"I wouldn't worry about the quality of pirate code. We've played the
finished
version and it's superb."
So, can I sleep easy now, safe in the knowledge that the W version is indeed
a beta version?
Or am I just kidding myself.....
Cheers,
M.
<snip>
<snip>
Possibly. I've generally found PC Gamer to be the most reliable of the
UK PC magazines (remember PC Format's 90% for Le Mans 24 Hours?), and
they certainly seem to be the readiest to lay into a sub-standard game
- I can't think of any other mag that regularly gives sub-20% scores.
They also seem to be reasonably accurate when it comes to racing games.
As with most mags, they're overly biased toward FPS and RTS games, but
at least not to the exclusion of everything else.
As a final thought, what about PC *** World? They tend to have the
best sim specialists.
--
David. (GPLRank handicap: -2.05)
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
(Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)
Jan.
=---
Their hardware reviews are pretty good however, and ocassionaly Andy
Mahood will do a decent review of a racing sim, but he tends to let his
personal likes/dislikes of various forms of Auto Racing affect his
reviews, and therefore isn't a non-biased/impartial source for accurate
information.
I'm giving PC *** World a chance this summer, and so far have found
their reviews to be less biased and more fair/impartial. Also they
don't seem to spend 70% of the magazine on strategy games, 20% on first
person shooters and 10% for everything else like PC Lamer (woops I mean
Gamer:-)
JJ
Sent via Deja.com http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Before you buy.
--
Kieran
www.pcracing.co.uk for GP3 and WSC
> > <snip>
> > >I emailed PC Gamer to see if the views on the net
> > >reflected their experiences. The reply I got was:
> > >"I wouldn't worry about the quality of pirate code. We've played the
> > >finished
> > >version and it's superb."
> > >So, can I sleep easy now[?]
> > <snip>
> > Possibly. I've generally found PC Gamer to be the most reliable of the
> > UK PC magazines (remember PC Format's 90% for Le Mans 24 Hours?), and
> > they certainly seem to be the readiest to lay into a sub-standard game
> > - I can't think of any other mag that regularly gives sub-20% scores.
> > They also seem to be reasonably accurate when it comes to racing games.
> > As with most mags, they're overly biased toward FPS and RTS games, but
> > at least not to the exclusion of everything else.
> > As a final thought, what about PC *** World? They tend to have the
> > best sim specialists.
> > --
> > David. (GPLRank handicap: -2.05)
> > "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
> > really."
> > (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)
> I do suggest you all save this message in case you are interested on
> rating the reliability of certain magazines.
> One way... or the other...
> -lark-
Yes, but not a Gold Award. That's the difference - PC FOrmat and co are
far too ready to give 90%+.
--
David. (GPLRank handicap: -2.05)
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
(Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)
--
Kieran
www.pcracing.co.uk for GP3 and WSC
> <snip>
> >I emailed PC Gamer to see if the views on the net
> >reflected their experiences. The reply I got was:
> >"I wouldn't worry about the quality of pirate code. We've played the
> >finished
> >version and it's superb."
> >So, can I sleep easy now[?]
> <snip>
> Possibly. I've generally found PC Gamer to be the most reliable of the
> UK PC magazines (remember PC Format's 90% for Le Mans 24 Hours?), and
> they certainly seem to be the readiest to lay into a sub-standard game
> - I can't think of any other mag that regularly gives sub-20% scores.
> They also seem to be reasonably accurate when it comes to racing games.
> As with most mags, they're overly biased toward FPS and RTS games, but
> at least not to the exclusion of everything else.
> As a final thought, what about PC *** World? They tend to have the
> best sim specialists.
> --
> David. (GPLRank handicap: -2.05)
> "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
> really."
> (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)
One way... or the other...
-lark-
Jan.
=---
> "I wouldn't worry about the quality of pirate code. We've played the
> finished
> version and it's superb."
> So, can I sleep easy now, safe in the knowledge that the W version is indeed
> a beta version?
> Or am I just kidding myself.....
They called SCGT a game for *** racers only (80%), but gave F1
2000 something around 60. N3 got 28 % for reasons unknown, maybe the
reviewer didn't have a clue. I think they overrated Le Mans 24 hour a
bit.
On the GP3 issue, they have already made up their mind about how good
this game is going to be. It has already been on the cover once, and I
bet the next issue will be totally devoted to GP3 again.
I do hope the final release of GP3 is reported better here, or else i
will think twice before buying it (haven't downloaded it either).
--
Olav K. Malmin
remove spam when replying
Well, that's a load of bullshit.
Deserves more than that. Maybe the reviewer tested it on a PC that
didn't have the muscle to run it and therefore decided it was ***
because he couldn't play it at 4fps. Hmm, sounds like most of the
people in RAS that don't like it either.
They just lost *all* credibility right there.
--
Nos
> >They called SCGT a game for *** racers only
> Well, that's a load of bullshit.
As mentioned earlier in this thread, PCG use the whole scale when
reviewing games, so 60 % is pretty average.
I don't think so. It is perfectly human to find something totally
uninteresting, and i think the reviewer did with N3.
Read for yourself on www.pcgamer.co.uk. You can search for reviews of
all the games they have done.
--
Olav K. Malmin
remove spam when replying
SCGT is quite accessible to all levels of players and not just the
fringe elements.
It's worthy of more than average. Especially considering the physics
engine is way above GP3.
A reviewer is supposed to be objective. If they are not then they are
in the wrong business. 28%?? pfffft!
--
Nos
Tony Whitley.
Then they are not being objective. I've bought a number of import UK
mags and they were all frivilous lightweight reviews injected with
humour. Don't think this is a bias either.I am from the UK. BTW, none
of the hunting games have got stellar reviews here either.
--
Nos
