So, the latest issue of PC Gamer has a review of N:TW. They give it a fairly respectable score of 82, but bearing in mind they gave Empire, vanilla Empire no less, a 94, the 82 is hardly flattering.
Also, actually reading the article gives a more negative view: "To impess us - the old hands - NTW needed two things: novelty and refinement. Alas it offers precious little of the latter and only a flawed form of the former." They also bemoan the lack of replayability of the Italian campaign, the lack of diplomatic options during the Egyptian campaign and the ease of conquering enemy capitals.
Throughout the article, sometimes in the text, sometimes in the captions, the reader is made aware that the Black Watch routs too easily, naval battles are beautiful yet bland and, perhaps most vitally, that the AI still utterly sucks at both campaign strategy and diplomacy.
It is when they get to discussing the new attrition features, however, that it starts to sink in that CA really haven't been making the efforts they should.
I don't know about the rest of you, and I'm certainly not usually one to pay too much attention to reviews, but I can't help feeling that if the very magazine that generously described ETW as 'A strategy masterwork' is struggling to find very much positive to say about it's sequel, then it's unlikely to be worth investing £30 of my hard-earned cash.Originally Posted by Tim Stone, PC Gamer
Bookmarks