New BI XP preview, lots of screenshots and 3 x movies at Gamespot...

Hi,

Just in case anyone has missed the post over at the RTW forums, have a look at the above at gamespot. ~:)

Dont bother posting unless you are gunna provide links

Here it is: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...w_6132682.html

manbaps, how difficult is it for you to find your way to gamespot!

I didn't find the preview, well, exactly packed with new information.

It looks like ladders reach the top of high stone walls now.

goood find

Thanks for the heads up.

There's also a review of BI in this month's UK PC Gamer in case anyone was unaware. Probably not. I say review, but really it's just one big flattering press release/preview with a 91% score bolted on at the end. Not one hint of criticism at the game and no mention of improved AI or anything. The only interesting thing is the mention that the Western Roman empire fell apart after just a few turns due to massive rebellions and debt. When will UK games mags actually dare to review a TW game properly? Even Amazon reviews have more honesty and professionalism about them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by professorspatula

I say review, but really it's just one big flattering press release/preview with a 91% score bolted on at the end. Not one hint of criticism at the game and no mention of improved AI or anything.

---

Rotten Tomatoes, a popular movie and game review site in the states, said somewhere that game review scores average at least 10 percent higher than movie review scores.

In short, game critics are noticably, measurably and consistently softer on games than on movies. There's no question that the problem is aggravated by fanboy sites and people who'd write free ads to get a pre-release copy of a game, but I don't believe any site is immune. Also, I think the smaller game review sites are far more likely to review only the games they are interested in and prone to like, further inflating the scores.

Most of the major game review sites gave R:TW very high scores. They're committed. They have a stake. Then the Total War fan base pretty much revolted. It's something of an embarrassment to the reviewers as well as the game developers.

There's a definite credibility gap between what the reviewers said and what the people who play Total War for years say. That credibility gap is widened by the gaming press' reputation for a cozy relationship with the industry it covers.

Game events like E3 don't help, frankly. Game companies show the press the good parts. When IGN wrote that they almost "wet our togas" in anticipation over R:TW at the pre-release E3, who thinks their chance of their writing a bad review of that game went up?

Then there's the enormous pressure to get "hands-on" previews and interviews with developers and such. Gaming companies don't drop such plums to people who don't play nice.

[Edited P.S.] A quote from a preview of the game, found on several web sites:

Quote:

---

What could be more hot than a continuation of the award-winning game that took strategy fans for a ride last year? Even more features, story, and gruesome combat packed into the expansion. Creative Assembly is packing in more of the amazing campaign missions, more units and structures to complete your campaign with, and, even more interestingly, CA has decided to work on a couple new gameplay features. With all of this crammed in, and the same team working on the game, there's no reason to think Barbarian Invasions won't be just as close to perfection as Rome: Total War was.

---

Good grief. Enough to make a press release writer blush.

It's just sad what has happened to games journalism. Looking back over the years, quality of reviews has declined. Over the top praise and lack of discernable criticism seems the norm for any big title. Especially 'world exclusive reviews'. At least the online review sites did dare have some criticism towards RTW, but the print mags seem devoid of it. For games I'm not sure about, I actually tend to regard the user reviews on Gamefaqs and similar sites much higher, because between the 'fanboys' (I hate that term) and the haters, there's usually a good mix of praise and criticisms and facts that mags ignore. To be honest, the only selling point for PC mags these days is that they're handy to read whilst you're on the toilet (and if you run out of bog roll, well those glossy pages make for a useful, albeit it not-so-nice-on-the-buttocks subsitiute).

It doesn't excite me in the slightest, which is sad.