PC Gamer game of the year: Ghost Recon

[dayglow 2]

I just picked up the new PC Gamer and they voted GR game of the year while at the sametime slagging OFP at every opertunity. Now when you read their comments they give there own valid opinnions on why: Found it more emersive (sound evironment) and liked the multiplayer better.

Now discuss

COLINMAN

[barret 0]

could u show me a link to the article..... I think maybe the guys at code ma7ers and the guy at bohemia interactive should jump on this.... Games like Meadl of honor always got bad grades untill their new verison came out.

[Antichrist 0]

PC Gamer is farking gay!!!!!

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 0]

PC Gamer CANNOT comment on GR without bashing OFP.

You will also notice in the Marsh issue of US PC Gamer a member of the US Army wrote them and told them that OFP was much more realistic and a better game. They replied only in sarcasm and making fun of OFP for having authentic radio. WTF is with PC Gamer. I just got a subscription and I hate them now. Its more Ads than articles, and its sooo biased.

[Antichrist 0]

PC GAMER are just sluts

they got paid by Red Storm to do this

[m16a2m203 0]

Try Computer Gaming World. Great Magazine. Haven't had a review steer me wrong yet.

[Guest]

PC Gamer is full of biased retards. They either got paid by Redstorm or love it's purty look'n graphics.

Computer Gameing World is the most trusted and impartial computer gaming mag you can find.

As M16A2 said CGW's reviews are always to the point and never miss a single detail.

[Chan 1]

Computer gaming world has been reviewing games for about 15 years now, so they know what they are doing.

PCGamer may be the world's best selling magazine(as it saids on the every issue cover) but it dosen't mean good reviews.

CGW also has alot more useful articles, columns, and game tips. Not to mention alot more fun to read.

[FetishFool 0]

I agree that PC Gamer had no right to bash OPF.

But it's all okay.

PC Gamer has always been biased.

Anyways, I like both GR and OPF. Not for the same reasons.

I'm going to go play GR now, though.

[Chan 1]

This might be a stupid question, but what does "biased" mean?

[Benze 0]

bi·as

n.

A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.

An unfair act or policy stemming from prejudice.

A statistical sampling or testing error caused by systematically favoring some outcomes over others.

It means PCGamer is falsely against OFP, a "reviewing error" by systematically favoring some outcomes over the others.

If you and your friend were on a court and a kid came up to you and said, "throw up the ball, and whoever catches it wins a dollar from the other person." If you threw it, you most likely would unfairly throw it toward your friend more, since you are "biased" toward your friend winning.

Not the best example, but bah.  

[SpaceAlex 0]

I hate this magazine's name and i hate this magazine even more.

Not only because of that ghost recon mistake

[RN Malboeuf 12]

Did you guys see Maxim PC (I think it was that one) they bashed OFP big time as well, they complained that it looked like Card board cut outs running around

I looked at the pics and they ran a cheap and cheasy system with no shadows, and it looked like pre version 1.0

talk about dumb fkers that don't even run the latest soft ware and hard ware

"ohh the game is boring, just a llot of running around...."

fking newbies I say

[4WDTaco 0]

What the? How can they choose Ghost Recon as Game of the Year?... I mean, didn't it come out like in October/November? So after 3 months of playing the game they decide that it's the game of the yr? Hmmmm, well damn, I'll wait to see what all other bad-ass games have and don't have and work on my development a little further and put it out on late December just to be Game of the Year. I mean, there were alot of games in 2001 that are good if not great games that were made with technology in 2001 not at the end of it. Hmmmm... anyways, I like Computer Gaming World better, I used to read PC Gamer but all the guys/gals sound like spoiled snobs there and if they can't save a million times and cheat on games then they won't like it. Laters.

[Guest]

Even if Operation Flashpoint never existed (god forbid!) Ghost Recon still sucks some major ass.

What is in the game that deserves GOTY? How is it original? What does it improve? How is it better than any other PC game released last year?

