CS:CZ "Reviews"

[onyx]

I just love the confidence

[Dangki]

This is the difference between American and Britain, we will say something is shit when it's shit (and even when it's not too :P) but yet the American media won't.



British media:cynical, miserable, hate filled, alcho's.

American media:super happy, smiley, brown nosing, prescription druggies.

Although I'd be very surprised if this gets over 80% in any US mag.

[Foo2rama]

Good review... he must have played the game... becuase last time I checked you COULDN'T play as a Terrorist.....

[street]

It's gonna be Elite Force 2 without the high tech alien shit, make of that what you will.

[x7-Superman!]

i predict a 2005 release date for CS:CZ, anything earlier is a miracle

[peagle]

Edited by [user="95147"] @ [time="1060290373"]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com

download Counter-Strike V1.6 (which we've been informed by Valve will already be available for download when you read this)

Really..? Fantastic, oh wait no.



Sounds like CS:CZ is everything you'd expect it to be. A wank singleplayer game packaged with the brilliance of classic CS multiplayer (in 1.6 form). Hmm.



I wondered in an earlier thread why the release of 1.6 was reportedly tied to the release of CZ. Now it seems obvious. Delay 1.6 past the release of CZ, and all your faithful CS players will have to purchase CZ to get the 1.6 upgrade rather than wait for 1.6 to come out free. I swear if that happens I'll combust.

[FatboyTim]

Remember when Ritual/Activision shipped the unfinished Sin? It took them some time to release a patch that vastly improved the game...



Let's just hope that Valve are making similar improvements with a pre-release patch for CZ.

[FLeK0]

some quotes about the article from Ritual (and friends):

Glade_Mormor, user

ohh.. 79 points!?? is that a joke!!?

reply from BrushBaron, level designer

Yeah because the game isn't OUT YET!!!

kanaeda, level deisgner:

that's what i was thinking. 79% is pretty damn good considering it wasn't a final version of the game.

Frightener, ritualistic staff

US zines will only review gold master CDs or boxed copies. PC Zone UK reviewed the game based on a late beta (near release) version of the game.

dark, user

When its this close to completion i dont think it would have made the slightest difference in the rating.

reply from BrushBaron level designer:

I think it does... he said the remote bomb wasn't in the game but it is... I wouldn't take anything this guy says seriously. It's not very professional in my opinion to review unfinished products.

all taken from teh forums

[GriffinMouse]

*Vamp* wrote..

...or they should just scrap it, admit they fucked up, then pretend it never happened.

I'll vote for that (and in fact I did, about a month back).



What kills me here is that CZ could have really been something good.

But now the only thing it's likely to do is tarnish Counter-Strikes good name.

I feel kinda dumb giving them so much praise, but I'd still say

that Gearbox had the whole thing covered. :P

[peagle]

FLeK0 wrote..

some quotes about the article from Ritual (and friends):



reply from BrushBaron, level designer



"Yeah because the game isn't OUT YET!!!"

Erm, wouldn't it have been Ritual who supplied them with the beta version for review?

[Foo2rama]

Good review... he must have played the game... becuase last time I checked you COULDN'T play as a Terrorist.....

[rizzuh]

Are you limey dorks over your fasncination and celebration of the UK media? You have an industry tabloid press; continuing the trend, you have a tabloid gaming press.



That is not a qualification. That is not a good thing. It doesn't make them more cynical or free or "telling it like it is." This isn't Def Comedy Jam, where reporters scream out, "YEAH I SAID IT! WHAT YOU GONNA DO? YEAH I SAID IT!"



I wonder why they review games before they're done? Is it for journalistic integrity or perhaps cynicism?



No, but maybe you should be a bit more cynical. They do it for money. They want the EXCLUSIVE, so they review games from preview copies that aren't given to all of the UK press. They want your pounds, not your respect about their "cynicism."



US reviews are just as brutual as reviews from the UK. The difference is that in the US the reviewers wait for the game to be finished.



While I understand that it's likely that CS:CZ will suck, in many cases the UK review system is a failure. See overwhelming positive reviews for C&C: Tiberium Sun and Black & White.

[{CKY}Pyro]

as i see it they are making the game out to a load of crap

[rizzuh]

peagle wrote..

Erm, wouldn't it have been Ritual who supplied them with the beta version for review?

No, Vivendi. The publisher.



Why the publishers let this practice go on is hilarious when considering what some of the Brits said earlier. When 'reviewing' the game, the reviewers understand the version is not final and let a lot of bugs not factor into the review or score.



On one hand, this evaluates gameplay potential over technical difficulties. On the other, it reviews a specific part of a game (its intended goals) rather than analyzing any technical issues or bugs.

[-=OG|citizenerazed=-]

Our press is far better than yours. Yours gave Operation Flashpoint something in the region of 67%.



Odd, that.