PC Roundup Review

Shadowgrounds Survivor, Mount & Blade, Sherlock Nemesis, Belief & Betrayal, Pro Cycling Manager.

Version tested: PC

Shadowgrounds Survivor

  • Developer: Frozenbyte
  • Publisher: Meridian4

A rather belated sequel to Frozenbyte's 2006 sci-fi shooter, Survivor still does little to mask the debt to Aliens and the many similar titles inspired by James Cameron's militaristic bug hunt over the years. Most notably, it's almost a dead ringer for Team 17's beloved Alien Breed, updated with a slinky graphical makeover and a light underlay of RPG levelling. This alone should make it of interest to many gamers of a certain age.

Set in the aftermath of an alien infestation at a human colony on Ganymede, you work your way through a streamlined story mode which sees you trekking from point to point in linear fashion, pausing only to grab as much ammo as you can carry before the next onslaught of snarling extra-terrestrial beasties appears.

It may not be intellectual, but it is ferociously satisfying thanks to a small but effective arsenal, which feels meaty and powerful as you bam-bam-bam shots into the advancing monsters, sending them staggering into bloody heaps. There's a tangible physicality to the combat which is more visceral than the top-down viewpoint might suggest. The physics are solid and dependable, giving each item of debris in your path its own sense of weight and momentum. It also gives you a small element of strategy, since short alternate paths can sometimes be found by wading through the lighter piles of trash. The lighting is great as well, resulting in a game that's atmospheric, especially when you bust out the flashlight to poke around in dark corners.

'PC Roundup' Screenshot 1

"The sausages just need a few more minutes," called Dad from the patio.

The upgrade system is simple, but just enough to make it more than a mindless fragfest. Each kill inches your EXP bar slightly higher, and each new level achieved gives you the option to spend your points on new skills or items - a motion tracker, for instance, or the ability to grapple with the larger boss aliens and try your luck at putting a bullet straight into the brain. Similar progression is applied your weapons, which can be improved by spending the tokens occasionally dropped by dead aliens. The skill tree is nicely paced, offering enough in the early stages to hook you, but ensuring that the really good stuff will always require some careful saving to attain.

The trouble is that Shadowgrounds was a game bursting with unrealised potential, and this sequel still leaves too much of that potential untouched. The continual lack of online play leaves a particularly obvious hole in the game's score sheet, since with some larger maps and more complex campaign objectives it has all the makings of a major cult hit. There are new features here - three characters to play as, some additional weapons - but despite marginal improvements the game is essentially the same as two years ago. Instead of taking things up a notch, it seems the developer seems happy to tread water. Shame.

7/10

Mount & Blade

  • Developer: Taleworlds
  • Publisher: Paradox Interactive

I wanted to like Mount & Blade more than I eventually did. I love the concept behind it, I applaud the attempts to shake up a genre that is rapidly settling into tired habits, and I'm drawn to its take on open-ended gameplay. But I'm getting ahead of myself...

Although it sounds like some new wonder product from Gillette, Mount & Blade is an RPG. Despite superficial similarities to other third-person role-players, it offers an admirably different brand of dice rolling. There's no story, for instance, or at least no pre-defined main quest to form the backbone of the experience. You create your character, set their base stats, and are dropped into the world of Calradia with a horse, basic weaponry and some goods to trade. What happens from there onwards is entirely up to you, not some scriptwriter.

Calradia is a feudal medieval world of the sort familiar to most RPG players, but there's another key difference here. There's no magic. No monsters. No fantasy elements at all. This is a realistic depiction of a fictional Middle Ages land, the sort of thing Tolkien would have come up with if he trimmed away all the orcs, dwarves and elves. There's an authenticity here, a maturity even, that suggests the genre may be ready to move on from adolescent monster mashing and into something with a bit more historical heft.

