PC GAMEPLAY review -Feb 2009-

[Shrubbo]

I am going to do a review on a new sports car. It looks similar to the others but god there has been a lot of work put in to how it drives. State of the art in cars!

 

I don't have much time so I will have to skimp a bit, in fact I don't have time to get a license to drive a manual and learn where to put the key so it will be Chauffeur driven and I'll just tell him what way to turn and when to honk the horn.

 

I will then score this. :thumbup:

[WynnTTr]

They don't speak Danish in Belgium, nor in The Netherlands.

 

Whatever. It's not in English so to me, it may as well be Danish or Chinese. The point is I couldn't read it to accurately critique it. Something that this review doesn't seem to do.

 

I see what you're saying, but in the publishing branch etc there's always a deadline to meet. It's not productive for a PC magazine to give their reviewers months to test a game.

 

No, they get a fixed timeframe during which to write a review. This timeframe is usually pretty standard and dictated by the average length of games. So in the current era of short lived shooters and RTS's it's no wonder the reviewer could only scratch the surface.

 

Yes, I agree and I said I understand it, but to give a definitive score based on an inaccurate assessment that's going to be published to the general public is misleading. As I said earlier -

 

I can understand if they don't have enough time, but if that's the case, I would rather leave the score open-ended until I properly understand what I'm reviewing.

 

To be fair, I think that him giving it an 82 despite only using the arcade mode is a very good score. From the looks of it though, he didn't let that influence his score, something that happens quite a lot. When reviewers blame a product for being too hard etc I mean.

 

-Z

 

Care to fully translate the article so that we can come to the same conclusion? The world doesn't revolve around Dutch (irony intended).

 

I stand by my views - if you can't even properly assess a product, why write about it? If you saw that in the printed media about a subject matter you know, would you stand for it?

[connos]

Dear All

 

I notice that some of you are getting a bit upset about some of the reviews in "Pure Gaming" magazines and websites. You should not be, their market is the "Pick up and blast for 30 minutes and then go and have a beer" market. It is to be expected. I also enjoy these types of games!

 

However. All these sites have an option to add your own reviews and comments.

As of today there are 10,878 registered members on this forum.

Yet hardly anyone has taken the opportunity to add their comments on these sites, either on the Gaming sites, or those, such as IGN who have taken a more positive and thoughtful attitude.

 

So I think if you want to make your feelings known, it might be an idea to make your comments/reviews known on these sites.

 

Good point JimMack and i already done that but because i know that bad reviews less buyers less money and no more games like this. ED needs our support.

[Ross-impress]

Translated by a friend Coenraad,

 

If we are honest, then we'll have (with allot of pain in the heart) to admit that the realistic flightsims aren't the most populair type of games at the moment. But still The Fighter Collection (TFC) dares to come up with Digital Combat Simulator: Black Shark. The goal of TFC is to continuously present new aircraft, and to start this initiative, they put nothing less then the Ka-50 "Black Shark" Hokum-A Attack helicopter in our lap. This Russian made chopper get presented by breathtaking state of teh art graphics and the flightmodel is so far perfected that even real life pilots get touched. Therefor it doesn't surprise that you can't just rush into the air to attack some bad guys on the 330.000km² big playing map of the Kaukausus mountains, but that you'll really have to dig in the controls and technikal matters before you even can think of fireing a missile or a high explosive round. From the startup procedure, navigating and weapons systems to safely landing with this distinctive chopper will take you hours if not days to fill with this extremely pushed trough realism. But no worries, for the people that all this realism is a little bit to much they have implemented a "Game" mode, in wich the playability is most important and realism is toned down a few knots. In that way you only get a fraction of the posabilities of the game and the satisfaction in the end will never be as high as when playing it the "Hard way", but the fact that this mode is present means that TFC is clearly aiming for a big audience. We'll have to give TFC credit for the fact that even in the "Game" mode the game never slips down to a brain dead arcade game, on the conturary, in that way you can slowly raise the realism bit by bit and still get to the level of Ace pilot. Graphicaly Black Shark has two faces. On one side there is the splendit cocpit detail and finish and the astounishing damage model, and also the display of all the other aircraft and vehicels is quite good. It gets a bit less when you are flying low above the ground, and look at the ground detail. The towns and villages and industrial areas are still quite allright, but the country in general does look like graphics from a few years back. As for game modes, this game has the complete arsenal with it. You can just dive into the action or chose one of the single missions, but the Campain has ofcours the best and most exiting things to offer, with a continuously changing front line accoring to your successes (or failing). Trough the mission editor you can build your own exiting scenarios and also the multiplayer with possabily to play cöoperative missions makes sure you'll have many hours of intense fun ahead of you. DCS: Black Shark has been in development for years and that you notice in the extreme detail and finish. It's an absolute must have for every flightsim enthousiast, and if you have been waiting to get your joystick out of that dusty corner, this is the perfect time. Hopefully TFC won't let us wait years for the follow up, and maybe the (combat) flightsim genre gets the attention back it atualy deserves.

