Kevin if you're still reading these comments can you explain what you mean by 'the combat isn't exactly real-time'. Does that mean you can actually play it as a turn-based game or is it another real-time hybrid where time doesn't flow fast giving you time to think and plan?
From what you say in the review combat can get frenetic which implies this is not the case? Any chance of a clarification? Thanks in advance.
@Rashgod @rasputin177 My point was it is NOT an enhanced version. It's not a remake or even a re-design it's the same game with widescreen support.
A genuine remake with improved graphics and interface would score a lot more than 6. This comes across as fan mod not the work of professionals and therefore does not deserve a review at all.
Are they going to review every old game that's had a mod or two released for it?
@rasputin177 The problem here is they haven't reviewed the game they've reviewed the non enhancement and given it a score of 6 when the original game deserves a 9. People new to BG will think the games deserves a 6 (it's just how people are, you're never going to change it).
They should have done a news item on this and mentioned Overhaul haven't really done anything to it you don't get from mods. This wasn't worth a standalone review at all it just sullies the BG name.
@rasputin177 I loved the game when it came out. No high res graphics or major interface enhancements is not going to endear the game to modern gamers. They tweaked it, they didn't 'enhance' it. What have they been doing all this time?
As Bloodmist says, you can get the same for much less, I don't get your optimism about these people doing new games in the series when they've done pretty much sod all to this one but still want 20 dollars for it.
What is this current obsession with reviewing games that look about 30 years out of date? Are they trying to prove they are 'real gamers' by reviewing games that look totally pants?
I must be doing something wrong. I have a high end PC and all details maxxed and at high resolution and the graphics look pants. You can tell it's hi res with some things but the textures on a lot of things are low res like you'd expect to see on a 7 year old console.
Wait I just answered my own question. The game itself is okay, nothing special. Very disappointed in how it looks though. A hi res texture patch would be good.
I'm sadly resigned to the fact Kevin Van Ord reviews so many games he doesn't play any of them properly. After a few hours with this game I can confirm his review is a disgrace. He's the senior Editor so probably grabs every game that comes in that he likes the sound of.
Someone at Gamespot please have a word in your bosses ear. This guy is a disaster, he hates every game that he's played for five minutes then written a load of drivel on the back of it.
yeah, who cares, buy it, play it. Some will like it, some like me will most likely hate it, because i couldnt stand RE5 at all. Not because it was a bad RE game, just because i didnt like the gameplay mechanics at all , the wierd 3rd person POV, anything about it was horrid to me. Much better zombie games out there that piss all over this.
you shouldnt let a review get the better of your judgement, its just an opinion."
That really is the truth. I got an xbox 360 recently and checked out Gamespot reviews to see which games might be worth my time. Kevin VanOrd reviewed most of them, he seems to be Gamespots 'go to' guy when they need some copy slapped out and he hated every game I had on my list to check out.
He's a professional reviewer who doesn't like games. My personal theory is he has reviewed far too many and I suspect spends very little time on each as he is churning out tons of reviews every week.
Bottom line: ignore this crap. If you like the sound of the game or the concept, try to find a demo or maybe rent it. Don't listen to these sad sack 'professionals' who lost any interest they ever had in gaming a long time ago when it became a chore to them.
blueinheaven's comments