Classes and combat are also areas where expected systems fail to transpire. You choose a rudimentary backstory for your character, which helps to shape your initial abilities, but it's really up to you how you develop in the future, with no rigid class system telling you what you can and can't learn. Likewise, combat doesn't just rely on backstage stat rolls. A simple, effective mouse system puts a variety of offensive and defensive moves at your fingertips, which are realised with no small amount of swashbuckling flair. Damage dealt and received depends as much on the angle and speed of the attack - your skill, in other words - as the character's core statistics. You can also fight just as easily on horseback. Taking a galloping swipe at a bandit as you thunder past him or planting arrows in a pursuing soldier is immensely satisfying.

'PC Roundup' Screenshot 2

Two big horny brushes on your helmet - a sure sign of social status.

In concept, then, Mount & Blade has much to recommend to the RPG player looking for something different. In reality, these bold ideas are undersold by a poor game engine, which makes basic exploration and interaction an often thankless task. NPCs parrot the same lines of text, and although there are hundreds of towns and villages, most end up feeling like copies of the same place. Even something as simple as dismounting from your horse becomes a fiddle, as you shuffle about finding a spot of terrain that will let you get down, while the frankly terrible graphics engine does little to entice you deep enough to discover the game's robust trading opportunities and the epic battles that come when you build up your own army.

There are foundations here for something really quite special, but in its current state the game is nowhere close to delivering on its promises. With an enthusiastic community of mod builders and some shrewd patches from the developer, Mount & Blade could evolve into a game more deserving of your time. Right now, it's only suitable for those willing to make the best of a flawed experience.

5/10

Sherlock Holmes: Nemesis

  • Developer: Frogwares
  • Publisher: Ascaron

I always get a warm glow whenever Frogwares returns to 221b Baker Street. The indie developer has a long and fruitful history with Sherlock Holmes, and a proven knack for taking turn-of-the-century fiction and turning it into above-average adventure gaming. The results may never be superlative software, but it's always worth the effort.

This sequel to the Lovecraftian mystery of Sherlock Holmes: Awakened pits the legendary sleuth against another literary character of the era. Arsène Lupin is a brilliant gentleman thief, made famous (in France at least) by author Maurice Leblanc through a series of wild escapades. Making him butt heads with Sherlock is a minor stroke of genius, as the playful French burglar challenges Holmes to prevent him from mocking the English establishment through a sequence of audacious raids.

Quite apart from the cultural frisson provided by the rivalry between the English detective and his fancy French quarry, having Holmes on the trail of a master thief who delights in flaunting his daring makes for some great puzzles set in memorable locations. The game takes you through all manner of famous London landmarks, and the puzzles never feel arbitrary because of Lupin's flamboyant character.

'PC Roundup' Screenshot 3

Sherlock was very proud of his carpet, the first in London to come with an epilepsy warning.

The game uses the same 3D engine as Awakened, and Frogwares seems to have refined it somewhat since that fun but flawed effort. The game is better designed to work in three dimensions and, while pixel-hunts remain, investigation and deduction feels much more logical. The game also retains the sudden tests, where you must prove you've been paying attention by answering a question related to the mystery. It's still a rather crude interruption, but at least now if you get the answer wrong you can go back into the game and check your notes and clues.

Frogwares stumbled slightly with its recent Dracula adventure, a rather generic effort that lacked the usual period flair. Nemesis too is not without its rough patches, but still represents a return to form of sorts, another solid Sherlock adventure that showcases better understanding of character, narrative, structure and pace than most of its genre peers.

7/10

Belief & Betrayal

  • Developer: Artematica
  • Publisher: Lighthouse Interactive

Assuming you read everything in order, and don't just flit about between reviews like some wanton Bolshevik, you'll have just seen me praise Frogwares for their understanding of character, narrative, structure and pace. These are important elements for an adventure game and they're almost entirely lacking in this howlingly stupid point-and-clicker.

Little attempt is made to hide the fact that Belief & Betrayal would very much like to be seen as the unofficial, bargain basement version of The Da Vinci Code. Unfortunately, with a plot that involves secret Vatican spies and a lead character who is unbearably smug and unpleasant, the end result feels more like Hudson Hawk.

'PC Roundup' Screenshot 4

FIND OVEN. INSERT HEAD.

