) issues that prevent them from beeing flawless. So, I would probably give them the same score.
Not.

As much as I enjoy playing spellforce at the moment, it doesn't take rocket science to figure out that one of the game will be shelved when the campaign is done, with the warm and fuzzy impression of money well spent, but that's all. The other game, otoh, will probably remain forever on the hard disk, will probably lead to hundred and hundred of hours of future playing time, and will be remembered for years (like I remember the hours playing MoM, civ1 ...).
One of the games is a good game, the other one is a classic.

So, despite the flaws, despite the interface, despite the lack of tutorial, what score does dom 2 really deserve ?

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

I think what irritates me about these reviews...especially the ign review....is not so much that they gave it a 65/100 or whatever....I understand that Dominions 2 is not for the average gamer. I mean, even the hardcore gamers, some of them, don't like it.

What irritates me though, is this: Strategy Game A is reviewed as not having enough of this, not having enough of that. Not enough strategy. Not enough options, ect, ect, ect.....

Then, Strategy Game B (short for Dominions 2) is reviewed at having too much of this. Too much of that. Too much strategy. Too many options, ect ect ect....

I mean, what is it? Do we want more options? Or do we not want more options?

Again, i know and fully understand that Dominions 2 is not for everyone. Not everyone is able to grasp it, or look beyond the "bad and poorly done" graphics. But, to me, this game has what every other strategy game does not have. It has SO much going on, and it all makes sense once you look into and think about what is going on. This game has so many options, i think that the reviewers really don't know what to do with them all. They seem to be overwhelmed by what goes on, and what can go on.

I enjoy the game, despite the reviews it gets. In fact, I am amazed at all that happens during a game....

Not sure what the purpose of my post is now that I have typed it....but, oh well...

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

What annoys me the most about sites like that is that they are playing the "God-game". Many people who don't think things through will go there and look at the "reviewer's picks" or "top 10" (as rated by them) when they are shopping for a new game. If you wish to submit a different opinion in a "reader review", you have to sign up and pay a monthly fee. Bah. This is similar to people who watch television news and automatically believe that the way the story is told is the "factual truth" or only side of the story. "It must be true, I saw it on the news!"

Want a real laugh? They know this, which is why when you click here:
http://www.ignsucks.com it takes you where it does. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

Fair review. Graphics and Sound aren't all the great, and if 2/5th of the review is based on these two window dressings than Dom2 will get a bad grade. Especially when another 1/5 of the score is based on some one's over all opinion of a game that is difficult to learn. So be it. IMO, the author really gave props to Shrapnel by saying that it [the game] has lots of potential, but is just not there yet. I think we can all agree on that, but the game is still incredibly addictive to hardcore strategy games, and we see that potential in this game more so than other so called strategy games.

If I were to rate the game, based on their rating system it wouldn't be good. Yet, this is still a game I would recommend to ppl, like me, who love TBS games... Thanks Quantum Mechanic http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

I responded in turn with my own review. You know, it was really a bit low, but still, it wasn't all bad. Hey, I'd never have bought the game if it were not for Gamespot's review. The review essentially tells you the game is too hardcore. What a bummer. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Dominions review up at Gamespot
 

It's a real ego booster to know that the learning curve of the game you play is too high for those who are having a hard time with Barbies Dream Castle... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif