Cyberock

I know we have all disagreed with people's reviews of games but you should see how this reviewer got shotdown...

http://www.quartertothree.com/phpBB2...pic.php?t=4261

Makes for some good reading. All this because somebody expressed their opinion of a game.

Groucho

Wow. Well, cyber, I do have to give you street cred for having the stones to put up that link. But why did you pull the review?

For those who haven't clicked it, in the thread (which was started by the developer of Galactic Civilizations), people tear down the review, the reviewer, the website (www.game2extreme.com), and cyberock himself. It is a good read.

For the record, I tried demo for Galactic Civilizations but I just couldn't get into it. Not my cup of tea, I guess.

Cyberock

If you look at Gamerankings, we did have the lowest review out there on the game. My reviewer really hated the game. I think at times he was a little harsh and there were some holes in his review. I have asked for him to take another look at it and make a strong argument for why he felt it deserved the score it got. It's easy to throw up a review when you go with everyone else but when you disagree, you have to have really strong points to back yourself up.

Liver&Onions

Yeah, that Cyberock really has the stones

I liked how they harped on him for his posts and lack of editing skills I bet the managing editor over at game2extreme kicks all sorts of ass.


I have a feeling that review will be back up and at them, new, improved and really being a great review.

Preacher

If I am undestanding what you yahoos are yelling about, it is a review that Cyberock has now pulled? So it was posted but the link goes to a place in his site that is no longet there?

-Well I'd like to read the article he's slagging.

Joshic

The problem with Gamerankings.com is that since they average the scores of all reviews, even one abnormally high or low score can throw off the overall average score. Another game that suffers because of this is Deathrow for Xbox. It is very highly rated by many websites, but one really low review has reduced the overall score for this game by a lot.

I think they should change their scoring system so that the lowest and highest scores are thrown out when calculating the overall average score. This is a good way of normalizing subjective reviews. Olympic figure skating is a subjective sport with subjective judges, and they understand that to make the scores fair, they need to throw out the lowest and highest scores - and they do.

Liver&Onions

It will be reposted as a much stronger argument for it's low score as soon as the writer adds more to it. As it was, it seemed an unjustified score.

Trigger

Those guys all sound fairly level-headed for the most part... They even have their own version of joltaddict. I was expecting a more heated discussion. Seemed like your reviewer was wrong and presented himself as an idiot when he came into the thread. I don't know much about turn-based strategy games having only played a few, but multiplayer in a turn-based game sounds really boring... playing civ3 in multiplayer would take forever. Cyberock - I think you handled yourself well (barring the typos and grammar errors) and I think you should re-evaluate your reviewer.

RoQuEr

I for one love playing PMEM turn based strategy games.

RoQuEr

"email troll" is pretty extreme. Your reviewer bashes the emailer for no apparent reason. It was a civil letter, and pretty mundane. Pretty dumb for the reviewer to go over to "enemy territory" and flame the thread starter for being immature, especially without reason.