The plot is barely worth mentioning, which isn't good news for an adventure game. Our main character is Jonathan Danter, a glib journalist who discovers that his dead uncle wasn't really dead at all, but was an undercover agent for the Pope. Except now his uncle is dead - for real, this time - and with only an unidentified phone call from someone who claims to be a detective claiming his life is in danger, he jumps on a plane and embarks on a quest filled with mindless dialogue, inane puzzles and the oft-repeated exclamation "Cat's whiskers!"

Poorly translated and badly acted, there's little here to distract from the terrible gameplay. Dialogue is overlong, yet in all its prattle very little of substance is conveyed. The sole glimmers of interest are the ability to eventually swap to two other characters and advance three (stupid) plot threads at once, and the concept of including the character's thoughts as inventory items. This means, in theory, you can combine their ideas with the relevant items to solve problems. Of course, you're playing the game and have thoughts of your own, so while it's a nice gesture, it's ultimately pointless.

4/10

Pro Cycling Manager Season 2008: Le Tour de France

  • Developer: Cyanide Studio
  • Publisher: Focus Home Interactive

If you're surprised to learn that there's a sports management game based around cycling, imagine how surprised you'll be when you discover that this is the latest entry in a series that has been belching up yearly updates since 2001. This surprised.

You'd assume that a series which has been going for this long would have arrived in 2008 as a fairly well polished product, bristling with refinements and features accrued over years of development. Given that the 2008 model is an ugly and often impenetrable slog, with graphics that would look outdated on a 1994 educational CD-ROM, you have to wonder what it looked like eight years ago - and who the hell keeps buying them.

The aim is to manage a team of international cyclists through various events around the world with particular focus on the Tour de France, this being the officially endorsed game of the race. All the usual management sim options are here - all orbiting around the calendar that tells you which events are coming up and your inbox, where incoming messages update you on your team's status. Scouts can be sent around the globe to spot new upcoming talent, while riders can be encouraged out of their contracts to join your pedalling crew.

It's all presented through bland menus, bristling with opaque options. You really shouldn't need to refer to the instructions in order to understand the basic functionality of a management game, yet at all times Pro Cycling Manager feels more like a spreadsheet than entertainment software.

Still, the races themselves should brighten things up - or so you'd think. Events themselves take an age to load, with the loading bar dutifully informing you as it prepares terrain, textures and riders. Quite what it's actually doing during these long loads must remain a mystery, however, since the sight that awaits you on the other side is so laughably poor that it can't possibly justify all the hard-drive chugging.

'PC Roundup' Screenshot 5

The "no stoppies" rule was strictly enforced.

A featureless grey strip slices through a grubby green expanse. This is your countryside. From your aerial viewpoint, hundreds of identical cyclists bunch together, clipping through each other and generally merging into a weird bike-themed optical illusion. You can change the camera angle, but that just reveals their weirdly-shaped heads and torsos in even more grim detail.

Icons for all of your riders clutter the left of the screen, while tiny buttons across the bottom can be used to give them orders. You can set their effort as a percentage, getting them to move up the pack, and then tell them to hold their position or react to an aggressive overtaking manoeuvre. Heart rates must be monitored, water can be dished out, and yet it's all so...uninvolving.

If you're so deep into professional cycling that you'd want to play a game where you navigate sterile menus and tell other people how to ride bikes, then there may be some small morsels of enjoyment to be found here, provided you accept that your own enthusiasm will be picking up the slack for a drab and technically sloppy game.

3/10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy

Comments (55) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • penhalion #1 3 years ago

    Hasn't shadowgounds survivor been out for ages. I remember buying it on steam quite a while ago.
  • UncleLou #2 3 years ago

    Mount and Blade a 5? Wow. Judging by the comments on RPS, it really seems to be a love it or hate it game. I've been playing it on and off since 2005, and the battles alone make it easily an 8 or 9 for me. It has the by far best melee and horse combat of any game, and the metagame is like Pirates - only better.

