AGEOD Forums

As I write this, I have yet to read the the review. I wanted to post it here first to let others know it's up. The author rated BoA as fair, awarding it 6.9. I'm curious to get back to read the reasoning behind his rating. Not that it's all that important to me, as I already know BoA is an excellent game, I'm just curious. Though at 6.9, I wonder whether or not he reviewed the same game I've been playing.

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/birthofamerica/review.html?sid=6161803

Well, you can't please everyone, can you?

I've just read the review and at least you can tell that the reviewer has actually played the game (oddly enough, it's not always the case). He has tested several scenarios (although I think he did not played the full '55 campaign otherwise he would know that the after the first 3 years of French advantage, the British are back with a vengeance), and has experienced the joys of the northern american winter...

I don't know which kind of marks are usually givenk, so I can't tell if "6.9" is fair or unfair. I do think that his conclusion is a bit harsh and unbalanced (he is right about the music and the lack of TCP/IP, but somehow it seems to be more important him than nice graphics, good engine, terrific AI, etc.).

But as I say, I can't judge a man's opinion. I'm more unhappy with people trahsing a game without playing more than 20 minutes to it...

Furthermore, somethings tells me he will find some real satisfaction with AGEOD's American Civil War which will provide some brand new features.

I think basically the problem is that BoA is not for the demographic that Gamespot caters to. In fact I noticed several comments that stated that very fact. For example:

Birth of America's challenging artificial intelligence and historical authenticity will please grizzled wargamers, but it doesn't do quite enough to broaden the genre's appeal to newcomers.

Halfhearted attempts at broader appeal are awkward and incomplete

Yet for all the attempts at a kinder, gentler wargame, Ageod doesn't go the distance needed to bring new players into the fold

Yet the attempts to appeal to the masses feel meager, and the game loses some of its identity as a result.

If those comments don't say 'the 13 year old kiddies who post on our forums won't like the game' then I don't know what would. To be perfectly honest I'm surprised it was reviewed on Gamespot at all.

Here is the review that I wrote for BoA before I was involved in any way with Ageod as a beta tester.

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/birthofamerica/player_review.html?id=379295

And 6.9 is NOT a good score. I don't usually write reviews but I thought, at the time, and even more now, that these scores and reviews were just plain wrong! Look at the other reviews and the number of people who agree with those reviews:

8.7 with 1 who agrees
3.3 with no one who agrees
8.9 (my rating) with 2 who agree
1.0 wit no one who agrees
8.9 with 7 who agree

By any reasonable scoring system that I can think of this should be a You Say score of 8.0 but it is still listed (as it was weeks ago when I wrote my review) at 6.9. In fact, my 8.9 did nothing to raise this score, so I'm rather dubious that there is even any math going on behind these ratings and reviews. Maybe this is just a bunch of politics? If this is the case I doubt that any independent developer is going to get good scores. Oh well, let them play their juvenile games. We'll play and develop the really GREAT games.

This was yours? I enjoyed it

Pocus wrote:This was yours? I enjoyed it

Oui, et écrivant c'était mon plaisir. J'espère que vous ne le trouvez pas trop critique.

How's that?! I used http://www.freetranslation.com so I hope that I didn't just insult your cat and call your grandmother something rude! Just in case I did, this is what I tried to say: "Yes, and writing it was my pleasure. I hope that you don't find it too critical."

Fair enough job, even if not perfect. Totally understandable anyway, perhaps more than my rough english that I inflict upon you everyday