 

Pro's:

Super realistic flight characteristics

Dynamic campain

Chalenging AI

 

Cons:

Extremely hard in simulation mode

Ground detail

 

 

 

Picture comments:

1) The weapons systems on the Black Shark make it to a true nightmare for everything that is on the ground. Rockets, armor penetrating- and high explosive rounds, he's got it all. Verus enemy aircraft he defends himself using missiles.

 

2)The Cockpit is abouts totaly clickable, what hightens the realism. Once you know what all those "clickable" buttons mean, you can easely allready call your self half a pilot.

 

 

Translation by Coenraad "Cougar" Noorloos

Edited February 17, 2009 by Ross

[GunSlingerAUS]

Nice work on the translation!

[Zembla]

Whatever. It's not in English so to me, it may as well be Danish or Chinese. The point is I couldn't read it to accurately critique it. Something that this review doesn't seem to do.

 

Keyword seem. If someone's opinion is different from yours, is it automatically invalidated?

 

Yes, I agree and I said I understand it, but to give a definitive score based on an inaccurate assessment that's going to be published to the general public is misleading. As I said earlier -

 

I can understand if they don't have enough time, but if that's the case, I would rather leave the score open-ended until I properly understand what I'm reviewing.

 

As I said, that's the way the cookie crumbles. You can argue it all day, but these guys have to deliver a review within a finite timeframe. Like it or not, it's a business, not some happy joyride where they can do whatever whenever.

 

Care to fully translate the article so that we can come to the same conclusion? The world doesn't revolve around Dutch (irony intended).

[...]

Whatever. It's not in English

 

Thanks for pointing out the irony, I almost missed it. Seems someone already translated it for you.

 

I stand by my views - if you can't even properly assess a product, why write about it? If you saw that in the printed media about a subject matter you know, would you stand for it?

 

Why do you assume it's improperly assessed? Besides, as I said before, opinions can differ, I respect that. It wouldn't be the first time the media obliterates a movie I liked in the reviews, or vice versa.

 

People are just dissing the review, the magazine and the reviewer because he has a different opinion. It's almost 2010.

 

-Z

[WynnTTr]

Keyword seem. If someone's opinion is different from yours, is it automatically invalidated?

 

Where in my post(s) did I invalidate it? I was basing my comments on the first post - read it again - and with only the knowledge that the reviewer had only tested the game in arcade mode.

 

Again read my first post - that's like reviewing a book by only reading the back cover description.

 

As I said, that's the way the cookie crumbles. You can argue it all day, but these guys have to deliver a review within a finite timeframe. Like it or not, it's a business, not some happy joyride where they can do whatever whenever.

Again - read my post - I already said, and this is the third time I'm saying it - I understand that. And I've already stated that doing so (reviewing something without actually properly testing it) is misleading.

 

Thanks for pointing out the irony, I almost missed it. Seems someone already translated it for you.

And yes, thanks to a translation, I can properly critique the article. The author did make a number of caveats to his review, which any reasonable reader will take into consideration. Hats off to them for doing so. And I agree with what he's written.

 

And next time maybe you could be a little bit less defensive and had told us what the general gist of the article was, if you couldn't be bothered translating it yourself. Then next time we can possibly avoid 'lost in translation' issues.

 

Why do you assume it's improperly assessed? Besides, as I said before, opinions can differ, I respect that. It wouldn't be the first time the media obliterates a movie I liked in the reviews, or vice versa.

This was a result of the first post stating that the reviewer had only tried the game in arcade mode and me not being able to read the review to see the quality of it.

 

And you're off base with movies and entertainment comment. I could not care less if the reviewer gave a score of 30% if he had properly played the game. I would have disagreed, but respected that perhaps this game isn't for him. That's fine, it doesn't affect my gaming in any way.

 

People are just dissing the review, the magazine and the reviewer because he has a different opinion. It's almost 2010.

 

-Z

No, ppl are dissing the review cos most, like me, only had the knowledge that the reviewer had only tried the game in arcade mode. And for a complex study sim of this caliber, that is a travesty that needs to be corrected. That's like give a review of War and Peace using only 'The Idiots Guide To...'

 

People are up in arms about this because they can see the injustice of it - if all the reviewer did was play the arcade mode and not given the game a fair chance. Did you read the TPC UK review?

 

What do you work for this magazine? Your defence of them is admirable.

Edited February 15, 2009 by WynnTTr

[Groove]

Can someone explain me that con ?

 

Cons:

Extremely hard in simulation mode.

 

 

[DragonRR]

Can someone explain me that con ?

