posted 04-08-99 11:29 AM ET         

The SMAC review, on the other hand, was just sad. Lots of hipshot opinions without really going into depth about *why* he felt that way or *why* that opinion is valid or useful to anyone using that review as a basis for buying the game. ("Gee, I don't like the color red. Red sux.") Factual inaccuracies, as well, which may seem trivial but really eats away at his credibility for making any sort of informed statement about the game.

I've written theatre and movie reviews for newspapers before, and in my estimate this guy was shoddy. Whether you like or dislike the game is largely irrelevant; what matters is that your review helps the potential buyer make an informed decision about whether to spend her money. You could fit ten of this GameOver guy in Yin's little finger.

posted 04-08-99 11:30 AM ET            

Preliminarily, a clarification: There are two SMAC reviews, one gives an 87% and one gives a 91%. Interestingly, the poorer review gets top billing at the site.

Important to note that the reviews are "signed" by persons using handles, not real names. Consistent with that bit of informality, the reviews themselves strike me as amateurish and superficial, but I encourage you to read them for yourselves. I'm speaking of all of the reviews here.

All three reviews of CTP and SMAC were done by different persons. One important distinction between them is that the person reviewing CTP said that he was initially disappointed, but persevered to play through an entire game and, by hard work, discovered the differences that led him to like the game. By sharp contrast, the two persons reviewing SMAC at that site played the game very little before giving their reviews as is quite apparent from their descriptions of the game.

Examples: the main SMAC review (the 87% one) said that the Factions in SMAC were identical to the indistinct races in Civ II and had no personality. Really? That would come as a tremendous shock to persons that actually play SMAC. Similarly, the reivewer said the mindworms in SMAC were identical to barbarians in Civ and, tellingly, said that there were only land and sea versions of mindworms. This reveals that he never played the game even to the stage of researching Centauri PSI (Locusts) much less endured Planet's revolts later in the game. Other examples of his grossly superficial experience with the game abound, but suffice it to say that his failure to give much time or thought to the effort is manifest in his review. One presumes that if the CTP reviewer had given up as early as this fellow, then CTP's review would have read similarly.

All three reviews place tremendous emphasis on graphics, animation, sound, etc. IOW, window dressing, and not game play, seems to dominate the thoughts of these reviewers. The CTP reviewer devotes some time to praising stacked combat, but this is also one of the more controversial "mixed blessing" features of that game (i.e. the Phalanx kills Tank debate raging on the Apolyton boards). The CTP reviewer praises the combat stacking as an improvement, without hinting at it's dark side. Finally, all three reviews, to a greater or lesser degree, indicate that the reviewer was partially moved to prefer CTP and/or dislike SMAC out of a dislike for scifi settings. I hardly think it was appropriate to let that sort of personal bias reflect itself in the comparative analysis of the games.

posted 04-09-99 12:20 PM ET            

No game that, even after 3 patches, has as many bugs and inconsistencies as SMAC gets 97%. IMVHO it's a great game, I can bare the bugs and there is a lot of playability despite the flaws but enough with the over-enthusiastic hyperbole. Anyone would think it was console game!

The day publishers start producing games with the calibre and craftmanship suggested by such a score is the day yin26 will have to lay down his keyboard of right and mouse of justice and take up flower arranging.

I think he may have a few more decades of crusading ahead of him...

Cynically,

posted 04-09-99 12:24 PM ET            

Yeah your all right so lets lay down the last tile. SMAC is BETTER than CTP. SMAC has lots of bugs though BUT CTP has MORE. SMAC has BETTER gameplay. CTP is boring SMAC isn't

I rest my case,