darwinia takes a beating!

[Rkiver]

Oooh, and the console gamers take a hit below the belt.

I still stick by what I said earlier. Not everyone will like a game, some people will not have a problem with certain bugs, others will rant and rave about them, and some will just say meh, who cares, it's just a game.

At the end of the day this is something a very small team made, and for that it is fairly impressive. It is innovative when compared to say "The Sims 342131412423: Yes we are making yet another one", but it is similar to Cannon Fodder, which we all know, and even the creators acknowledge.

I would ask this of those who have slated it, not a personal attack mind you, just as question. Could you do better?

[Parallax]

"I would ask this of those who have slated it, not a personal attack mind you, just as question. Could you do better?"

Ludicrous argument - could a film reviewer make good films? Could a music reviewer make decent music? Of course not - that's not our job.

Conversely, could a games developer write publishable prose? In most instances, no.

Which reminds me - our offer to Introversion to write a response to our review is still open

[Rkiver]

Not really, the way I see it if you want to criticize something, you should perhaps be able to understand what goes into making a game. You don't have to be able to do so yourself of course. That's just my opinion on it.

I mean what gives you, as a reviewer, the almighty power to condem a game? Nothing bar your opinion, and we all have our opinion of course. I once again feel the need to point you that while you find the game to have many faults, others may be more forgiving, and may enjoy the game. Of course some people will ignore your review and still get it, others will not ignore it, and will not buy Darwinia. That is the way of the world.

Personally I am wondering if Chris or the rest of Introversion will do their own feedback to your review. I also wonder why you only took one line from what I said and ignored the rest.

[Parallax]

To be able to review a game, you need to be a passionate gamer who can write - nothing more. Of course you don't have to know every detail about what goes into making a game. The whole point is that people out there are going to spend thirty quid on this game - it's our job to play it for them, and tell them whether we think they'll get good value for money.

Just because the game is by a small British firm, it doesn't automatically make it an essential purchase. As for the point about it being innovative - we recognised that in our review. Again though, innovation doesn't automatically equate to a great game.

And as for what gives us the "right" to report on games - it's called freedom of the press, and it's a very old, important and well established concept.

If you're going to keep this up, start making some proper points.

[Tortanick]

Which reminds me - our offer to Introversion to write a response to our review is still open

I hope your not entirely dependant on IV reading this thread to tell them this, you should E-mail them Assuming you havn't allready that is.

May I ask if you played the biosphere level, that IMO is the best level of all, if you want I can PM you and give you an acess all levels cheat. (edit NM I saw a screenshot in your review of biosphere)

[The GoldFish]

I agree with both Rkiver and (mostly) Parallax - when you're watching an amatuer-professional dancer, you can usually see when his rhythm is a little off, or when he gets his footing a little wrong, so in a way you *can* see what he should be doing, but there's no way you could go up there and do it. Granted, he might be doing other dancery stuff really quite well, but as an audience, you're there to watch him dance.

[Hendar23]

It's the horrific slow-down that totally spoilt most of the game for me. My system is double the min-specs on all counts and I play at minumum settings, but it's still at <8fps after the fourth level or so.

[m]

It's a prefectly fair review - a bit picky but a valid point of view. Frankly I think some people have been a bit generous because it's an indie game (albeit the best in a long time). Attacking this guy's abilities as a reviewer and the the very concept of reviewing in general is just silly.

(begin rant) And btw, Sims is the most innovative game series in years. They actually make an effort to simulate human relationships - something virtually unqiue in computer gaming. Maybe if they had some competition in that genre they'd do more than just churn out expansion after expansion. (end rant)

[Tortanick]

By my own rules (so old its new) the sims is inovative. I think little computer people and alter ego are early examples.

However an if the sims is inavotive, is sims 5 expansion 8 inovative. EA makes somthing good (sometimes) then clones it so often that you get board.
Any of the "we want inovation" community would have got board and when they see EA make ANOTHER expansion pack, that dosn't add anything of value another 50 tables so what. They see EA pileing on junk and selling it. In EA and "Sim gamer X"'s view the next expansion could be great just not ours.