    I can only recommend people who haven't played M&B yet to give it a fair try.
  • marilena #3 3 years ago

    With Lou on this one. I haven't payed the final version, but Mount & Blade was better than 5/10 even two years before release. I can't imagine they have made it worse over time, so I can only assume the reviewer didn't 'get' it. Always a debatable statement, I know, but the thing is I also didn't get it at first and fell in love with it on my second try. I had even made a caustic post about it on the forum, I felt like an idiot after that.
    Edited by 2 at 30/09/08 @ 11:49
  • DanWhitehead #4 3 years ago

    I can definitely see why people would fall in love with Mount & Blade. I really wanted to feel the same. It's just that in its current state the experience is far too clumsy for me to give it a hearty recommendation. I agree that people should try the free trial for themselves though.
  • Amajiro #5 3 years ago

    What version of M&B was reviewed?
  • Skurmedel #6 3 years ago

    I would give Mount & Blade an 8, kept me busy for at least a week straight.

    In the end I agree with UncleLou, everybody should give it an honest try. Not everybody will or can like it, but I'm sure some will find it very entertaining.
  • MrChuckles #7 3 years ago

    Btw, i played the best new PC game of the year at the weekend, get KING'S BOUNTY: THE LEGEND from the Atari website.

    It's like Heroes of Might and Magic but without the dreary castle management. You control 1 hero rather than splitting your time amongst 4 or 5 heroes with rubbish equipment, and the whole game is structured like an RPG, really highly recommended, it's driven me away from Warhammer.
  • mingster #8 3 years ago

    I've been hearing good stuff about Kings Bounty too..
  • hiddenranbir #9 3 years ago

    Round ups? Indepth please and criminal you have M&B a 5. Criminal.
  • DanWhitehead #10 3 years ago

    I would give Mount & Blade an 8, kept me busy for at least a week straight.

    A week of play doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for an open-ended role-playing game though.

    Remember, a Eurogamer 5/10 isn't the same as a similar score elsewhere. From the score guidelines, a 5/10 is "a game that had the potential to be good, but simply ended up saddled with a catalogue of issues that the majority of gamers will not put up with."

    That, to me, is Mount & Blade. As I said in the review, there's a ton of features that I really wanted to like. The combat is innovative and fun, and I applaud the attempts to move away from RPG cliches. But I know that if I gave it a 7 or higher then I'd be scoring it for its lofty ideas more than its often clunky execution, and that's not how I do things.
  • DoKtoR #11 3 years ago

    Yeah I quite liked Mount & Blade... I even had some mates that thought it was cool watching me joust the poor river pirates only to get hit square in the head by a sea raiders throwing axe in the next battle... good times! At least a 7/10... it was even Eurogamer that first introduced me to the game a couple of years ago :-)

    Shouldn't reviewers be praising indie game designers for not following the tried and tired structure found in most commercial games anyway?
    Edited by 1 at 30/09/08 @ 12:43
  • Empedocles #12 3 years ago

    Been playing M&B for 3 weeks solid now having bought a beta key, easily a 8/10 based on the combat alone - standing on top of a hill wioth you troops facing off a calvary charge is just magic.
  • shadaik #13 3 years ago

    You create your character, set their base stats, and are dropped into the world of Calradia with a horse, basic weaponry and some goods to trade. What happens from there onwards is entirely up to you, not some scriptwriter.
    In other words, it#s an MMO, just without M, M, and O?
  • TessaTickle #14 3 years ago

    Regarding M&B ... it's worth knowing that it's a two man effort, a one-man-one-woman effort to be exact. Some chap and his wife started this out on their own as a side project while they both have day jobs.
  • UncleLou #15 3 years ago

    I don't think M&B should necessarily judged by RPG standards. It doesn't tell an epic story, or is really that much about levelling up - like I mentioned, I think the metagame (silly term a bit, sorry) is more comparable to Pirates!, with the awesome battles coming on top of that. There's not much in gaming that compares to a skirmish in M&B, with you in the middle of it, on the back of a horse. The fact alone that they made something like shooting a bow from the back of a horse so much fun, and so well to control, is astonishing.

