Two German Reviews...

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by thelordofthenoobs, September 11, 2014.

?

The reviews we saw so far are...

  1. ...too positive.

    11.8%
  2. ...too negative.

    13.7%
  3. ...exactly the way I expected them to be.

    52.9%
  4. ...biased.

    9.8%
  5. ...unfair.

    13.7%
  6. ...awesome.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. ...bacon.

    21.6%
  8. I don't care! Why are there so many poll responses?!

    13.7%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. thelordofthenoobs

    thelordofthenoobs Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    356
    http://www.pcgames.de/Planetary-Ann...ests/Test-Ambitioniert-aber-unfertig-1135492/
    http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/plane...fazit_mit_der_test_version,48731,3078096.html

    These are the only reviews of the release version by large gaming magazines I have found so far.

    They are not very positive.
    They see PA as a game with great potential, but feel that it is unfinished and lacks many of the things the community has been asking for. They also have critisism when it comes to balancing, amongst other things.

    And unfortunately, I have to 100 % agree with these reviews :(

    I didn't state much of my opinion about the release state of the game because I didn't want to further discourage the devs and silently hoped that somehow I was wrong and everyone would be all over PA but the reviewers seem to have the same opinion as me.

    Your thoughts ?

    Edit:
    @radongog found a review by eurogamer.de, which is way more positive:
    http://www.eurogamer.de/articles/2014-09-10-planetary-annihilation-test
    Last edited: September 11, 2014
  2. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    ...exactly the way I expected them to be.

    To be fair, but that's what we all have been sating for months, so yeah uber knows.
    zweistein000 and ace63 like this.
  3. duncane

    duncane Active Member

    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    191
    To post a review this quickly after a games release means they haven't really had enough time with the game. Even worse is the fact they complain about balance, something which ALL rts games take until well after to release to work out.
  4. thetrophysystem

    thetrophysystem Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,050
    Likes Received:
    2,874
    Should get those translated and have a read.

    But my initial opinion, and this is giving them the merit of an honest critique without having read their critique, is that "release" was a date set up knowing they could definitely have the game in a working condition but wouldn't be able to make absolutely all the magical additions happen on time. Some complain, but in the end it's a development and a business. When it starts acting less like a business, then it starts becoming in danger on that end too. It is funded by kickstarter, but not producing business decisions around the game doesn't insure the longterm very well. I mean, they will have to stay a company to properly support the game for as long as possible, possibly years while it may only take a month or few for "offline servers" and "saves".

    Just think about exactly that for a moment. The kickstarter funds the initial development of the game. So much work over so long a time by so many people. A physical number. A company making sound business decisions to promote a solid production for the game, selling it with the best production and publishing it can get, funds the company behind the initial development, to stay a company to continue support. Which do you prefer, a one time product limited by a stretch of time, or a product with a set release date and a secure company behind it's future upkeep?

    Basically, it is best to try and make a business decision about putting a game on market, and nobody else cares about that aspect except the company itself. What outside players and critics see, is that the development could have been better over time, and that is some magical compelling force to throw away any date or promise with external collaborators on publishing for instance. It really is a godaweful arguement for throwing away set dates when the product is as honestly functional as it is.

    All that aside, when I do read it, it could do me the favor and at least get the whole story. What I said for instance, is a little deep, dont expect that, but if it can in detail portray the kickstarter and the differences, then it had better also detail what is present as well as absent. Anything else, I can reason with as a valid arguement.
    Last edited: September 11, 2014
    Remy561 likes this.
  5. cwarner7264

    cwarner7264 Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    4,460
    Likes Received:
    5,390
    I will always vote for bacon.
  6. duncane

    duncane Active Member

    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    191
    I would also add this is one of the first big Kickstarter games. Normal rules dont apply. Reviews at release may not even matter in the end. Even release dates may mean nothing. I hope what will matter is how much the developers support the game 1, 2, 3 years after release.
    Remy561, cptconundrum and cdrkf like this.
  7. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    4,793
    I also think we don't need to worry *too much* about what the release reviews say.

    TA is considerer (at least by some) one of *the* best RTS games ever made. That conclusion was not off the back of the release press though, rather from the many people who played it for *years* after it's release. I was playing TA on line competitively up until about 2002, at which point I moved over to TA:Spring (so still playing it basically :p).

