Yet another LOTM recommend me a strat game thread

[Asher]

You fail, LOTM. Threadjack noted.

Consider your wrist slapped, mister!

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Asher
You fail, LOTM. Threadjack noted.

Consider your wrist slapped, mister!

yeah, I forgot Kuci was a mod here.

if youd rather start a new thread about this, feel free.

[Asher]

I have no desire to discuss sites filled with boring people, and staff that post fabricated reviews.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Asher
I have no desire to discuss sites filled with boring people, and staff that post fabricated reviews.

You just did. Discuss Qto3 that is. You seem fine making accusations against them, but dont seem to want someone who knows the site (and gaming in general) better than I do, to answer your accusations.

[Asher]

I'm sorry, what would Trip know about whether the guy faked his review? He wouldn't.

However, people who have played Halo 3 and compared his preview with others found a lot of things very suspicious.

He either faked his review, or he's a complete moron. You can take your pick, but what Trip says won't change that.

And I'm not sure he appreciates you pulling him into this.

[Nikolai]

Can't you two take this somewhere else? Like the relevant thread? Or through PM?

[El_Cid]

Is it now a crime to dislike Halo3?

"when consoles rule the world of gaming, and all revenue flows into the mighty coffers of the big three, then those detractors will learn the meaning of pain....and how personaly i will make Tom Chick suffer for his blasphemy!!! "

To get back on topic LotM did you check out Microproses Sword of the Samurai?

Unless you really have something against the japanese(and some do for WW2 etc), I think you may find it a fun strat game.

[Asher]

Originally posted by El_Cid
Is it now a crime to dislike Halo3?

No, it's not that he didn't like it, it's that he got most of the fundamental basic facts wrong. I don't care about his opinions (they are subjective), but when the basic facts are wrong surrounding the game, and it's supposed to be a gaming site, questions are raised.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Nikolai
Can't you two take this somewhere else? Like the relevant thread? Or through PM?

Tell it to LOTM. A little birdie told me via PM he was not-so-subtly discussing me in this thread. It's his threadjack.

And LOTM doesn't get PMs. While I was banned and he was badmouthing me, I PMed him to ask him to stop since it's not right when I can't respond. He ignored the PM, only to reply to it about a month ago telling me to stop PMing him.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Asher
And LOTM doesn't get PMs. While I was banned and he was badmouthing me,

I was responding to people who were, explicitly or implicitly, discussing me.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Nikolai
Can't you two take this somewhere else? Like the relevant thread? Or through PM?

I wanted Jons opinion, and he was here.

If he dislikes my "pulling him in" Im sure he'll say so.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
see this thread from post 81 on

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=170434&perpage=30&pagenumber=3

1. "You don't need to explain who Tom Chick is. And there's a reason no gamers read his reviews.

The fact that he reviewed the game without playing multiplayer is suspicious. If he actually had a review copy, he'd have been able to play lots of online multiplayer with other reviewers who are on a special XBL. Further, he displays some profound ignorance of gaming history with his little speech about how Halo "proved console shooters could work, but Perfect Dark did that first". Goldeneye did it first, and Goldeneye was a far more popular game (and, IMO, better game) than Perfect Dark. He's also expecting a radical departure in gameplay from the previous Halo games? Is he ****ing crazy? Does he know how many people LOVE Halo as it is?

Sounds like a attention-grabbing "review".

2." No, I think the "gamers" on his site are more likely to be people like you. And no offense, but you're not exactly a "gamer" as is popularly used -- you do play games, sure, but typically you're 5-6 years behind the curve."

3. "The site looks second rate, just like Brad Wardell. The "review" is bad enough and suspect enough (it's been said by others at more reputable sites that they think the guy hasn't played Halo 3 at all) that it's worth avoiding."

4." From looking at that site, it seems to be predominantly about PC gaming. I can see why he's still bitter about Halo, then. Still, worthless site and review."

5. "Why would I post on such a worthless site? The guy's an unqualified bit actor who plays minor characters on TV shows, his reviews are awful (and likely dishonest, since he didn't get a review copy if he couldn't play it online), and the forums look vacant and boring. The fact that YOU recommend it for gaming purposes only cements it as a worthless site."

etc, etc, etc.

As Asher has said, I do visit that site, so I suppose I'm irrevocably biased.

Tom did say that what he wrote on his site wasn't technically a review... just his impressions on the SP side of the game.

Jon

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by El_Cid
Is it now a crime to dislike Halo3?

"when consoles rule the world of gaming, and all revenue flows into the mighty coffers of the big three, then those detractors will learn the meaning of pain....and how personaly i will make Tom Chick suffer for his blasphemy!!! "

To get back on topic LotM did you check out Microproses Sword of the Samurai?

Unless you really have something against the japanese(and some do for WW2 etc), I think you may find it a fun strat game.

I checked the Wiki, its a DOS game from 1989.
1. I dont want the agony of playing that on my XP machine (if I played it I would do so on my Win98 dino machine in the basement, but thats not set up now for various reasons)

2. I am, you know, trying to reach the point where I can speak more authoritatively about kinda current games. I included Populous and X-Com only cause of their fame and importance, and Harpoon, just cause Im interested in naval stuff.

[El_Cid]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


I checked the Wiki, its a DOS game from 1989.
1. I dont want the agony of playing that on my XP machine (if I played it I would do so on my Win98 dino machine in the basement, but thats not set up now for various reasons)

2. I am, you know, trying to reach the point where I can speak more authoritatively about kinda current games. I included Populous and X-Com only cause of their fame and importance, and Harpoon, just cause Im interested in naval stuff.

re 1. yes it's DOS and doesn't work well on XP(I've not tried it on DOSBox mind you) - i play it on my old p166. Still don't let this get in the way or you may miss out on a very interesting strat game, and the game Sid Meier cut his teeth on. Historicaly for strat games it's an important game(and I find, a very good one).

re 2. Yes thats good to do - i'm happy many of my friends have the latest hyped consoles so i can get to play them and confirm my correct viewpoint that games ARE being dumbed down, shortend, use graphics over content, and the eVil multi-national corps of game creation are killing what games could and should have become.

[Andemagne]

Re: Yet another LOTM recommend me a strat game thread

of that list (in #1 post): HoMM3, any day of the week
of any list: HoMM3