PC Gamer Review

[Ruges]

So I just picked up the december issue of PC gamer. It has the review for SRCW. 58 percent. which is a mediocre rating. While they do give props for some of the features, They critize the AI's reactions, or rather lack of.

[goulash]

Well, I think that is a fair score for the game in its current state. To be honest, if this next patch does not impress me, I am going to have to dropping the game as a bad investment.

Whilst it is vastly complex and looks good in many areas, it always fails on the ai side and some serious tweaks are needed to at least make the ai look intelligent and threatening and very improtantly non static.

Should also be options so player can do some touble causing between 2 other countries at a cost or risk to self if caught and the world may start to get politically interesting then.

CB system needs some work so some manipulation for both increasing and decreasing can occur bypassing the years and years of boring diplo deals to get back in good books.

Obviously this has to be at major cost or risk again e.g. do I want to gamble billions convincing the world I am a now good boy after I blasted 2 small countries to hell.

The UN shoute have a vote to return application button so other countries can vote if they want you back.

Sooo much potential this game has but it does feel very static at the moment

[nick-bang]

Well, I think that is a fair score for the game in its current state. To be honest, if this next patch does not impress me, I am going to have to dropping the game as a bad investment.

Whilst it is vastly complex and looks good in many areas, it always fails on the ai side and some serious tweaks are needed to at least make the ai look intelligent and threatening and very improtantly non static.

Should also be options so player can do some touble causing between 2 other countries at a cost or risk to self if caught and the world may start to get politically interesting then.

CB system needs some work so some manipulation for both increasing and decreasing can occur bypassing the years and years of boring diplo deals to get back in good books.

Obviously this has to be at major cost or risk again e.g. do I want to gamble billions convincing the world I am a now good boy after I blasted 2 small countries to hell.

The UN shoute have a vote to return application button so other countries can vote if they want you back.

Sooo much potential this game has but it does feel very static at the moment

Actually then your critique is at a genre more than a game. I have never ever seen a Grand Scale war simulater where the AI could be on par with a good player. However SR comes MUCH closer than most of its competitors - includingh the publisher Paradox games which have actually borrowed/been inspired by many of the features from SR.

Some of the other critique are already there - YOU can cause trouble in other countries including inciting riots etc...
I dont agree with your idea that you should somehow become a nice guy by using money. At all.
Ghadaffi and Saddam tried and impressed no one.The real world is noit a kindergarden where you shake hands and are friends again - jugoslavia being just ONE example.

The expulsion from the UN in this game have always been a little strange IMHO as neither North Korea, Iran, Syria or any other medieval, primitive and crazy dictatorships have ever been expelled !


There is a clear border and line between what is an error and what YOU like !

[goulash]

Actually then your critique is at a genre more than a game. No, its at this game mate.

I have never ever seen a Grand Scale war simulater where the AI could be on par with a good player.
However SR comes MUCH closer than most of its competitors - includingh the publisher Paradox games which have actually borrowed/been inspired by many of the features from SR. I think SR series has always been a great potential game and hopefully update 2 will show us all how much better it can be. Bye the way what other games have borrowed / been inspired by this one?

Some of the other critique are already there - YOU can cause trouble in other countries including inciting riots etc... I know that, but I want to cause trouble between Iran and Israel so how can I do that?

I dont agree with your idea that you should somehow become a nice guy by using money. At all. I was more refering to the risk / gamble chance factor of speeding things up dimplomatically rather than money. It is just that something has to be risked and gambled otherwise such an option would be abused. This is just a thought on potential ways of giving the player a chance to redeem himself slightly quicker after being badboy. The current method is slow and boring.

Ghadaffi and Saddam tried and impressed no one.The real world is noit a kindergarden where you shake hands and are friends again - jugoslavia being just ONE example. Com on both were leaders for years and years and Saddam had previous wars etc. They killed their own people and faced up to the West = their demise and nothing to do with how they ran their country. Prior to 1990, they did alright so I would not exactly be so quick as to say these people failed to impress other countries as I think they did ok to last as long as they did considering the type of people they were. Ghadaffi even got close to improved relations once he denounced terrorism.

The expulsion from the UN in this game have always been a little strange IMHO as neither North Korea, Iran, Syria or any other medieval, primitive and crazy dictatorships have ever been expelled ! Agreed


There is a clear border and line between what is an error and what YOU like ! You can say that line every single time for every game and it means nothing to a consumer whom will pay for what they want and not pay when they dont get it.

There is a fine line between what is fun playing and not fun playing simpla as that.

