Tribes Review at 1UP

[Angelspit]

For some reason, reviews of the Tribes of the East expansion are taking a while to come up online. GameSpy, among others, is too busy playing <i>Gears of War, Call of Duty 4</i> and <i>Hellgate London</i>. However, 1UP posted <a href="/http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3164269">another short review</a> of the Orcish expansion, giving the game a 7 out of time and a fairly positive bottomline:



"Nival took Heroes V in a new, elaborately lush artistic direction, which remains as beautiful as ever -- and well connected to the Dark Messiah look -- in this expansion. General game performance is unfortunately unimproved, and things sometimes slow to a near-crawl on the tactical map. Ultimately, Tribes of the East manages to gobble time as effectively as any good Heroes installment; it's an impressive final outing for Heroes V -- and another strong showing from Nival."



Elsewhere, arturchix spotted a reference to the December edition of PC Zone UK, which gives the expansion a grade of 58%. The article itself is not available online.

If you would like to take a look at the original page visit this link:
https://www.celestialheavens.com/1194639122

[Elvin]

Nice review, does not repeat what the others said and makes some good points of its own. Short and to the point.

[rdeford]

I agree.

[Muszka]

Could have been longer, but after the other reviews this is a piece of art.

[jeff]

Interesting that the editor's gave it a 7, but the site average is a 6.2. Before anyone rolls in I have not voted there, and will not until I decide to buy it, which I have not done it even when it was reduced to 19.99.

[PhoenixReborn]

Interesting that the editor's gave it a 7, but the site average is a 6.2. Before anyone rolls in I have not voted there, and will not until I decide to buy it, which I have not done it even when it was reduced to 19.99.

What's really interesting is that on the same page it says user rating 5.5.

http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=31 ... ec=REVIEWS

The numbers are meaningless without knowing how many people are involved.

For example Metacritic gives an average score of 67 from 5 review sites, and 9.6 from 5 user voters.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platfor ... the%20east

They at least say how many votes are involved...but 5 votes is too few to be meaningful.

Gamespot has the best statistics in terms of large numbers:

Gamespot score 5.5,
critic score (avg of 3 sites) 6.5,
300 user votes 7.9

Reading the user reviews some people gave sympathy votes of 10 because they felt the gamespot review was harsh.

So even those numbers don't really mean a whole lot.

The upshot is that if you read enough fan reviews and site reviews you will know whether or not you want the game.

For example, you personally view the map editor as high in importance, but I can't think of a single review, fan or otherwise that talked about the map editor beyond acknowledging that exists (and incorrectly noting a lack of documentation in one case)...

[jeff]

What's really interesting is that on the same page it says user rating 5.5.

http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=31 ... ec=REVIEWS

The numbers are meaningless without knowing how many people are involved.

They at least say how many votes are involved...but 5 votes is too few to be meaningful.

Gamespot has the best statistics in terms of large numbers:

Gamespot score 5.5,
critic score (avg of 3 sites) 6.5,
300 user votes 7.9

You're right most of the stats are meaninless, which is why I said it is the peoples comments here that help me decide which way to go.

[VodevilX]

9.5/10 in a Hungarian gaming magazine

[Meandor]

Decent review. Imho it shows that we are not blind fanboys, it gives almost the same mark as IGN review yet we are not shouting wtf and so on.

[Moragauth]

Playing the goddamn game's demo should suffice to tell you if you want it or not. If you enjoyed HoF, ToTE is great. Trying to average out reviews etc. is an exercise in futility, unless you're completely new to the series.

[Elvin]

Not always and there is only so much you can see in a demo. For all you know you are shown the good part and the rest is broken.
The game could be perfect in every sense except have terrible balance and you would not know.

[Veldrynus]

Yeah, if the fanboy's fav game gets a good review, it's automatically "a piece of art", but when it gets some bashing, the writer is "obviously" a moron.

[Omega_Destroyer]

Truer words have never been spoken in this thread.

[PhoenixReborn]

Yeah, if the fanboy's fav game gets a good review, it's automatically "a piece of art", but when it gets some bashing, the writer is "obviously" a moron.

I don't think it's so easy.

The gamespot review has factual errors and things that show the reviewer does not actually know how to play the game. Just because someone knows how to play the game and says that review is bad does not make them a "fanboy". Your just throwing out labels to make people seem extreme.

There are fewer bugs on release, all the factions are playable, the artifacts have descriptions etc, there is even more content... and yet the game is getting worse reviews than heroes v original and hammers. It doesn't add up.

[Moragauth]

Doesn't take a 'fanboy' to find the Gamespot review deficient...

[Muszka]

One may find it subjective the 'piece of art' term, and may say that I'm a fan, but still this is a good review, at least better than the others, and I mean the quality of it. The other reviews were somekind of fictional, this one has more reality. True, it's short, so it can't be an excelent or a perfect review. It's just somewhere between good and average. The 'piece of art' was just a comparsion. The other reviews' problems were not the scores they had gave, it were the missing and unreal arguments.



A perfect review is Angelspit's Etherlords II review, that is a real 'piece of art'.