Answer, it isn't.

Ghost Recon is nothing more than Rainbow six with prettier graphics, slightly bigger maps, and less weapons.

IL-2Sturmovic, Medal of Honor, Operation Flashpoint,CivIII, ect are all mutch more original and way more fun games to play.

This GOTY was rigged by Redstorm just to give them an excuse to repakage Ghost Recon into a GOTY FOR BULL SHIT eddition so they can make more money.

And don't get me started on Redstorm's lack of user support for the community.....

[Goodsport 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FetishFool @ Feb. 07 2002,01:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I agree that PC Gamer had no right to bash OPF.

But it's all okay.

PC Gamer has always been biased.

Anyways, I like both GR and OPF.  Not for the same reasons.

I'm going to go play GR now, though.  <span id='postcolor'>

I haven't read the latest issue of PC Gamer yet, but if it's true that the magazine bashed OFP, that's pretty sad.

I also agree with you that both OPF and GR are really fun games, and they are different enough from each other for both to be worth owning and playing.

-G

[dayglow 2]

You have to remember that they are stating their preference. They have GR in the 'action game' catagory so they don't claim it's the most realistic game around. If you are looking for action, OFP isn't the greatest out there. Like they said, the first 2 missions, they didn't fire a shot. The same with Maxium PC, they didn't like the fact it was so realistic and couldn't go Rambo. Now if I wanted holywood action, OFP wouldn't provide it for me.

I have both games and I believe they both do what they set out to do. I agree with them that GR is a great game and with the patch even better, but I didn't like the fact that they dissid OFP like they did. OFP is one game that tried and succeeded to expand the horizon of gaming. It has some rough edges (I've had hell with the installation and corrupt files), but the huge evironment, the ability to do pretty much anything in that evironment except deform the terrain, and the awesome power of the mission editor, etc.. mean more to gaming than GR.

At the same time I don't think PC Gamer is getting paid under the table by Red Storm. That group of 5-10 editors simply like the GAME of GR better than OFP and I agree with them on some points. The evironment allthough smaller is more detailed. From the sound to the sights. The missions are very tight and well scripted. etc

In the end I feel I like OFP more just for the potential and depth of the game, but I don't let that stop me from enjoying GR. Hope this makes sense.

COLINMAN

[padome 0]

I just bought ofp and can't stop playing it. Its one of the best games I've ever played.

[Charlie_McSheenie 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DayGlow @ Feb. 07 2002,00:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I just picked up the new PC Gamer and they voted GR game of the year while at the sametime slagging OFP at every opertunity. Now when you read their comments they give there own valid opinnions on why: Found it more emersive (sound evironment) and liked the multiplayer better.

Now discuss

COLINMAN<span id='postcolor'>

This may be a little late in the discussion, but is this the US pc gamer?

if it is then its thoroughly understandable since they make the most boring, tedious and generally rubbish pc gaming magazine in america. the best one being that pc accelerator one, that one is class, almost better than UK pc gamer (although i haven't seen it in any px bookshop for a few years now, is it still being made?)

[Sandman 0]

I think GR is a good game, but not nearly as good as OFP.

And the Game of the Year title....I think Max Payne was pretty good (looked good, good sounds and good story) but OFP filled a hole in the gaming community. Nothing so "complete" have ever been done before (nothing that was any good anyways).

I can see why reviewers choose GR over OFP. If U play GR for 1 hour and then switch to OFP and play it 1 hour - first impressions lean towards GR for most reviewers. But if you really "penetrate" the game, looking at it in detail you can see that OFP is so much more than GR.

Problem is that most reviewers doesnt have that much time on their hands to do this "in-depth-review".

The fact that GR is compared with OFP by many people (not just reviewers) is soooooo wrong. They are not comparable. GR should be compared with SWAT3, R6-serie and maybe Delta Force series. OFP doesnt have an equal. Sure, U can compare certain bits and pieces of it to other games, but as a whole concept there´s nothing like it...