    That said, I've been hoping that other devs shamelessly rip off M&B's combat mechanics for their RPGs, but so far that hasn't happened, much to my amazement.
  • Bennicus #16 3 years ago

    I was sure M&B would've been an 8 or 9, it is for me at least
  • andromeda #17 3 years ago

    seriously , whats the point in these roundups of crap pc games?

  • UncleLou #18 3 years ago

    To annoy people like you. Job done!
  • Skurmedel #19 3 years ago

    "A week of play doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for an open-ended role-playing game though."

    Yes I can agree, but I'm talking 8 hours a day or more, it was like a third of my vacation. After that I had to stop since it wasn't my game.
    Edited by 1 at 30/09/08 @ 13:57
  • Trikk #20 3 years ago

    What a fucking bullshit review of M&B. Having played the game for something like half a decade, I can't help but think the reviewer spent an evening with the demo and then spent a day writing the review. It has some very rudimentary RPG-style features, yet it's pigeonholed as an RPG?

    The graphics and physics are shoddy, the rest of the game is excellent. There's no obvious Main Quest, which is neither a plus nor a minus. The combat is the best of any action game on any platform bar none. The tactics are simplistic but satisfying. You're not a general who lays out complex tactics over a battle map, more like a front line sergeant yelling orders to your troops.

    It's a great sandbox game, no matter if you want to play as a trader, lone wolf, slave master, archer or any other type of role you can think of in the skill-based character system. It's one of those games you dive into for a week straight, spending way too many hours with until something else comes along to grab your attention. Then you spend some time with the new game, realize it's over hyped bullshit and before you know it, you're back in the saddle, charging into four dozen foot soldiers with your elite cavalry.

    Like TESIII and TESIV, it's a great game on its own, but adding mods to the mix makes this a must-buy. Marking it down 3-4 points because the graphics are dated - it's a very old engine after all - is just bullshit and proof of how little a true gamer can rely on your reviews.
  • penhalion #21 3 years ago

    Yikes you guys need to get over yourselves. The review is one persons opinion. If it doesn't match your, then simply say you disagree and move on. When the heck did insults get introduced into things. that's what 4 year olds do when they are loosing an argument!
  • Silvervein #22 3 years ago

    I have to agree with general opinion about Mount and blade on this thread. I was playing different versions of it over the years, some of it modded (story mod comes to mind, it turned the game into really compelling experience: pity it's not compatibile with new versions), some not. It does fantastic job of placing player into role of medieval type mercenary vagabond (although there's nothing stopping you from becoming a merchant). Big highlight of the game are battles, which are marvellous. Untill you charge group of pikemen at the head of cavalry charge, or hold your ground with infantry as enemy cavalry charges at you, you saw nothing.
    As for the engine, it is basic, yes, but it's more than sufficient to show quite real looking environments, wounds on characters and best of all: it allows even big battles to take place without framerate problems, and that on computers that were not imported straight from USS Enterprise. Which are needed for games like crysis.
    Edited by 1 at 30/09/08 @ 14:59
  • UncleLou #23 3 years ago

    "Yikes you guys need to get over yourselves. The review is one persons opinion. If it doesn't match your, then simply say you disagree and move on. When the heck did insults get introduced into things. that's what 4 year olds do when they are loosing an argument!
    "

    Uh, what? I think you'll find that's what all of us did, with the exception of Trikk, maybe. Well, maybe we didn't move on, but we disagreed and gave reasons. I wasn't aware the comments section only was for console fanboy arguments.
  • Skurmedel #24 3 years ago

    Ok, yes maybe we should calm down a bit. Dan's writings is often good stuff... but you know how it is when you love something.
  • darc #25 3 years ago

    "A featureless grey strip slices through a grubby green expanse. This is your countryside. From your aerial viewpoint, hundreds of identical cyclists bunch together, clipping through each other and generally merging into a weird bike-themed optical illusion. You can change the camera angle, but that just reveals their weirdly-shaped heads and torsos in even more grim detail."