[Fistalis]

So I just picked up the december issue of PC gamer. It has the review for SRCW. 58 percent. which is a mediocre rating. While they do give props for some of the features, They critize the AI's reactions, or rather lack of.

They still print magazines?

Disagree or agree with reviewers, doesn't matter to me.. I gave up on commercial reviews after the release of Civ V which was universally acclaimed by critics and IMO a horrible addition to an otherwise good series of games. It pretty much solidified my view that if you want good review scores make it pretty, simple enough a 5 year old can play it and don't forget to spend half your budget on an opening movie. Replay value doesn't matter because reviewers will only play it for an hour anyway

For further confirmation one only has to look here. http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/ ... w=detailed

[nick-bang]

Actually then your critique is at a genre more than a game. No, its at this game mate.
Well... Actually it is of the genre because as I wrote, then this game stands above the others (also) in this regard. Hence the statement

I have never ever seen a Grand Scale war simulater where the AI could be on par with a good player.
However SR comes MUCH closer than most of its competitors - includingh the publisher Paradox games which have actually borrowed/been inspired by many of the features from SR. I think SR series has always been a great potential game and hopefully update 2 will show us all how much better it can be. Bye the way what other games have borrowed / been inspired by this one?
Hearts of Iron 3 to name just one, but actually many of paradox games have been ... shall we say inspired by SR...

There is a clear border and line between what is an error and what YOU like ! You can say that line every single time for every game and it means nothing to a consumer whom will pay for what they want and not pay when they dont get it.

There is a fine line between what is fun playing and not fun playing simpla as that.

Agreed - but that still does not change that what YOU think is fun is not by definition what I think is fun ... savvy ?

[warhead]

Well, I think that is a fair score for the game in its current state. To be honest, if this next patch does not impress me, I am going to have to dropping the game as a bad investment.

Whilst it is vastly complex and looks good in many areas, it always fails on the ai side and some serious tweaks are needed to at least make the ai look intelligent and threatening and very improtantly non static.

Should also be options so player can do some touble causing between 2 other countries at a cost or risk to self if caught and the world may start to get politically interesting then.

CB system needs some work so some manipulation for both increasing and decreasing can occur bypassing the years and years of boring diplo deals to get back in good books.

Obviously this has to be at major cost or risk again e.g. do I want to gamble billions convincing the world I am a now good boy after I blasted 2 small countries to hell.

The UN shoute have a vote to return application button so other countries can vote if they want you back.

Sooo much potential this game has but it does feel very static at the moment

i didn't even know the UN kicked you out in this game. if you want to cheat use the cheat shelovesme cheat and the UN will have 100% approval.
i save swap in some of my games to start other countries into wars. obviously once it's patched im hoping I won't have to do that so much. i always check off the critical UN option because I can't stand the UN irl or in game.

[LiKaapstad]

I believe the only reason they gave SRCW a bad rating was because they never looked at the game manual. Trust me, I know alot of people who just start playing the game without ever considering what the "plan" actualy is.

[mrusso1983]

Knowing reviewers, I would have expected the score to be even lower. I am mildly disappointed in the state of the game's release. But I am not at all concerned about my long-term investment, because of BG's stellar track record on supporting their products.

In terms of AI, after years of tweaking, the HOI2-3 series is pretty decent. And the AI in WitE is pretty darn good as well.

If the SR series offered easy text file modding like HOI, it would be gamer's heaven for me.

[red2]

I believe that if battlegoat continues up dating this game and works with the ai, eventually they could get it up to a 70-80. I love this genre and I firmly believe the devs will get it right.

[nick-bang]

I believe that if battlegoat continues up dating this game and works with the ai, eventually they could get it up to a 70-80. I love this genre and I firmly believe the devs will get it right.

There is no doubt that Batllegoat will continua to support and develop this game - in fact they have also done so with all their games and far more than any other software house.

[George Geczy]

I re-read this review and there are some interesting things about it. For one thing, it's the first time (out of our 3 games) that PC Gamer actually gave the review to somebody who understands strategy games. SR2010 was reviewed by someone who's previous strategy review pinnacle was "Zoo Tycoon" (seriously)... the SR2020 review was also clearly not someone who played the game in any depth. This time around, the reviewer actually seemed to play and understand the game, which is a big plus.

