Review CVG trashes ShadowFlare

Tags: Shadowflare

<a href="http://www.computerandvideogames.com/">CVG</a> has posted a really, really, really brief <A href="http://www.computerandvideogames.com/r/?page=http://www.computerandvideogames.com/reviews/reviews_story.php{que}id=82418">review</a> of <a href="http://www.shadowflare.us/">ShadowFlare</a>, giving it a <b>28%</b>. Here's the <a href="http://www.computerandvideogames.com/r/?page=http://www.computerandvideogames.com/reviews/reviews_story.php{que}id=82418">review</a>:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote><b>24 Oct 02</b> You must be Diablo and I claim my five pounds. Well it might as well be. Confused? Let me explain. If we were playing 20 questions and you asked: Is it an RPG? Do you play in a low resolution? Has it got a minimal storyline? Is it full of repetitive mouse clicking? Do you battle relentless hordes? Do you start out in a small town? Do you wander around fields and dungeons completing simple missions? Do you slowly level up your stats? And do you gain an ever more powerful supply of weapons? Can you also cast magic? Do you constantly have to unload your inventory in order to pick up everything? Do you carry on this cycle until the end?
<br>
<br>
And if I nodded yes, you'd have jumped up and shouted Diablo. And I'd have shaken my head and said no. But if you'd asked more questions: Does it do nothing to improve on Diablo? Have these people never played Diablo 2? Or Dungeon Siege? Are the levels so unimaginative that they all look the same? Have they mostly done nothing but change the colour palette for the enemies as they get harder? Is there little variation between the look of weapons? Do you keep having to identify the potentially useful weapons with a merchant despite having done so hundreds of times before? Is it ridiculously tough? Is it a boring repetitious mess of unoriginality not worth dragging yourself through?
<br>
<br>
THEN YOU'D HAVE LOST. THAT WAS OVER 20 QUESTIONS. AH WELL.</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Honestly, that's the whole review. Two and a half paragraphs.
<br>
<br>
Snagged from <a href="http://rpgdot.com">RPGDot</a>

 

That is honestly one of the funniest reviews I've ever read. But alas, it's just another case of "big magazine picks on little indy developer".

Jeez, I just wish that the big magazines would stop picking on the little unknown games and deal with something their own size.

You'll notice that the only games with bad reviews are the ones released by small, struggling companies like CDV (Sudden Strike series, and lately DivDiv), JoWood (a host of games, but let's not think about that crappy CRPG they made), Nival Interactive (Rage of Mages, Etherlords, etc.) and the other small companies, or small game development studios, like our little Reflexive.

 

Oh, and sometimes, they'll even resort to giving a good, somewhat popular (though not hyped) game a poor review, just because it's not hyped. Like that crappy UK game review show "Cybernet", and their review of Age of Wonders 2, where they called it a real time strategy game that will "hit the bargain bin" for being "slow and unexciting", and the fact that it didn't have "top of the line 3d graphics as exhibited in Warcraft 3."

What? The game looks wonderful!

 

P.S. Shadowflare sucks.

 

Y'know Rex, there is an edit function.

 

PC Gamer gave Avernum a 17%. :shock:

 

Before PCGamer became crap, they gave Geneforge an 89, I think.
Not even I would score it that high.

 

Even though it deserves it?

 

Geneforge seemed like a really cool game. Too bad I couldn't get into it because I didn't care for the controls...

 

Actually CDV is quite large - they are publishing IG 3, Combat Mission, Cossacks, Neocron, IGI 2 {?} {+ plenty more} aswell as the ones you mentioned and numerous other "erotica" games. As far as i know, Sudden strike and Combat mission have been rated quite highly and IG 3 certainly has plenty of potential.

 

I would definitely give Geneforge an 89, or higher. It rocks.

 

Mmm . . . Combat Mission. Not accessible to to the neophyte, maybe, but an absolute freaking necessity for any serious wannabe tactician. It r0x0rz. It is w00tism personified.

But I didn't post here to say that. I posted to say that they probably kick the games they don't expect the their consumers to like. This includes most low-budget hardcore roleplaying games, since most consumers of PC Gamer quite assuredly don't like low budget hardcore roleplaying games. That someone actually rated Geneforge 89 in a commercial magazine is surprising; I assume they put it in an obscure spot where no one noticed it without looking closely and even then made sure to safeguard a lot by abusing the word "value."