Dominions review up at Gamespot

[diamondspider]

Originally posted by Bowlingballhead:
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.

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 ]

[Kjeld]

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 (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 ) 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 ?

[MythicalMino]

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...

[Targa]

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.

[Japher]

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

[moodgiesanta]

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.

[Japher]

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...