GameSpot Gives Tribes a 5.5

Angelspit · Unread postby **Angelspit** » 20 Oct 2007, 07:05

Brett Todd at GameSpot wrote a <a href="/http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/her ... 94">review of the Tribes of th East expansion</a> that's more detailed than the IGN article. However, the game gets a body slam there with a score of 5.5 and harsh criticism towards the difficulty level and gameplay:

<i>"You really can't waste units in even a single battle on most maps, unless you enjoy spending a lot of time and energy rebuilding troop strength. So, say hello to trial and error, not to mention the frequent reloading of saves. This really bogs down missions; even roadside battles with garden-variety gryphons and liches can take so much out of your armies that you're constantly backtracking for reinforcements, or even worse, hitting the end-turn button to zip through weeks to reload recruits and shrines. It all combines to feel cheap instead of challenging. Nival may have been looking for a quick way to lengthen the levels and make everything feel tougher, but in actuality it simply amped up the tedium."</i>

The reviewer also notes similarities between some Stronghold units and existing creatures from other towns. the formulaic nature of scenarios, the lack of imaginativity behind the alternate upgrades and the lack of usefulness of blood rage and the sacrificial altar. The only positive comment is that gameplay is still addictive and Heroes veterans will enjoy getting more of the same (but arguably, newcomers who will be introduced to the series via this standalone expansion might not share this view). This article is a tough blow to Ubival, which saw the scores for its games go from 8.2 (GameSpot's <a href="/http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/her ... ml">review of the basic game</a> to 6.4 (<a href="/http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/her ... n">Hammers of Fate</a>) and now 5.5.

Is Tribes of the East really that hard and tedious?

If you would like to take a look at the original page visit this link:
https://www.celestialheavens.com/1192863928

agni77 · Unread postby **agni77** » 20 Oct 2007, 07:45

pretty much have to agree with him if you are a casual gamer, but the problem is that the repetitive, unoriginality IS THE WHOLE POINT for many fans. drastic changes, however original, will be a hard sell to its current fan base unless they make it a sequel, not an expansion. The review is like giving 5.5 to Star Wars digitally Mastered and scenes added version after giving 8.2 to star wars, and 6.4 to a version that simply cleaned out film grains.

anyway, i do agree that they wasted a good chance at making it very interesting with alternate upgrades allowing for an all-archer army for academy(L1~L7), all-melee army for stronghold, etc. that would have changed the dynamics greatly.

arturchix · Unread postby **arturchix** » 20 Oct 2007, 07:58

Since 1UP gave DM a 4 out of 10 I don't really care what the reviewers say because most of their reviews are just ridiculous. Of course, they can always argue that it's their own opinion. To me it looks like Ubisoft doesn't have lots of friendly reviewers in US. Just ignore them and evaluate yourself.

Meandor · Unread postby **Meandor** » 20 Oct 2007, 08:43

"This article is a tough blow to Ubival, which saw the scores for its games go from 8.2 (GameSpot's review of the basic game to 6.4 (Hammers of Fate) and now 5.5."

I don`t get this thing. Basic game is worth buying(8.2 score) but enchanted version(stand alone after all) is not?

Grumpy Old Wizard · Unread postby **Grumpy Old Wizard** » 20 Oct 2007, 09:27

The reviewer also notes similarities between some Stronghold units and existing creatures from other towns. the formulaic nature of scenarios, the lack of imaginativity behind the alternate upgrades and the lack of usefulness of blood rage and the sacrificial altar. The only positive comment is that gameplay is still addictive and Heroes veterans will enjoy getting more of the same (but arguably, newcomers who will be introduced to the series via this standalone expansion might not share this view).

To me there seems to be a wide variety of specials for the creatures. Sure, there are some creatures that share certain specials but they differ in other things.

Blood rage not useful? The reviewer doesn't have a clue about how to play the orcs then.

So he says the game is addictive (which to me means good) but slams it with a low score? Makes no sense.

The maps that I have played so far have been better done than in the original or HOF.

I think there are some balance issues that need to be addressed, but this is a good game and it is the review itself that should recieve a low score.