[m]

This is going OT - sorry - but no, of course the expansions aren't innovative but if you want to knock a game for lack of innovation there are easier targets, like Doom III - Darwinia beats that easy.

[LeatherRaven]

By my own rules (so old its new) the sims is inovative. I think little computer people and alter ego are early examples.

However an if the sims is inavotive, is sims 5 expansion 8 inovative. EA makes somthing good (sometimes) then clones it so often that you get board.
Any of the "we want inovation" community would have got board and when they see EA make ANOTHER expansion pack, that dosn't add anything of value another 50 tables so what. They see EA pileing on junk and selling it. In EA and "Sim gamer X"'s view the next expansion could be great just not .

Agreed. I think the Sims gets rather an unfair knocking, especially in the hardcore gaming press. Mainly because the people who knock it aren't the ones it's aimed at and the people it's aimed at aren't really readers of hardcore games magazines and the like. OT, I know, but then I've already had my own defend-o-rama thread

Rhi

[Samwise415]

Some people just don't like a game that crashes, each to their own.

Heh... surprisingly, the "anti-crashing" demographic is a fairly large market. To quote one poster at F13:

If the game needs a patch to complete its main gameplay path, I don't really care how nifty the rest of it is.

[Tortanick]

By my own rules (so old its new) the sims is inovative. I think little computer people and alter ego are early examples.

However an if the sims is inavotive, is sims 5 expansion 8 inovative. EA makes somthing good (sometimes) then clones it so often that you get board.
Any of the "we want inovation" community would have got board and when they see EA make ANOTHER expansion pack, that dosn't add anything of value another 50 tables so what. They see EA pileing on junk and selling it. In EA and "Sim gamer X"'s view the next expansion could be great just not .

Agreed. I think the Sims gets rather an unfair knocking, especially in the hardcore gaming press. Mainly because the people who knock it aren't the ones it's aimed at and the people it's aimed at aren't really readers of hardcore games magazines and the like. OT, I know, but then I've already had my own defend-o-rama thread

Rhi

Well I disagree, I LOVED the sims when I first got it, that was along with livin(g?) large. However I became board very quickily. It was inovative but it gets boring fast. Thats not a problem. However if your board of a game its rare an expansion pack will revitalise the game. The sim's expansion packs don't and they don't add much that is new. IIRC the origonal sims and the first expansion pack (maby the first few) were greeted well by PCgamer, as for the others I never checked. However the rest of expansions got only avrage ratings. 50-60%, When you judge the expansion as what it adds not what the sims is. And you remember that the players are board allready so this needs to rekindle their intrest. Then the kockin is perfectly fair.

[LeatherRaven]

Well I disagree, I LOVED the sims when I first got it, that was along with livin(g?) large. However I became board very quickily. It was inovative but it gets boring fast. Thats not a problem. However if your board of a game its rare an expansion pack will revitalise the game. The sim's expansion packs don't and they don't add much that is new. IIRC the origonal sims and the first expansion pack (maby the first few) were greeted well by PCgamer, as for the others I never checked. However the rest of expansions got only avrage ratings. 50-60%, When you judge the expansion as what it adds not what the sims is. And you remember that the players are board allready so this needs to rekindle their intrest. Then the kockin is perfectly fair.

The Sims and the Sims 2 both got good scores across the board. But while hardcore gamers may have been attracted to the concept initially, the long term appeal of the franchise as a whole seems to be with more casual gamers (who've been transformed into hardcore Simer). Those are the ones who want... in fact clamour for the expansion packs, where as I think most hardcore gamers (certainly in this country) couldn't care less about Unleashed, or On Holiday or whatever.

[Darksun]

I like The Sims, and The Sims 2, they're good games, I just don't like how EA have handled the franchise and turned it into nothing more than a money making venture. It has become iconic of everything wrong with the games industry.

Still, I can't wait for Spore to come out