    Excepting the clipping, sounds just like the real thing. 10/10! :p
  • Zawath #26 3 years ago

    You can't really say that the Mount & Blade engine is terrible because it supports big battles of 100 men which is pretty impressive. Oblivion obviously has better graphics but the battles are also 10 times smaller.
  • Trikk #27 3 years ago

    The review is one persons opinion.

    And what is an opinion based on nothing worth? People don't read a review to get someone's opinion on how the screenshots look, they read a review to get an opinion on the game. The graphics are not great, but they do their job. I didn't see Duke Nukem 3D geta 3/10 for having outdated graphics. The criticism is inconsistent with what I've come to expect from an EG review, this sounds more like a random amateur's review of a demo.

    The main meat of Mount & Blade game play is given as much room as the features not in the game. There is no mention of the world map, where you spend a lot of your time. There's no mention of your troops, NPC companions, questing, sieges, tournaments, trading, etc, etc. I know these roundups are supposed to be short reviews, but if this review was my only exposure to the game I wouldn't have understood shit about how the game actually plays.

    The review simply does not do its job in explaining the game and sells it short by slapping on an unfair score based on superficial traits. That may be my opinion, but at least I can back it up with some substance.
  • hiddenranbir #28 3 years ago

    That's why round ups suck.

    EuroG needs more space for pointless news items like, "THIS IS WHAT SOME GUY SAID!"
  • JoeX111 #29 3 years ago

    "I LOVE Mount & Blade! Please vindicate my love of Mount & Blade! Your opinion is worthless if you do not love Mount & Blade!"

    Here's the thing. I like Mount and Blade too, but I'm also not going to blindly claim it is a 10 out of 10 game, nor will I say it is anywhere near perfect. It is a fun, if spotty, release and the reviewer called it as such. If you disagree, it doesn't mean his review is "wrong" or that he "only spent an evening playing the DEMO." It means his opinion is different from yours. Get over it.

    If the game is as perfect as you say, then one review isn't going to spell its doom, nor will a single reviewer ever knock it down a peg. You don't need to defend it. Unless part of you realizes the game isn't as good as you say. In which case, defend your insecurities away!
    Edited by 2 at 30/09/08 @ 17:11
  • Orange #30 3 years ago

    To only give Mount and Blade a 5/10 is shoddy reviewing, especially with no mention of the castle sieges, the massive battles against varying styles of army and the flexibility you have to create your own force (and not just an epic sized one), the npc heroes you can recruit, the armour, items and new mounts you can get as well. Sounds pretty much like you played it for a half an hour and saw a few easy chances to be dismissive, when anyone who actually bought the game or is interested in the genre would invest a lot more into it.
  • Feanor #31 3 years ago

    I give Mount & Blade 8/10 based only on the support shown for it here.
  • Goolz #32 3 years ago

    Did the reviewer even play the game (Mount & Blade) for more than 5mins?
  • darc #33 3 years ago

    "If the game is as perfect as you say, then one review isn't going to spell its doom, nor will a single reviewer ever knock it down a peg. You don't need to defend it. Unless part of you realizes the game isn't as good as you say. In which case, defend your insecurities away!"

    Don't waste a post like this here - it belongs in an XBox vs. PS3 thread! ;)
    Edited by 1 at 30/09/08 @ 19:02
  • Mechstra #34 3 years ago

    I dearly love Mount & Blade, warts and all, but the wolfpack response from some of the community who come onto review sites after it receives low scores is just ridiculous. And does nothing to sell the game to any third party who happens to stumble across the vitriol.
  • calexico #35 3 years ago

    The Test of Pro Cycling Manager is typically a test of someone who understood nothing to the game and who does'nt like this type. It's like to do a test of football manager to someone who hates football and gestion :p
  • Mechstra #36 3 years ago

    Although compared to the Pro Cycling Manager defendants they're positively civil.
  • AOFanboi #37 3 years ago

    M&B fanboys are worse than Apple freaks. And I say this as a MacBook Prop owner.
  • evilbert #38 3 years ago

    Have the Mount and Blade devs created multiple profiles on here just to put down the review? :)

    Joking, joking!