GOW

Elvin · Unread postby **Elvin** » 20 Oct 2007, 09:59

That's not serious on many levels.

Humakt · Unread postby **Humakt** » 20 Oct 2007, 10:01

Tribes of the East is an EXCELLENT expansion. This reviewer is lousy player and whiny type of person who can't take challenge. He should stick to the tutorials and Disciples for his strategy games, and STOP making reviews.

I got Beyond the Sword for Civ 4 that is very good expansion which has apparently got good reviews, but Tribes of the East is better with more impressive content and a faction that plays altogether different.

Tribes of the East is best expansion any HoMM game has ever had, period. Giving it lower score than 8 is a sign of stupidity.

Ryder · Unread postby **Ryder** » 20 Oct 2007, 10:49

I've lost a lot of respect for Gamespot recently.

CloudRiderX · Unread postby **CloudRiderX** » 20 Oct 2007, 11:21

He probably complains about the difficulty so much because he sucks at the game. It's not exactly something you can get good at in one review sitting.

While it may be true that the alternate upgrades are somewhat underdone, that is a very big advancement for an expansion, so when H6 rolls around, Ubi will probably perfect them there.

Orfinn · Unread postby **Orfinn** » 20 Oct 2007, 12:09

I hate reviewers soo much...

Nelgirith · Unread postby **Nelgirith** » 20 Oct 2007, 12:22

As an add-on, I think ToE deserves a better mark than HoF, but not too high either. Besides Arantir's campaign, the storyline is quite dull and the final map is way too difficult compared to the rest of the game. If the reviewer played that map, I agree with his view upon the game. Return, return, return, summon creatures, fight, return, return, return, return, summon creatures, fight, fight, return, return, rince and repeat.

As a stand-alone prodct (so for someone who doesn't own H5 and/or HoF), it deserves at least the same mark as basic H5 as I consider it being the best way to discover the game. The only major flaw in this is the lack of the H5 and HoF campaigns imo.

Infiltrator · Unread postby **Infiltrator** » 20 Oct 2007, 12:55

Although I haven't gotten tribes yet, he's obviously a noob at heroes looking at the review.

Moragauth · Unread postby **Moragauth** » 20 Oct 2007, 12:55

Incredible that idiots like this get to review for Gamespot. Ho hum.

However, if one has a look at the critic and user score, the game is in the region of 8.0 or so, which is where I'd rate it too. Simply put, the reviewer can be ignored.
Edited on Sat, Oct 20 2007, 08:57 by Moragauth

Ya5MieL · Unread postby **Ya5MieL** » 20 Oct 2007, 13:13

So H5 1.0 gets 8.2

TotE 3.0 gets 5.5.

I didn't realize version 1.0 was so great compared to TotE.

arturchix · Unread postby **arturchix** » 20 Oct 2007, 13:26

Normally I don't care but I wrote a little response in the Gamespot player reviews.

grimogre · Unread postby **grimogre** » 20 Oct 2007, 13:27

I put in a review of my own.I suggested that UBISOFT put in a BABY difficulty for REVIEWERS:)

ThunderTitan · Unread postby **ThunderTitan** » 20 Oct 2007, 13:56

Harsh review...

also, what's with the "Same as last Year" thing? It's a damn expansion, how much can you change the damned game mechanics?!

Angelspit · Unread postby **Angelspit** » 20 Oct 2007, 14:07

Gaming sites should stop reviewing expansions altogether. Why bother?

Nebs · Unread postby **Nebs** » 20 Oct 2007, 14:12

grimogre wrote:I put in a review of my own.I suggested that UBISOFT put in a BABY difficulty for REVIEWERS:)

arturchix wrote:Normally I don't care but I wrote a little response in the Gamespot player reviews.

Read it. Great write up. Though, grade is a bit...ambitious.

Ah, hell, I'd give it atleast 9.

arturchix · Unread postby **arturchix** » 20 Oct 2007, 14:13

Ain't it funny that Gamespot blames an expansion to feel identical in style to the original game?

Read it. Great write up. Though, grade is a bit...ambitious.

I agree, I'd normally give it 9 as well but I just couldn't resist to finish my rant with a 10 out of 10.

The Heroes Round Table