Jump to content

Pretty lame PC Gamer Review if you ask me (61/100)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply
http://www.pcgamer.com/football-manager-2015-review/

Honestly it seems shallow and skims over all the new features. And also you mean to tell me since it went live a few hours ago he has already totally play tested it? Not using the same beta we all were?

I laughed when he described the new scouting system with the attribute ranges as 'a totally uneccesary time-sink'

Amazing since it's been a feature us users have requested for years yet has led this reviewer to give a average review.

I despair, I really do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He loses me with the first paragraph comparing fmc in '14 to full fat game '15 and then even more when he gets bored scouting for a player and just googles one instead..

Idiot..

It's like playing minecraft and getting bored building castle so you just go download one instead... totally misses the point..

Idiot....

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look closely they have the BETA too. It'd be more effort for SI to manage 2 ME's.

Interesting, if not very in depth, review. I agree with all of the sentiment towards classic, as I love it dearly.

I can't help but thinking that basing a review primarily on the match engine, when it's in a BETA state, is a bit premature. That being said, I agree that the current ME (non live) is far too susceptible to crosses / cross field passes & long balls.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He loses me with the first paragraph comparing fmc in '14 to full fat game '15 and then even more when he gets bored scouting for a player and just googles one instead..

Idiot..

Exactly, what was that about? Worst opening sentence ever... but it does set the tone for the rest of his review i guess. I went the other way around; from full game to FMC for the first time and i was shocked too. Why would anyone compare two installments by playing different game modes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My comment on the review which I just posted:

Poor review, and I mean really poor. For some reason this reviewer believes that everyone plays classic mode like he does and is reviewing the main game through some very weird tinted glasses.

The attribute ranges on scouting is one of the most user requested features over the years and us people (aka the majority) who play the main FM version are delighted it's now in the game.

Seriously, who uses Google to check out good players? Whats the point of playing the game if you already know whos going to become the next Messi? It's like playing a puzzle game with a list of the answers in front of you. And yet this reviewer seems to believe 'everyone' plays this way.

Considering the ME is updated so frequently I don't know where you get the 'crosses are overpowered and direct football wins the day' rubbish from. I've been playing the beta and have no problem introducing a short passing game and doing very well.

Might I suggest this site actually tries to get a knowledgeable person to write this review as opposed to someone who obviously has very limited knowledge of Football Manager and it's user-base.

Already getting wound up, where do they get these people from?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly if he couldn't make a more refined approach work, it's because he sucks at tactics. My possession-based approach is working just fine and the vast majority of my goals do not involve crosses or direct passing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Must say I'm very surprised about the 'use google' issue in regards to scouting players. That's a new one on me! :D

Patch idea for April 1st 2015 - When you request a scout report on a player, the game launches your default browser and automatically pulls up a google search for the player in question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Feature request: Replace search box with Google search box.

You know. For scouting.

Patch idea for April 1st 2015 - When you request a scout report on a player, the game launches your default browser and automatically pulls up a google search for the player in question.

:lol::applause:

Two best comments of the week :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Google is great, I use it see to see what players look like before I decide whether or not I am allowed to fall in love with them (in the FM sense).

Amir Abrashi was one from last year, loved that kid and google brought us closer together.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Frankly if he couldn't make a more refined approach work, it's because he sucks at tactics. My possession-based approach is working just fine and the vast majority of my goals do not involve crosses or direct passing.

Yes, it's definitely his tactics! I have my Chelsea team playing lovely, silky passing football whilst winning most matches in the Beta. I might go and leave a review for him and tell him he should head to the tactics section of this forum :D:D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe EA paid them to say football manager was **** and give the new fifa manager a great review at the hope someone buys there game?

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

You're all too invested in this if reviews are annoying you, they're one guys opinion , don't get all upset because it differs from yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

You're all too invested in this if reviews are annoying you, they're one guys opinion , don't get all upset because it differs from yours.

It would be fine if he was just simply expressing his opinion on the game, more than once, however, he expresses his opinion as being shared by the majority of players. Pretty poor journalism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be fine if he was just simply expressing his opinion on the game, more than once, however, he expresses his opinion as being shared by the majority of players. Pretty poor journalism.

According to his Twitter he's very happy with how the review turned out, and we're all just 'haters'. Incredible, whatever happened to journalism standards?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing to the guy who reviewed the new Icewind Dale Enhanced Edition. (Icewind Dale, for those who don't know is a frighteningly complex RPG, cousin to Baldur's Gate.) The reviewer played it on super easy "Story Mode" to continue playing 'Tiny Tower' on his tablet at the same time. One of the devs on the official forums rather sniffily described the reviewer as "not really our target player".

Link to post
Share on other sites
According to his Twitter he's very happy with how the review turned out, and we're all just 'haters'. Incredible, whatever happened to journalism standards?

They're enthusiast press, not Pulitzer chasers. Seriously you're all acting like upset fanboys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
According to his Twitter he's very happy with how the review turned out, and we're all just 'haters'. Incredible, whatever happened to journalism standards?

He says he's a fan of the series, which I believe. A lot of the reviews written by people who aren't super familiar with FM are very "surface level," they don't really engage themselves with the game mechanics at all.

The match engine is worked on long after release, so I'm not fussed about that. At a broad stroke I like the new scouting changes, I definitely get what they were going for, but I also understand the complaint about scouting your targets creating a bit of a "timesink" factor if you're a perfectionist about it. There are tons of different playstyles in FM; I'm used to turning off press conferences, not being fussy about tactics, holidaying if I feel like I'm guaranteed midtable, but spending a lot of effort trawling through international lineups etc. for the right signing. I'll probably just get better at it as I keep playing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They're enthusiast press, not Pulitzer chasers. Seriously you're all acting like upset fanboys.