    There aren't many games from the 90's that lasted that long. If PA can stand the test of time, and especially if Uber can keep rolling with the updates, then PA may very well take it's place as an all time great :)
    Remy561, warrenkc and duncane like this.
  8. ace63

    ace63 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    826
    And here comes the backlash of the premature release...
  9. radongog

    radongog Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    638
    Likes Received:
    295
    My general thought is that tey are looking at it too negative, because they include the "missing" features in their analysis---and they shouldn´t do so!
    Like a student a game shouldn´t be tested with main focus on the dropouts!

    And the lack of stressing the ShareArmy-Mode is a crime. It´s proberbly the feature that makes this game outstanding in Mulitplayer!

    Anyways, just a thought: Minecraft got real positive reviews, although it´s way more sandbox, ways more unfinished and got a ways slower update cylce. (this were two big critics in press as well as in forums) Why give exellent ratings to a game like Minecraft and not giving them to PA? ;)
    Remy561 likes this.
  10. thelordofthenoobs

    thelordofthenoobs Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    356
    Personally I don't actually care for what the reviews say in this case, because I have my own opinion (and in my opinion, Uber is very well capable of realizing PA's full potential).

    But you are saying it yourself: It all comes down to how much Uber will support the game after release.
    And since they are a business, they can only support the game if it makes sense for them from a business perspective, e.g. PA needs to give them a decent amount of income (meaning people have to buy it, obviously).

    And that's exactly what these reviews are about. If there is a positive public opinion about a game, people are a lot more likely to buy it.

    And reviews play a very important role in creating such an opinion.

    That's what worries me.
    These reviews might ultimately lead to PA not being supported for a long time because Uber has to move on to other projects.
    Remy561 and bradaz85 like this.
  11. thetrophysystem

    thetrophysystem Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,050
    Likes Received:
    2,874
    Actually, the first one was fair. Which is wierd, because they were the best I could hope for as far as factuality and basing the score on utility. PA was graded high enough, with a lot of missing points from missing save feature, which is the only real glaring thing you would go to use and notice it's absence.

    The second one, I tried translating, did it give a score even? It seemed like they played it for sure, but maybe it was too close to release and not enough was played, because it seemed the review was done like a comparison to supcom, both in game features as far as units and such, and as gameplay as far as someone struggling to play it. And believe you me, a LOT of new people would have trouble playing this, which is what looked like happened with the review from what I gathered...

    So the second one is disreguard unless I can figure out what the relative **** it was all about, but I can agree with the first one as an objective review. If I didn't know savegames were mostly tied to serverside, I would say they should work on savegames first to throw off a LOT of anyone's right to complain. Not being the case, not much they can do, unless they can rig what emulators do to save and just get a classic "state dump" save working to bridge the time between development. If it was at all possible for them to do before release, they should have. Hey, they were pretty much booked for time though *shrugs*
    Most people quote the Steam sales. This game sold high on Steam many times now. Alpha. Beta. Gamma. Galactic War Update. Release.

    These sales added to the kickstarter show likelihood that there is nothing to worry about. Assuming savegames and server are already built and just need work mounting in a public useable way. When those features come out, hopefully a lot of people who were held off buying because of arguements, will buy it and it will ride high on steam yet again.

    It is a longterm thing, and as long as successful additions to the game yield successful strides in it's support, I am not worried. It was a large kickstarter project so it does help their visibility. It is honestly worse with games without visibility, they are the ones I feel sorrier for. Grey Goo has a lot of negativity atop of not very much publicity, so I hope them well also. Hopefully within the next year, the RTS returns as a popular genre and these games have sustainability from it.
    Last edited: September 11, 2014
  12. thelordofthenoobs

    thelordofthenoobs Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    356
    The second "review" seems like it is more like a first look at the release version (which is also suggested by the the headline "Erstes Fazit mit der Verkaufsversion").
    Maybe they will do a more detailed follow up.

    The first magazine has been keeping an eye on PA for a long time and they also played it while it was still in Early Access, so they haven't rushed out a review quickly after release, as they have been playing it throughout development.
    The tester from the second review only started playing after release.
    bradaz85 likes this.
  13. thetrophysystem

    thetrophysystem Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,050
    Likes Received:
    2,874
    That would make a lot of sense. If it is a first view, that might have been something they could have held off on until they were sure. Either way, it could continue to be negative but grasp a concept around the game and I would be happy. It just seemed like a lot of empty not understanding the game, like maybe someone should send him a note on the side with some information on how to play some good matches to introduce the concept.