His one example of AI non-reaction was historically a bit poor, however - he complained that "NATO's reaction" was quiet when Russia ran over Austria and Switzerland. Of course, we all know that in 1949 neither Austria nor Switzerland were members of NATO, and in fact Austria was in 1949 was the most "eastern"-oriented of so-called Western Europe. A better test would have been attacking France or another NATO country, which would have generated a somewhat more significant response. (Though this is also something that has been further improved with the new Update 2, which of course the reviewer did not have.)

More than half the review is actually spent praising "fine features" of the game, from the Minister automation, to AI Naval invasions, to the map objectives system, the "super-rich diplomacy", etc. So the final score seems a bit harsh.

Toss in the fact that games that garner a significantly higher score (such as Civ V) are often full of reproducible crash bugs and significant engine faults, versus SRCW which has no reproducible crash bug as of Update 1, and a number of other factors from Multiplayer to the price point to ongoing new content, and that score really doesn't make sense. Of course, in 10 years PC Gamer US has done us no favours, so I didn't expect that to change.

[Ruges]

I re-read this review and there are some interesting things about it. For one thing, it's the first time (out of our 3 games) that PC Gamer actually gave the review to somebody who understands strategy games. SR2010 was reviewed by someone who's previous strategy review pinnacle was "Zoo Tycoon" (seriously)... the SR2020 review was also clearly not someone who played the game in any depth. This time around, the reviewer actually seemed to play and understand the game, which is a big plus.

His one example of AI non-reaction was historically a bit poor, however - he complained that "NATO's reaction" was quiet when Russia ran over Austria and Switzerland. Of course, we all know that in 1949 neither Austria nor Switzerland were members of NATO, and in fact Austria was in 1949 was the most "eastern"-oriented of so-called Western Europe. A better test would have been attacking France or another NATO country, which would have generated a somewhat more significant response. (Though this is also something that has been further improved with the new Update 2, which of course the reviewer did not have.)

More than half the review is actually spent praising "fine features" of the game, from the Minister automation, to AI Naval invasions, to the map objectives system, the "super-rich diplomacy", etc. So the final score seems a bit harsh.

Toss in the fact that games that garner a significantly higher score (such as Civ V) are often full of reproducible crash bugs and significant engine faults, versus SRCW which has no reproducible crash bug as of Update 1, and a number of other factors from Multiplayer to the price point to ongoing new content, and that score really doesn't make sense. Of course, in 10 years PC Gamer US has done us no favours, so I didn't expect that to change.

Nice defense on the AI non-reaction. Could be a bit true about nato not acualy doing a thing about it. Russia had a huge military at this point in time. And weary after WW2, I could see NATO doing nothing about it. Of course wait anouther 10-20 more years and it might have been a different subject.

But yea I do agree that he had more positive to say about the review then the negative. So I could defenatly have seen anouther 10-15 more points. But was held to the higher AAA standards, instead of the budget tittle it is. So maybe that is a compliment in of itself.

[George Geczy]

Could be a bit true about nato not acualy doing a thing about it. Russia had a huge military at this point in time. And weary after WW2, I could see NATO doing nothing about it. Of course wait anouther 10-20 more years and it might have been a different subject.

Since Austria is not part of NATO (then or now), the "an attack on one is an attack on all" NATO clause didn't apply, even by the 1960s... So instead it would be more of a "Soviets in Afghanistan" situation. One could say that by the 1960's the US might have a more severe reaction to a European expansion of Soviet influence, but on the other hand they did not do anything for either the Hungarian or Czech revolutions and permitted the Soviets to clamp down, right next door to Austria. So the question of western reaction to an Austria attack is an interesting one.

In SRCW, the US has neither spotting nor land transit treaties with Austria and Switzerland in 1949, so there is no gameplay imperative for an immediate US response to attacks on those regions. The belli hit the USSR takes for those actions will certainly change the progression of the game in a major way, but it just doesn't make sense to expect a hot war after these actions.

It's unfortunate that the fact that the SRCW game engine actually tries to tackle nuances like this doesn't get coverage in reviews like the PCG review.

[KesslerK09]

To be honest I never heard of Battlegoat or Supreme Ruler series until a year ago. I was a huge Civilization fan, and when the new one came out I was a disgruntled customer. Instead of going to a game review magazine I browsed the web. I came across SR2020, read user reviews and watched some youtube videos. It was on sale on Impulse so I took a gamble and bought it. I usually hate games that don’t have challenge my video card, but the game play and the replay value kept me hooked. Now I’m continuing my addiction to this series by playing Cold War.

Screw reviews, the new Civilization received good reviews and SRCW received bad reviews… But what game is collecting virtual dust on my hard drive?