I'm not bothered what review the game gets, as long as I enjoy it and it sells enough copies to allow them to keep making them, that's as far are my caring goes.

But if you are going to review a game I think you should do it properly. I just think it's disappointing how journalism standards are falling as a whole, you only have to go on the Daily Mail website to see how far we've sunk in the past 10 years. It just aggravates me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They're enthusiast press, not Pulitzer chasers. Seriously you're all acting like upset fanboys.

Couldn't care less if it was his personal blog. But the fact that he contributed to a major gaming website where it will be read by many people, he needs to be called out for the inadequacy of his review.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Really? Some of us are just questioning the validity of the piece, not throwing around insults.

There are people writing emails of complaint ! :)

Anyway , granted he does say that he feels the google method is the method most people use, which I agree is strange , though I'm sure there are people who read World Football and read Guardian articles on the top 50 young players in world football etc and then buy them in FM etc , but w/e that's neither here nor there, what he does do is pull up points that have appeared in the other reviews as well.

Now granted there are only 16 reviews for FM15 compared to FM14 having 40+ , but even if you just compare the outlets that have to date reviewed both , the average is down to it;s lowest for a good number of years , and they are all echoing the same complaints.

EuroGamer (Italy , Protugal and Main site) 2014 - 80 2015 - 60

PC Gamer 2014 87 2015 61

MetroGameCentral 2014 - 80 2015 - 70

And so on and so forth. The changes to some parts of the UI, the tactics screen, media interaction and scouting/transfers are a common theme throughout the current reviews.

Rightly or wrongly the media haven't been as welcoming to FM as they have with every release since 2010 , and it's certainly something I've seen echoed on other gaming forums.

Ultimately it doesn't matter as we're all buying or have bought it already.

I'm not bothered what review the game gets, as long as I enjoy it and it sells enough copies to allow them to keep making them, that's as far are my caring goes.

But if you are going to review a game I think you should do it properly. I just think it's disappointing how journalism standards are falling as a whole, you only have to go on the Daily Mail website to see how far we've sunk in the past 10 years. It just aggravates me.

"He has a different opinion from me , therefore he is wrong"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont read many FM reviews, speccialy not in other language then my. But I dont read any in my langauge any more either, FM get worse and worse review here even if the game is better. Since feels like the people that are reviewing it thinks they play FIFA and just want to set up start lineup, simulate fast to first match and win thet game without have to do anything. And also think scouting, media etc is bad because they feel it take to long time. So the day they learn the differance between Football Manager and FIFA I will maybe read some again...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Eurogamer's review is much better, and gives proper reasons as to why it gives a 6/10.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-11-04-football-manager-2015-review

Absolutely agree. Eurogamer's review is a constructively critical piece offering solid reasons for the average review. If I were the editor of PC Gamer, I'd be embarrassed at the quality of the writing, or lack thereof, and the biased subjectivity of the reviewer. It's simply not proper journalism.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A very poorly written review.

Clearly PC Gamer have no quality control in place. Frankly embarrassing.

The guy clearly doesn't have the concentration span to appreciate the finer points of FM.

Should stick to reviewing shooters.

In fact, he came across as having a personal axe to grind, he's probably posted on here and been chewed up and spat out by some of our MODS :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd suggest people all write a comment... but that would be childish and naughty...

Come on mate, you act like you are new here. :D

I loved this bit....

"Things taking too long is a theme the theme of this year’s Football Manager. Scouting players now takes several attempts, during which their attributes are displayed as a range (eg: 10-15) that you gradually narrow down. It’s a totally unnecessary time sink. I spent two solid months researching duff right wingers before eventually giving up and googling for one, which lead me to the excellent looking Andrija Zivkovic in a fraction of the time. This is how most FM fans actually play, but instead of embracing this level of meta-knowledge, SI are acting like it doesn’t exist."

So how many people here got a telephone call from the reviewer asking how we played?

I never got that call and I also do not play like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He has a different opinion from me , therefore he is wrong"

That's not what I've said at all. In fact I think the Eurogamer review raises some solid points. I personally wouldn't score the game 6/10 but I respect their decision because they actually pointed out why. All the PC Gamer reviewer has done is say that he doesn't like the full-fat version of FM2015 because it's not as simple the FMC version of FM2014. That's a flawed argument in my humble opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only problem that I have with the Eurogamer review is the reviewer saying he will pour hundreds of hours into the game but he only scores it 60/100.

That is a bit silly to be honest, any game that can give you hundreds of hours of enjoyment is a winner, not many games these days will keep you going for 20 or 30 hours let alone hundreds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I read the Eurogamer review I felt that he reviewed or at least scored the game based on his opinions of the new features, UI etc. and not the game as a whole. Fundamentally FM is the same game as always, so from one year to the next having a 2 point drop in the score seems unjustifiable!

Link to post
Share on other sites
The only problem that I have with the Eurogamer review is the reviewer saying he will pour hundreds of hours into the game but he only scores it 60/100.

That is a bit silly to be honest, any game that can give you hundreds of hours of enjoyment is a winner, not many games these days will keep you going for 20 or 30 hours let alone hundreds.

Yeah I agree there, it's a strange position to be in though. I wasn't a massive fan of FM14 yet I've put 777 hours into it :)

There's no doubting that FM games are some of the best for value on the market, it just depends on whether you include whether the game is good value and consider that when you score it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...