    ABOUT POLL OPTIONS: Biased and Unfair are the same thing basically, and there was no alternative choice. Which is particularly wierd, as I figured that would be the one I would choose but I would actually choose "objective and fair" if it were an option.
  14. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    4,793
    Uber aren't stupid :p

    The reviews right now are 'Great potential, wait until feature X has been added' (replace X with whatever your particular flavour of essential missing feature is).

    What Uber then do is release a big update to great fan fair "Feature X now available, more to come". This highlights the game, generates new buzz and a new wave of revenue (just like Alpha, Beta, gamma and so on).

    Work on it for another couple of months and "Feature Y now available + all these enhancements +..." same again :p

    The point is they could have waiting until all these were done, and got 1 very large sales spike, however working like this probably spreads the income out a bit which is easier on the cash flow for them. They're not hiding what isn't available, and many people will have PA on their watch list for when these things get added.

    Strikes me as a pretty clever business strategy if you ask me :p
    Remy561 and thetrophysystem like this.
  15. thelordofthenoobs

    thelordofthenoobs Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    356
    I hope you are right, as I have seen good, unfinished games getting bad reviews and never recovering from that even after the devs fixed all of their problems and added lots of nice stuff :(

    As for the poll options, I actually included an option for good reviews, but I guess "awesome" is not too fitting given that the review is not that positive..well..can't change it now :(
  16. temeter

    temeter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    305
    The gamestar review is coming in multiple parts, that's why they don't have a score yet.

    That stuff isn't to much worth anyway. While something like 70% might be fair, the review itself is kinda pointless. It can't consider the idea of continually development. They put it there, add a score, and that's how it stays as a final statement. That's also why magazines often don't even review F2P-titles.
  17. thetrophysystem

    thetrophysystem Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,050
    Likes Received:
    2,874
    Starbound in my opinion is also in good development although people give it flak.

    Generally, I am impatient with ITS updates for some reason, probably just over eager. However, it can't really be helped. Recently, nightly builds show off half *** features, more gritty stuff than Uber usually gives us even. A feature only half working, like ship upgrades. Still, as much as the rest of the game "usually" runs vanilla aside from the added things, it is very interesting for the impatient like me. I want to play some, maybe personally play around with the upgradeable ships from what I can of them, work on farming, advance the tiers beyond so far getting steel, ect.
  18. adoghost

    adoghost Active Member

    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    115
    Totally bacon
    Remy561 likes this.
  19. icycalm

    icycalm Post Master General

    Messages:
    951
    Likes Received:
    722
    Complaints about balance are laughable. All it says to me when someone complains about balance is that they don't even play RTSes and are just making something up to seem like they are knowledgeable. Balance is the pseudo-intellectual's number 1 thing to complain about. They think it makes them look smart, because it's complicated. But all you have to do is watch a few high level videos to see there's nothing MAJORLY wrong with balance. Could you improve it a little bit? Sure you could. For example the Astreus/Teleporter issue that Brian has been harping on for ages. And a few other little things like this. And I am sure the top players will have a few more suggestions I am not able to think up for myself because I haven't seen the game as deeply as they have.

    But even if NOTHING was EVER changed in the balance department, PA would be and remain an immensely deep and entertaining game for YEARS if not DECADES. Whoever denies this knows ****-all about RTSes, as far as I am concerned, and is a loser poser who is trying to appear smart.
  20. philoscience

    philoscience Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,022
    Likes Received:
    1,048
    It's not all bad. We made the front page of reddit yesterday. Top comments had 500+ upvotes and were very positive, while still highlighting some of the ongoing issues.

    http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/2g051l/hows_planetary_annihilation/

    There is a small camp of people who seem to somehow actively hate uber and PA. I never understand people like this but it's the internet what can you expect. Most reasonable RTS players seem to hail it as an incredible progress in the genre. I don't expect PA to have an explosive initial growth, but rather a gradual but steady increase as the game shines more and more and the competitive scene continues to grow. A great thing about PA is that it is just as fun, or even more fun for some, to watch as it is to play. I think the competitive scene will become a lifeblood for this game.
    Remy561 likes this.

Share This Page