BOGUS CS REVIEWS - Was: Re: IS COUNTERSTIKE WORTH THE MONEY?
CAP
The review of Counterstrike was basically OFF TARGET. The
box tells you what kind of game it is...add-on, not new.
The company did not inform potential buyers of the lack of
multiplayer capabilities.
The review stated that there was value added to multiplayer
with 130 maps. WHO CARES, Anyone can build their own maps.
Who has time to try out every map that was boxed in the
game anyway? The MAJOR issue concerning multiplayers was
not addressed: the nonexistence of new units in multiplayer
or even skirmish mode. Also the ability to save games in
multiplayer was not mentioned.
Guess it's just a ragtag person/group trying to make a
buck like everyone else. Would not even bother with the
sad reviews given by them for this game or any others.
Liam Jackson wrote:
>
> Check out a review online at:
> htXtp:/X/neXxusXgamiXng.XneXthoXsting.Xcom/revXieXXws/rXevieXws/coXuXnter.html
> Good Day.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
c...@clark.net
CAP on CoolTalk/NetMeeting
MERC on Kali/ICQ
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Liam Jackson
CAP and Fellow Gamers,
First of all, Mace stressed the fact that it was JUST an add-on
because there are many people out there who would not know the difference,
and who may have inadvertently purchased this product, and this fact should
be clarified right from the start.
Secondly, it takes a lot of time to create a map, and secondly, the
new maps are well done. They give you 130 Maps to use before you have to go
creating your own, and this is a major plus. If Maps meant nothing, why would
the Quake Map Packs be selling so well? Obviously people WANT extra maps, and
130 are included in the game. Are you saying Mace should not have brought
that fact up in the review?
I did not play the game extensively, for I did not review it.
Perhaps Mace did omit the lack of new troops in Multi-player mode. But being
able to save multi-player games is nothing new, nothing revolutionary. Should
Frank have added in his Ark Of Time that it allows you to save games? Or quit
without shutting off the computer? No. It's a given.
Just because you disagree with one review does not mean that all
reviews are "sad" and that we are a "rag-tag" group. I do not complain that
you disagree with our Counterstrike review, but I do become upset when you
make broad statements condemning our site and its entire content.
Finally, I noticed you blocked out the URL of the review by mixing
X's into it, like this:
htXtp:/X/neXxusXgamiXng.XneXthoXsting.Xcom/revXieXXws/rXevieXws/coXuXnter.htm
l. Why not let fellow gamers check out the site and the review and make their
own judgments. If the review is so bad, as you proclaim, why do you not let
other gamers check out the review, and let them see that you are correct? It
would only help your reputation.
Liam Jackson
Editor-in-Chief
http://nexusgaming.nethosting.com
ljac...@nexusgaming.nethosting.com
In article <335E19...@clark.net>, c...@clark.net says...
cap
Not intended to be a pissing contest.
Liam Jackson wrote:
>
> CAP and Fellow Gamers,
> First of all, Mace stressed the fact that it was JUST an add-on
> because there are many people out there who would not know the difference,
> and who may have inadvertently purchased this product, and this fact should
> be clarified right from the start.
---> I'll basically say the same thing in this paragraph as I said
in my original post quoted below. The box clearly states at the
front, top, left hand corner:
16 ADD-ON MISSIONS
The bottom, front:
COMPANION DISK TO THE MILLION-SELLING COMMAND & CONQUER RED ALERT
The back has various reminders as well. What WS did not mention
is the fact that new units were not supported via multi etc. Was
this mentioned in your review?
> Secondly, it takes a lot of time to create a map, and secondly, the
> new maps are well done. They give you 130 Maps to use before you have to go
> creating your own, and this is a major plus. If Maps meant nothing, why would
> the Quake Map Packs be selling so well? Obviously people WANT extra maps, and
> 130 are included in the game. Are you saying Mace should not have brought
> that fact up in the review?
---> Quality maps can be crreated in 1-2 hours once you get the
hang of it. One of the reasons there is an editor in RA is to make
maps to your liking, not to someone elses. 'Quak' is not the issue
and is a totally differnet type of game. I'd would get bored
running around shooting up the same stuff over and over myself.
> I did not play the game extensively, for I did not review it.
> Perhaps Mace did omit the lack of new troops in Multi-player mode. But being
> able to save multi-player games is nothing new, nothing revolutionary. Should
> Frank have added in his Ark Of Time that it allows you to save games? Or quit
> without shutting off the computer? No. It's a given.
---> The BIGGEST problem of CS is the fact that the new units can't be
played in multiplayer nor skirmish (exectp one sole map). And to top
it off you can't even build any of the new stuff in single missions.
As for saving in multi-player not being revolutionary????? GET WITH IT!
Ask ANY 'Net player what the biggest problem with 'Net play is...playing
a game for 30 mins or even 5 mins and getting disconnected!!! For what?
To start ALL OVER again? I'd say that "other" games "may" have this,
BUT for RA it's a first!
> Just because you disagree with one review does not mean that all
> reviews are "sad" and that we are a "rag-tag" group. I do not complain that
> you disagree with our Counterstrike review, but I do become upset when you
> make broad statements condemning our site and its entire content.