    I read the review of M&B (having never heard of it before now) and thought 'shame, sounds like an interesting concept' and disregarded it. Now, having read the comments and the rabid support it's getting, I'm off to download it!
  • Obiwanshinobi #39 3 years ago

    Mount and Blade obviously has not been reviewed on equal terms with the likes of TES. Perhaps it's just not "big" enough to get full-fledged review. I can't blame the reviewer for not praising this game to the skies. He's not paid for doing so. But isn't he paid for playing it a little bit further into than demo version allows? Maybe he's not. I'm not well aware about EG's policy concerning these roundups.
    Anyway, this so called review made me curious, and you apologists did the rest of reviewer's job, writting some more about game's content and justifying your opinions. Now I'm making some space on my HD, having shareware version downloaded right here.
    Edited by 2 at 30/09/08 @ 20:25
  • BlackKraken #40 3 years ago

    I started up mount and blade, went through character creation, and then saw the ugliness of the world. I thought "urgh, this is awful"

    Then (a little later on) i started fighting. As a (moderate) TES fan, ive been accustomed to god-awful combat.
    Every future RPG maker should play this game so they can get their combat systems right...

    Sure, this game isnt well implemented, but if only a few of the ideas from it are taken on by other developers then its release is a godsend.
  • UncleLou #41 3 years ago

    It's hilarious how people can't differentiate anymore between reasoned disagreement and fanboy reaction. Shocking lack of reading comprehension. They just read something, sense some disagreement, and offload a pre-fabricated, knee-jerk response. I really blame console gaming discussion culture - absolutely terrible.
  • Obiwanshinobi #42 3 years ago

    I really blame console gaming discussion culture - absolutely terrible.

    Roll on PC fanboyism vs. console fanobyism discussion. We'll have another discussion culture to blame.
    From what I know, people discussing pros and cons of different consoles, often discuss pros and cons of different PC games as well. Are they switching between discussion cultures?
    Edited by 1 at 30/09/08 @ 21:56
  • Shrike #43 3 years ago

    +1 to the Mount & Blade support. There are still a few problems - the sieges are a bit of a slog - but other than that, it's fantastic. I feel rewarded for the time I've spent with it. The combat is about as realistic as you could hope from a game, rewards you for preparation as well as risk-taking derring-do, and supports a really impressive range of play styles simply by creating a set of rules and applying them consistently. It definitely requires a little bit of imagination to flesh out the world at the moment, but there are great potential scenarios - the rebellions/succession wars you can start, for example.

    My only criticism is that after a while the fighting can come down to a bit of a disciplined science: when to pick off stragglers, when to bunch up, when to charge, where to stand. In that regard it is perhaps too close to reality; but that is also part of its charm. In many ways it is a game for people who want to get down on the ground in Total War and shout at people (while chopping off a few heads themselves.)
  • WJF #44 3 years ago

    Well after reading the responses to the M&B review, I'm going to give it a shot. Anything to distract from the massively disappointing SM Colonization 0.8
  • archonsod #45 3 years ago

    The main meat of Mount & Blade game play is given as much room as the features not in the game. There is no mention of the world map, where you spend a lot of your time.

    Well, if you want to pull the review apart on accuracy you could point out that you can dismount your horse anywhere as long as you remember to stop it first. Even in mid air if you abuse the physics system :p

    For me the big problem with the review is for some reason the game has been pegged as an RPG, when it's far more akin to Sid Meier's Pirates! sans ships. There's some elements of roleplaying there, but it's not quite the full shilling. If you're coming to the game expecting a Neverwinter Nights style romp then you'll be disappointed.
    It's a big point in favour for me though. Don't get me wrong, I love RPG's, but I find it impossible to really enjoy them unless I can get a good three or four hours together to really sink my teeth in (my ability to completely forget what I'm supposed to be doing, important plot points and similar no matter how many in game journal entries are provided doesn't help here). I don't need that with M&B though; it's the kind of game you can enjoy just as much playing in short bursts as you can with marathon sessions; you can hop in for a twenty minute Nord bash during your lunch break in a way you simply can't manage with The Witcher.
  • karstux #46 3 years ago

    The low score for M&B is sad because it's such a "small" game. As others mentioned, it's a two-men effort, as such a true indy game. Games of that scale don't get a lot of press exposure, and if that little bit of press that they get says it's "meh", it really hurts them.

