Review spotted!

SamuraiGG · Post by **SamuraiGG** » May 30 2005

Don't let the negative comments get you down. You got a fantastic game that keeps improving with each update, it doesn't get much better than that.

Zickefoose · Post by **Zickefoose** » May 30 2005

I take a 1-10 rating model a little more serious than game reviewers.

I give this game a 7/10 However I have yet to rate a single game with a 9/10 or higher, I just think reviewers should make it a challenge where only like 5 games make it past 9/10. It just does not seem right playing a game that has a ton of bugs rated a 9.5/10.

Cauldyth · Post by **Cauldyth** » May 30 2005

Somehow I have the feeling that humans will be walking on Mars before we end up getting 'Galactic Ruler' finished

Perfect! That means it, like SR2010 itself, will be a game based on facts instead of far-future speculation!

-Cauldyth

deanco · Post by **deanco** » May 30 2005

"I have this fear about reading a review of SR2010 from a Half Life groupie"

I hate to say this, man, but your fear is going to become reality.

You'll have to stay strong when you see it, but it *will* come.

DeanCo--

JaguarUSF · Post by **JaguarUSF** » Jun 02 2005

As a former game reviewer (http://www.gamegenie.com/reviews/pc/index.shtml I'd say half of those are mine), I can say that reviews that come out of smaller review sites can seem a little under-depth from the perspective of people who have been following a game for years. If you have several games to review, you just don't have time to play a game for 2 weeks straight and unlock all its features. Usually, you can tell if a game is generally good or not in about 30 minutes. Of course, some places read the manual and base the review off of that, instead of actually playing the game.

BlueKnight · Post by **BlueKnight** » Jun 02 2005

Here is another review that I found:

http://www.gamerankings.com/itemranking ... wid=580532

Cauldyth · Post by **Cauldyth** » Jun 02 2005

Same review.

-Cauldyth

altmunster · Post by **altmunster** » Jun 02 2005

JaguarUSF wrote:As a former game reviewer (http://www.gamegenie.com/reviews/pc/index.shtml I'd say half of those are mine), I can say that reviews that come out of smaller review sites can seem a little under-depth from the perspective of people who have been following a game for years. If you have several games to review, you just don't have time to play a game for 2 weeks straight and unlock all its features. Usually, you can tell if a game is generally good or not in about 30 minutes. Of course, some places read the manual and base the review off of that, instead of actually playing the game.

So in other words, don't trust reviewers because the reviews are likley based on limited experience with the game?

Or at least don't trsut reviewers that try to quantify thier experience numerically?

I can usually tell how good a review is by how much they describe about the game beyond the press release/ back of the box. The review posted at the beginning of this thread does not delve too deeply beyond the back of the box type stuff, so he is probably one of the 30 min types..