Dominions review up at Gamespot

[ceremony]

Originally posted by rabelais
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.

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.

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by ceremony:
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.

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.

[ceremony]

Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
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.

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.

[rabelais]

Originally posted by ceremony:

quote:

---

Originally posted by rabelais
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.

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.

---

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.

I admitted quite explicitly to ranting. Don't get me started again, my wife will make me switch to decaf....

Rabe the Indignant

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

[Unwise]

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.

[HJ]

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.

[Dekent]

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.