Dec PCG on ACQ/WHQ

chrisvalla

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
645
Reaction score
0
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Country
llUnited States
Full Spectrum Warrior - 88%; uninspiring AI, "short", good environments, "good sim for modern urban combat"

Call of Duty UO expansion - 93%; "Murderously realistic combat", drivable vehicles in MP, an improvement over the original

War Over Vietnam - 73%; "deep... Harpoon fans will dig it... budget-title ambience... a good effort..."

Political Machine - 73%; "It's politics with even fewer rules than usual..."

Panzer Campaigns - El Alamein - 80%

To Serve and Command - 10% (apparently it does neither well)

Civil War Battles: Gettysburg Campaign - 75%

Spartan - 58%

and of course...

Evil Genius - 88%... I think Dr. S. has the review on this one covered ;)
 

Bariman

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
328
Reaction score
0
Location
Morgan City, Lousian
Country
llUnited States
chrisvalla said:
I haven't played either... I'm more about the percentages or if 'buggy' is a low point.

Yeah, I find it funny when they list something as both a high and low point, when they have the same list for high and low, or when a game has no good points.

And you didn't mention Half-Life 2, which got a 98%. I think the only other game to get that high was maybe Alpha Centauri, and that might have been 97%. Looks like they have a new Best Game Ever.
 

CPangracs

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2003
Messages
1,589
Reaction score
2
Location
Within My Means
Country
llUnited States
Marines said:
COD:UO was "Murderously realistic" while FSW was basically uninspiring and flawed. :rolleyes:

That says alot about the reviewers.
Sorry, Marines, but I disagree. They have the comments right, but you shouldn't compare the two, because they are different types and different genres. FSW is NOT an FPS, COD" UO IS an FPS - major difference.
 

gobeavs

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
1,860
Reaction score
0
Location
West Coast USA
Country
llUnited States
Doctor Sinister said:
:surprise:

Just out of interest, what did it "fail" on - or do they just never give 100% on principle?

Dr. S.
Low res textures on some outdoor enviroments..thats the only one I can remember. IIRC though, Far Cry got like a 94%, and other games are mid-nineties also. So CoD: UO isn't one of the best they have reviewed.
 

Bariman

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
328
Reaction score
0
Location
Morgan City, Lousian
Country
llUnited States
Doctor Sinister said:
:surprise:

Just out of interest, what did it "fail" on - or do they just never give 100% on principle?

Dr. S.

According to the article, "Lows: Squadmates sometimes get in your way; low-res textures in huge outdoor scenes." They also listed in the Highs "Everything." The Bottom Line states that HL2 is arguably "...the best game ever made."

PCG's world-exclusive review was their cover article, and covered several pages outside of the review section, and, of course, had several advertisements jammed in (including Evil Genius).

The game also includes the original Half-Life remade on the Source engine (thought with original character models), and talked about Counter-Strike: Source.
 

Marines

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
1,017
Reaction score
0
Location
Surrounded By Commun
CPangracs said:
Sorry, Marines, but I disagree. They have the comments right, but you shouldn't compare the two, because they are different types and different genres. FSW is NOT an FPS, COD" UO IS an FPS - major difference.
I am well aware of the differences between two CP. They maybe separate genres all together but they are more or less a combat simulation. Don't get me wrong I liked UO but it was hardly murderously realistic.
 
Top