IGN EAW Review Video out

[Master Nikolaos]

There's a new video for Empire at War on IGN, check it out:

 

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/713/713904/vids_1.html

[Commander Obi-Wan]

**** man! I can't wait to play EaW!

[Jmaster3265]

Very cool, did anyone feel though that that critic was kind of harsh though? He keep talking about how awful he thought the land grpahics were. (troops, landscape etc.)

[mikemil828]

Ign review In Short:

Mediocre Space

Lame Land

 

Rock Paper Scissors makes stuff predictable

 

RTS fans would think it sucks

Only for Star Wars Fans

 

That's what I got out of it

 

They would probably only give it a 6

[Guest DarthMaulUK]

I have to say that the guy reviewing must have had his head in the sand these past 30 years. To complain that theres a lack of Units and factions stumped me, especially when you look at the time frame this game was set between!

 

The point being, if you make the game too complicated like Rebellion, the game just wont sell but make it accessible, just like Empire at War is, the game will reach a broader RTS base and so far, this is something IGN failed to have mentioned in this review. However, I think expecting IGN to actually give a decent review is like trying to win the lottery without buying a ticket, as these guys gave Star Wars Galaxies: NGE 8 and only a fool would do that

 

DMUK

[Spam57]

Watch for Gamespot's Review...

 

IGN, is a 2nd rate reviewing company in my opinion, the one review you really wanna look out for is GAMESPOT, they are the most fair in my opinion and i'm expecting a good review ranging from anywhere... low or high in the 9's.

[Lone Starr]

I just can't trust IGN. They give to many shady ratings.

[mikemil828]

Watch for Gamespot's Review...

 

IGN, is a 2nd rate reviewing company in my opinion, the one review you really wanna look out for is GAMESPOT, they are the most fair in my opinion and i'm expecting a good review ranging from anywhere... low or high in the 9's.

 

Gamespot is extremely tough with PC games, they only gave Warcraft III a 9.3, I would expect 8 range

[Master Nikolaos]

Yes, IGN's ratings are messed up, they give some bad games high ratings and some good ones like SEAW a bad review(rating still unnanaunced).

[mikemil828]

The rating is announce now: 7.6

 

http://pc.ign.com/articles/688/688963p1.html

[Sithxace]

true that making the game complicated like rebellion means it just wont sell, haha im greedy, im one of the bunch who loved rebellion so if they would have made it like rebellion, i would have died and went to heaven playing EAW forever.

[TK-421]

Yes, IGN's ratings are messed up, they give some bad games high ratings and some good ones like SEAW a bad review(rating still unnanaunced).

 

It kills me how they would trash the game and call the graphics bad when if they even tried to go all out at least 85% of the population who would want the game wouldn't be able to run it. They need to think outside the box rather than just sitting within it's paper walls.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

 

[enterman]

very funny thread title I saw in the IGN boards: What does the reviewer have, a Atari 800 computer?

[gstommylee]

Thats a good one.

[Master Nikolaos]

The graphics on the new screens they released don't even look maxed out, that's just cr#p. They probably tested the game in like "ultra_low" graphic options...

[gstommylee]

The person is an EA fan probably

[Master Nikolaos]

That review looks like its been done in a rather rushed, uninterested manner. I could hear the guy stutter in the video, but then again, I watched the video mainly for the game content(the review= ah?...can you even call it a review?...Sadly, yes).

[Spaxspore]

everone who has ever played RTS should realize graphics DO NOT make a game. IT just another element in a greater Symphony

[Ecthelion]

Did anyone read the print review? He started off by saying Galactic Battlegrounds was better than Rebellion. That made me not want to read the rest of the review, as that's utter baloney. Rebellion had it's faults, but at least it was its own game. Galactic Battlegrounds was just AOEII with different graphics.

[darth_vadar_13]

well i suppose hes kinda rite but the ground battles dont suck that much! nd with all thses mods devolping they can sure turn this game into a great thing! i say well done petrogypll

 

ps. sry about the bad spelling!

[TK-421]

Did anyone read the print review? He started off by saying Galactic Battlegrounds was better than Rebellion. That made me not want to read the rest of the review, as that's utter baloney. Rebellion had it's faults, but at least it was its own game. Galactic Battlegrounds was just AOEII with different graphics.

Not even, Galactic Battlegrounds could have been a mod for AOE 1. I would never pay for that game.

[Elukka]

Compare.

 

Gamespy: Space and land.

 

IGN:

Space

and land.

 

Are they playing the same game? Though some of the screens on IGN do have high graphics on, these one's sure dont.

[Ecthelion]

Not even, Galactic Battlegrounds could have been a mod for AOE 1. I would never pay for that game.

 

Actually, I meant that it was AOE 2 with different graphics quite literally. It used the AOE2 engine, as I recall. Although I'm sure AOE2 used an upgraded AOE1 engine.

[Jmaster3265]

very funny thread title I saw in the IGN boards: What does the reviewer have, a Atari 800 computer?

 

Computer or graphics card? Never heard of a Atari Comp. And actuallyI heard of ATI graphics card if ATI= atari and they make good graphics cards.

[jasonirma]

Computer or graphics card? Never heard of a Atari Comp. And actuallyI heard of ATI graphics card if ATI= atari and they make good graphics cards.

 

Oh dear God! I'm a fossil. I hope...pray even...that that was a sarcastic comment. If it's not, I'm gonna rip up my Polaroids and play an LP. That's what I'll do!