And the rumour that PCGamer is taking bribes from Red Storm - that probably true. But thats probably true for most computer magazines. Pesonally I dont look at reviews when I buy games, I play the demo before to make my own opinion of the game.

With todays information technology and communication possibilities the use of reviewing magazines is obsolete. It´s much easier to ask people in a forum (such as this) their opinion or download a demo than buying a magazine full of commercials and biased reviews.

[chickenman 0]

I bought OFP. Played it as often as I could over a fairly long period, and took ages to finish it.

I then started stuffing around with the mission editor, but without web access, I had no idea what I was doing, and none of the great custom made stuff that you can get now (well custom patterns).

I still play it a lot just stuffing around with the mission editor, blowing stuff up never gets boring. If it does, work out a new way to do it.

I bought Ghost recon. Played it till i finished it, which took maybe a day or three. I was very disappointed with the mission structure and even the story line, but I found the game play was okay, even if it tended to be easier if you went rambo style, and the whole specialist idea took a lot out of the character of the game.

After finishing it, i played the single player rogue spear style terrorist hunt type games which sucked and were completely boring and useless.

I lent the game to a friend and havent played it since.

In terms of value for money, long term playability and impact on my time infront of the computer, there is no way that ghost recon compares to ofp.

BTW- all media companies receive 'fringe benefits' from the things they are reveiwing. Restraunt writers eat free, wine tasters drink free, games reveiwers get games free, sports people go to sports things free... AS LONG AS THEY WRITE NICE SHIT IN THEIR ARTICLE.

Ghost recon people must have given them more incentives to like their product..........................

[Damage Inc 0]

PC Gamer is a s**tty magazine and the reviewers don't know anything about games.

[Enemy of the State 0]

u all read the wrong mag u should all read PC ZONE the best mag on in the world they review fairly and havent made a mistake yet on any of the reviews but my point is that they loved O F so much they did 2 previews and 2 reviews and they loved it soooo much they gave it 90% thats a good percentage in this mag and they still go on about it but i cant find the mag but im sure they had it as best game of the year and yes i think pc gamer is a pile of S**t and ill take them on any time any place at flashpoint.

[Damage Inc 0]

LOL, PC Zone is at least as bad as PC Gamer if not worse.

[dayglow 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sandman @ Feb. 07 2002,05:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The fact that GR is compared with OFP by many people (not just reviewers) is soooooo wrong. They are not comparable. GR should be compared with SWAT3, R6-serie and maybe Delta Force series. OFP doesnt have an equal. Sure, U can compare certain bits and pieces of it to other games, but as a whole concept there´s nothing like it...<span id='postcolor'>

I quite agree with this. The comparisions with OFP are wrong. The games take two very different paths. OFP simulates a modern battlefield using combined arms. GR on the other hand uses the premise of a little unattached recon platton and creates an action game out of it. This is what PC Gamer likes, they don't want the realism. Myself I like having the realism of OFP. I wish I had more control over my men in GR. In most FPS you carry 10 guns and run around shooting. With GR I have 6 men with different guns, but I have to control each one to use them to the most effectiveness. For me that's the same shit, different pile.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And the rumour that PCGamer is taking bribes from Red Storm - that probably true. But thats probably true for most computer magazines. Pesonally I dont look at reviews when I buy games, I play the demo before to make my own opinion of the game.

<span id='postcolor'>

This I dissagree with. I don't think that the PC business is rift with corruption. What it is is 10 individuals that have their own opinion. I didn't vote them in as PC gaming experts, so I read the reviews and see why they didn't like the game. If I agree with their points as well as reading other reviews to see if it's consistent as well as how the demo feels to me, then I make my choice. Case and point is Medal of Honour. The demo didn't really impress me all that much. But after reading the review, both in PC Gamer and CGW, plus others on the web I bought it. It is a great game and I'm really enjoying it. If I soully went by the demo I would have never bought it.

COLINMAN