    And even if you say that an "Eurogamer 5" is better than other reviewer's 5s: that accounts for nothing when scores are accumulated at Metacritic.

    It should have scored higher for its ambition, scope and for fairness's sake.
  • hiddenranbir #47 3 years ago

    I'd say majority of responses are reasonable. Not specifically at the scores but the fact there isn't much love for short quick 'round ups'. They don't provide as much coverage as high profile games, when in most cases, they deserve it much much more.

    Edited by 1 at 01/10/08 @ 10:58
  • Vinicity #48 3 years ago

    Please stop it with the Hudson Hawk hate. I mean it!
  • Orange #49 3 years ago

    I will defend Mount and Blade from a poor score as it's damn fine game which I would like to see others encouraged to play. With the vast amount of underwhelming and identikit games released each year something like M&B that offers a fun and interesting experience should be praised, especially as they do not have the publishing muscle to push for a proper review and score like the big boys can (and even to an unfair degree).
  • Trikk #50 3 years ago

    I even considered writing my own review here about the game but then I realized how incredibly lazy I am and would probably just end up trolling myself.
  • Stokkolm #51 3 years ago

    Mount & Blade is the only game that managed to gather a strong fan base without any trailers, screenshots and other marketing stuff. The players found the quality in the game on their own without being manipulated by massive hype, and they shared the game with their friends, until it became quite popular worldwide. I think that's a breakthrough in history of gaming. This review proves that reviewers are the most vulnerable to hype, and eurogamer is after all like any other gamng site: reviewing games based on hype rather than any of its contents.
  • YourMessageHere #52 3 years ago

    the concept of including the character's thoughts as inventory items. This means, in theory, you can combine their ideas with the relevant items to solve problems. Of course, you're playing the game and have thoughts of your own, so while it's a nice gesture, it's ultimately pointless.

    So, since this is a problem with every game ever made in which you play someone other than yourself and are required to think more than "align target in centre, pull switch", surely this effort ought to be praised rather than disregarded? I've not played this but the number of times when I've had to spend inordinate amounts of time doing something stupidly convoluted just so my character 'has an idea' that I thought of in about 3 seconds is larger than I would like by a huge margin (and is basically why I don't play adventure games). This sounds, on paper, like the closest thing to a solution yet found. Is it truly so shoddily done that it deserves to be dismissed in such cursory fashion?
  • Obiwanshinobi #53 3 years ago

    This review proves that reviewers are the most vulnerable to hype, and eurogamer is after all like any other gamng site: reviewing games based on hype rather than any of its contents.
    Hell, yeah! That will teach them, but please take a notice that fans' massive, reasonable response in comments made up for reviewer's supposed indolence and incompetence in truly homeostatic way. Thus evil forces once again got beaten to a pulp. Then only remaining problem's the score, contaminating, fouling, polluting Metacritic. Maybe such atrocity is just inevitable, for the sake of homeostasis.
  • gmjapan #54 3 years ago

    Seriously Mount&Blade a 5? For me its an easy 8 but that doesnt really cover the truth. M&B has outstanding combat. Simply outstanding but it has an interface bolted on to make a game out of this combat engine that doesnt match up.

    No mention of sieges, hero companions, tournaments or body matching impacts though. Its unmatched in galloping on horseback and slashing someones face; they scream and fall to the ground clutching their eyes or swipe them in the ribs with a heavy mace and they wobble off to that side, shoot their legs out with arrows and they crumple... Charging headlong into cavalry, lance couched while barking orders. Did we play the same game?
  • Farzlepot #55 3 years ago

    Is this what the PC has come to now? "Roundups" instead of proper reviews?