IGN Review......

Great review, 8.9 still low.

4 days left for UK people
 
Here's the breakdown: http://pc.ign.com/articles/627/627218p5.html

Seems fair enough to me, the menus are pretty crap, but what menus are nice anyway?

He gave the graphics an 8.5 based on the fact that it won't look great if you don't have a state of the art machine? Can you say "duh"? Based on what I've seen I'd say they were a 9.0.
 
good review, and understandable score. few lows for the game but it's still stellar.
 
Lasting Appeal
Oh boy... loved ones of the editors here at IGN are going to have to say goodbye to quality time. All of that is going to be given to this game
Click to expand...
Shouldn't this be all that matters? The game is fun, so fun that they are addicted to it and that is all they will be doing.

All the "lows" don't really affect gameplay in any way.
 
yes but they have to rate the whole game. i think its fair.
 
Ennui said:
yes but they have to rate the whole game. i think its fair.
Click to expand...
It is fair, but the way it was weighed was not.
 
I can't buy it straight off because I just bought GTA :(
 
Hmm, I thought it would get higher, especially from IGN. I'm still buying it though. :thumbs:
 
ratings don`t matter that much, we all have played the demo and we know its going to rock hard....
 
not too worried about ratings, we all know this is an amzing game that will only get better once we get the full version.
 
I'm surprised they rated it only 8.9. IGN has a habit of overrating games (like GTA:SA - 9.9? c'mon...) and I thought BF2 would be no exception.

Their comment on graphics seems silly to me.

IGN said:
When all the details are turned up, Battlefield 2 look great but unless you have a state of the art machine, that probably won't be the case.
Click to expand...

First of all...this is true for lots of games...
Second of all...I have a mid-lvl computer and I have many of the settings on high, others on low and the game still looks very good.

Sound got a 9.0 but correct me if I'm wrong...the only MENTION this guy has is the music isn't the same as the original (or the original isn't included)? I thought that he'd mention the VOIP is about 10x better than Source's built in voice filter or go into SOME detail about the torrent of sound you hear on a raging battlefield...but whatever.

He also mentions maps as a big gripe on the first page. I think the settings are pretty accurate of what we'd find in an MEC/US or US/China clash. I don't know how Russia would come into play as a map like he mentioned...but from what I've seen of maps the settings vary and they look great. I can believe that some of the bigger maps could be kind of empty at 64 players in the middle of nowhere...but take a look at BF1942... If you lost your vehicle in the middle of El Al or Gazala...you had a solid 2+ minute walk to anywhere. He even says, "Still, what is available ranges from good to excellent."

He also kinda whines about conquest mode. He wishes there was a DM mode? Are you kidding me? That would probably be one of the crappiest DM games out there. Some people in the community are upset about no CTF...but I thought that sucked anyways. One guy could swoop in in a helo, drop his buddy real quick and get the flag and take off again flying quickly back to base. It would always just turn into a game of base camping (your own) and preparing an escape route.

Another hole in his review mentions the "Whack a Mole" syndrome that happens on less populated servers. That's what the scalable maps are for. 10 players shouldn't play on a 64 player map expecting a full, tight experience.

I agree that the auto-balance feature should be changed. It should pick from the Unnasigned category rather than at random. If nobody is unassigned then pick out of squads (not the squad leader).

Anyways. I think the score should be higher (not insanely high - maybe a solid 9.4 or 9.5). I wouldn't be surprised if GS reviews the game at almost the same score.
 
I knew it would get something like that. Like i said, it doesnt have enough changes or new features to warrant scoring a 9
 
I think what he ment by Looks bad if gfx arn't high or whatever just means that....
Look at HL2 even on Low it still look quite nice. On BF2 turn the terrain textures to low and holy crap it is...well...it don't look...umm..."that good". I guess thats what he ment but whatever I dun know\care.
 
AmishSlayer said:
Anyways. I think the score should be higher (not insanely high - maybe a solid 9.4 or 9.5). I wouldn't be surprised if GS reviews the game at almost the same score.
Click to expand...
Have you got the game or are you just judging on the demo like everyone else?
 
Sparta said:
Have you got the game or are you just judging on the demo like everyone else?
Click to expand...

I've played the game on a friend's computer. He was visiting from CA where he does design work for a web design company and also interns at Sony Pictures. A co-worker of his got his hands on a pre-release copy (that didn't really care about it) and I got to play it when my buddy visited.

Given I didn't get much time with it to make a review myself...but as far as I played I feel it deserved higher. Then again I'm hardly unbiased. I try to look at it as unbiased as possible but this type of game is probably my favorite and it's a welcome change to a summer full of boredom.
 
I rate my black screen and missing textures as... I'll be generous: 0.5 / 10
 
FictiousWill said:
I rate my black screen and missing textures as... I'll be generous: 0.5 / 10
Click to expand...
I rate your computer crap/10
 
FictiousWill said:
If only it was, then perhaps you'd be justified in being an asshole. :(
Click to expand...
There year is 2005, your graphics card is from the year 2000.
 
Nice review, but I don't see how they could only give it an 8.5/10 on gameplay. Just the demo alone has some of the best gameplay I have ever seen in a video game.
 
I can actually see GS rating this game better than IGN for once. We all know GS rates games extremely low and other games extremely high. I am guessing they reasonably give this game a 9.2. It could be possible, but it is highly doubtful.
 
I dont feel like reading it, since I dont believe anything people say in scored reviews... but can anyone tell me if there was any indcation that he played solo more or played in a squad more? If he rates 8.5/10 for gameplay I get the feeling he didnt play with real squads.
 