 

Cons:

Extremely hard in simulation mode.

 

 

 

About as easily as :

 

Pros:

Dynamic Campaign

 

:music_whistling:

[Zembla]

 

What do you work for this magazine? Your defence of them is admirable.

 

I don't, but I do write reviews for other instances. I'm talking in general here.

 

It's never fun to see someone disagree with you, but in the end as a reviewer you're limited, and people often forget that. But I'm pretty sure my abundant defense compensated for your generous ad hominem attacks :rolleyes:

 

Besides, I can reverse your statement too, "What do you work for Eagle Dynamics? Your defence of them is admirable."

 

Anyway, this is getting far off topic. This is not about you or me, this is about the review.

 

-Z

Edited February 16, 2009 by Zembla

[Guest Helohero]

Zembla, you're missing the point of what's being posted. I agree with Wynnttr in that I don't understand Dutch and all we had going for us was the first remark from the ED person about the reviewer only testing in arcade mode.

The point was that how can you review game like this by only playing arcade mode? Goign by your movie analogy, that' like giving a review based ONLY on watching the 30sec ad.

[WynnTTr]

I don't, but I do write reviews for other instances. I'm talking in general here.

 

It's never fun to see someone disagree with you, but in the end as a reviewer you're limited, and people often forget that. But I'm pretty sure my abundant defense compensated for your generous ad hominem attacks :rolleyes:

 

Besides, I can reverse your statement too, "What do you work for Eagle Dynamics? Your defence of them is admirable."

 

Anyway, this is getting far off topic. This is not about you or me, this is about the review.

 

-Z

 

/shakes head.

 

Where in any of my posts did I make ad hominen attacks against you? The only possible way I could have is if you wrote the original article and took insult. If that's not the case, well here's my first - you sure got a chip on your shoulder.

 

What gave you the impression I'm a keen defender of ED? I only spoke up about the circumstances in how the article was written - do you want me to state it... again?

 

This game is far from perfect. The outdated LOMAC engine, the ridiculous trees, the woeful ground effects at low altitude, the campaign is lacking (but sufficient), the intelligent AI (or lack thereof). Everything I tell ppl I know about the sim, the good and bad.

 

My posts have been about the article, not about reviewers in general. And I've already updated my assessment of the review after reading the translation. Here's another ad hominen - or can you not take compliments either?

 

[WynnTTr]

Zembla, you're missing the point of what's being posted. I agree with Wynnttr in that I don't understand Dutch and all we had going for us was the first remark from the ED person about the reviewer only testing in arcade mode.

The point was that how can you review game like this by only playing arcade mode? Goign by your movie analogy, that' like giving a review based ONLY on watching the 30sec ad.

 

EXACTLY!

[Bisch]

82% is way too low for BS - but too high for action mode

[Rhino4]

but the Campain has ofcours the best and most exiting things to offer, with a continuously changing front line accoring to your successes (or failing).

Pro's:

Dynamic campain

Challenging AI

Cons:

Extremely hard in simulation mode

 

Stefan Wenmaekers PcGameplay.

 

Huh?:huh:

 

...There's no dynamic campaign, the AI is a pushover, and what is with saying that the game being "extremely hard in game mode" is a con???? This guy should be fired...I'm serious. This guy does not deserve his job. Hands down. Period. Anybody speak the lingo and wanna email his editor?

[Ross-impress]

Huh?:huh:

 

...There's no dynamic campaign, the AI is a pushover, and what is with saying that the game being "extremely hard in game mode" is a con????

 

Pc gameplay isn't a sim magazine, so i think it's great they would review this sim. The person didn't had the time to make him clear with simulation, so i think he tried but was to hard for him.(and this is normal as not full time simmer)

Again this isn't a sim magazine. So don't be so offensive against.

 

 

Ross..

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

However, those scores are very important in people decision when buying games. My kids subscribe to PC Magazin. When PC magazine arrives it is a fight between them on who's gonna read it first. And gues what, when we talk games, the first thing they say is "PC Magazine rated it ...".

[MarcPhoenix]

It's in Dutch. Not Danish.

 

It's not in Dutch, it's in "Flamish" (your +/- identical native language) :smilewink::pilotfly:

http://www.pcgameplay.com/contact.html

 

:)

[boris putin]

PC mags are after money from software companies. Rating can be effected by how many ads are sold in Mag.

Let me do a review. Not perfect but the best by a mile. 9.9/10

[HansRoaming]

I think people are forgetting the context of this review.

 

Bearing in mind that potentially a lot of readers might not have flown any sim before then the experience in arcade mode is going to be important. The fact it plays well there opens up BS for a wider audience and brings more people to the product.

 

With more people buying BS and other DCS purchases the more ED can spent resources developing and making the series better. A win win for all.