IGNs reviews are getting a little iffy lately. The Guild Wars review was odd in the opposite sense; the reviewer basically complained the entire time, then gave it a 9.0. Here, the reviewer says that the game is going to eat the editors' lives, and gives it an 8.9.

And yeah, I'm sure Gamespot will rate this one higher. They certainly raved in their recent preview. (And on this similar note of comparison, they gave Guild Wars a higher score than IGN as well.)
 
AmishSlayer said:
I've played the game on a friend's computer. He was visiting from CA where he does design work for a web design company and also interns at Sony Pictures. A co-worker of his got his hands on a pre-release copy (that didn't really care about it) and I got to play it when my buddy visited.

Given I didn't get much time with it to make a review myself...but as far as I played I feel it deserved higher. Then again I'm hardly unbiased. I try to look at it as unbiased as possible but this type of game is probably my favorite and it's a welcome change to a summer full of boredom.
Click to expand...
Well if you still haven't played the full game then you can't give an opinion based on the full product if you haven't played it all.
 
Mr. Redundant said:
http://files.filefront.com/Battlefield_2_Retail_Video_SE2;3893024;/fileinfo.html
335mb 30 minutes of game footage from BF2 pre-release (sent out early to certain peeps, clans, reviewers)
Click to expand...

I don't know if you guys saw this or not, I posted it long ago... but it could have been ignored due to it being posted in an old thread.

I think the full retail version looks absolutely Brilliant.
I heartily recommend this video to those on the edge of their seats waiting for BF2 ( like Amish and I ), it shows a lot of content, some cool fights etc, without having to dl the warez version of the game.

3 days people :) we can handle that, especially (as Amish said) since we have that awesome demo to tide us over.... I must say I am really glad they decided to release one, and earlier than the game release to boot!



that being said, the IGN score sounds about right.
the game isn't super blissfull without a decent squad.
in BF2 your squad really determines what kind of fun you have, and I am really thankful our HL2.net community has some of the coolest people around.
if it weren't for you teamworking moflos, I probably would also think BF2 was mediocre, or really good at best... instead of the best game I have ever played.

so again thanks to you guys, and I hope to see you on the real ranked battlefields (once we play them in unranked servers of course) once the game is released in a couple days!
much <3 :cheers:
 
Who cares? Its just a review...8.9 is still a pretty high score in my book.
 
Before I download the demo, will downloading a large file in the background affect my ping in CS:S?
 
JellyWorld said:
Before I download the demo, will downloading a large file in the background affect my ping in CS:S?
Click to expand...

Yep. Downloading any sized file will affect your ping. Only with a large file your ping will be crazy for a longer time.
 
Yeah, who cares what they give it. We still know it's a great game.
 
disapponted with the 'insanely high requirements' comments, remember a few weeks ago a ign editor was on the bf2 ign board answering questions on the full version they recieved, he said he played it maxed with 4aa on a x800pro, gig of ram and 3ghz p4. What happened to that?
 
Sparta said:
Well if you still haven't played the full game then you can't give an opinion based on the full product if you haven't played it all.
Click to expand...

I'm saying that based on the written review IGN put out it seems like they should've given it a higher score. I know I'm not in the position to make final opinions on the game.
 
Who cares what the rating is. They could have rated it 0/10 and I'd still get it. If I didn't get a demo first then I'd wait to see it in action. Since that's not the case I know exactly what I'm getting. Seems like some people treat this ambiguous ratings system as a contest to see who's d!ck is bigger. Oh yeah well the game I like is an 8.5er, oh yeah well mine is a 9.0!

Who cares. Besides, is this ign score really that bad?
 
good review ....but the review editor should be fired for lack of consistency...Jade Empire recieved a 9.9 ...almost a 10 full points higher than everyone else ...using that as an example, bf2 should have gotten a 7.9 everywhere else


IMHO, his most important point:


" suppose what I'm really sad about is that there aren't any objective modes like those found in the Return to Castle Wolfenstein games (modes where certain obstacles have to be overcome or destroyed before moving on in a level). These were always very interesting, and Battlefield 2 could have done an amazing job in implementing them."


objectives would have made this game THE multiplayer game
 
CptStern said:
good review ....but the review editor should be fired for lack of consistency...Jade Empire recieved a 9.9 ...almost a 10 full points higher than everyone else ...using that as an example, bf2 should have gotten a 7.9 everywhere else


IMHO, his most important point:


" suppose what I'm really sad about is that there aren't any objective modes like those found in the Return to Castle Wolfenstein games (modes where certain obstacles have to be overcome or destroyed before moving on in a level). These were always very interesting, and Battlefield 2 could have done an amazing job in implementing them."


objectives would have made this game THE multiplayer game
Click to expand...

There are objectives, you just are not forced to do them.
 
yeah website reviews dont really interest me, i'm more interested in the community response particurly from tomorrow onwards when the folks in the us and canada get it. I'm a bit disappointed that theres only 1 gamemode- conquest, although i really enjoy the mode, maybe a future patch will add some and ofcourse mods.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hectic Glenn
Kerbal Developers Depart Valve
Replies
4
Views
27K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
-smash-
Valve updated the customer review system for Steam
Replies
0
Views
16K
-smash-
-smash-
Hectic Glenn
Cold Case #1: Valve Voice Actress - October Moore
Replies
1
Views
18K
Gerzowktz
Gerzowktz
Omnomnick
Big VAC Bans + Changes For Steam Reviews! - ValveTime News Round-Up (20th September 2016)
Replies
1
Views
15K
Gerzowktz
Gerzowktz
Eejit
X-COM 2 announced, bugger off back to your Vaults
Replies
0
Views
2K
Eejit
Eejit
Back
Top