---> CS in general blows. Most postings to Usenet and mailing lists
echo
this. MOST people perceived the add-on disk as being "new life" to a
a game with its days numbered. Now, we just count the days for the new
Real-Time games coming from OTHER companies.
> Finally, I noticed you blocked out the URL of the review by mixing
> X's into it, like this:
> htXtp:/X/neXxusXgamiXng.XneXthoXsting.Xcom/revXieXXws/rXevieXws/coXuXnter.htm
> l. Why not let fellow gamers check out the site and the review and make their
> own judgments. If the review is so bad, as you proclaim, why do you not let
> other gamers check out the review, and let them see that you are correct? It
> would only help your reputation.
---> Ya it was intentional. I only advertise for the worthy. I decide
what IS and what is NOT. I don't want other people's time wasted. I'm
conducting a public service. So there is your answer.
I would suggest more time in Usenet for your writers and further
research into products. If a game is intented for 'Net play then I
would
at least want some kind of "review" on that aspect of the game instead
of just loading games up and playing it a couple of times.
Tyler Baker
> ---> Quality maps can be crreated in 1-2 hours once you get the
> hang of it. One of the reasons there is an editor in RA is to make
> maps to your liking, not to someone elses. 'Quak' is not the issue
> and is a totally differnet type of game. I'd would get bored
> running around shooting up the same stuff over and over myself.
Yah making 3D maps is a lot more difficult than making 2D maps. The
reason Quake is still very popular is because it is so extensible with
QuakeC and level design, so you can create all sorts of new weapons and
game behaviours. RA has rules.ini but it does not allow you anywhere
near the same amount of freedom as you have with QuakeC. Trust me, I
have been trying my best to do this with ultRA which can be found at
http://207.222.198.193/ultra.htm or http://207.222.198.193/start.htm as
of tomorrow. Now that people have started to get into editing the mix
files in RA, a lot of new mods that go farther than rules.ini will be
created. In the latest version of ultRA v1.8 (will be up sometime
tomorrow) a custom conquer.mix file is used to add icons to a lot of the
existing units that do not have icons as well as add some units like the
C&C Recon Bike and the Advanced Guard Tower which simply is not in
conquer.mix (inside main.mix on the RA CD) but is in a custom
conquer.mix that ch...@blc.edu made. All that Chuck did was extract the
data from C&C using MixMan and then import that data (after editing the
image frames a bit in Paint Shop Pro) into RA using RAMIXER 3.0.
> ---> The BIGGEST problem of CS is the fact that the new units can't be
> played in multiplayer nor skirmish (exectp one sole map). And to top
> it off you can't even build any of the new stuff in single missions.
> As for saving in multi-player not being revolutionary????? GET WITH IT!
> Ask ANY 'Net player what the biggest problem with 'Net play is...playing
> a game for 30 mins or even 5 mins and getting disconnected!!! For what?
> To start ALL OVER again? I'd say that "other" games "may" have this,
> BUT for RA it's a first!
>
Ahh stop whining about CS and just get an RA mod like ultRA or extRA or
else make your own. I find RA to be horribly designed and I only play
the mods these days as RA is totally boring now.
> > Just because you disagree with one review does not mean that all
> > reviews are "sad" and that we are a "rag-tag" group. I do not complain that
> > you disagree with our Counterstrike review, but I do become upset when you
> > make broad statements condemning our site and its entire content.
>
> ---> CS in general blows. Most postings to Usenet and mailing lists
> echo
> this. MOST people perceived the add-on disk as being "new life" to a
> a game with its days numbered. Now, we just count the days for the new
> Real-Time games coming from OTHER companies.
>
Well let me guess... Drum Roll please !!!!! Dark Reign? Well this
game is so hyped up that I am starting to be suspect of it all. Well
when I get it, I will make up my mind then.
ZTXjim
I must agree with Tyler. I can only picture somebody at WestWood
having a hissy fit when they found out about all of the editors and
such that people had made for C&C. Only that can explain the pains
they took to hide stuff. Thankfully a few cracks are forming in the
wall.
If they want to put a lockout for "official" single-player missions,
that's cool. But open the door for multiplayer games. I thinks
that's all we're looking for.
Jim
CAP
Tyler Baker attempted yet another spam:
>
"Quak" WAS/IS _NOT_ the issue.
- - - Blatant attempt at advertising A X E D - - -
> > ---> The BIGGEST problem of CS is the fact that the new units can't be
> > played in multiplayer nor skirmish (exectp one sole map). And to top
> > it off you can't even build any of the new stuff in single missions.
> > As for saving in multi-player not being revolutionary????? GET WITH IT!
> > Ask ANY 'Net player what the biggest problem with 'Net play is...playing
> > a game for 30 mins or even 5 mins and getting disconnected!!! For what?
> > To start ALL OVER again? I'd say that "other" games "may" have this,
> > BUT for RA it's a first!
> >
>
> Ahh stop whining about CS and just get an RA mod like ultRA or extRA or
> else make your own. I find RA to be horribly designed and I only play
> the mods these days as RA is totally boring now.
>
---> Tried the thing, no big woop. Don't see much support in the thing.
What little of it that exists will die soon, and you with it.
- - - A X E D - - -
>
> Well let me guess... Drum Roll please !!!!! Dark Reign? Well this
> game is so hyped up that I am starting to be suspect of it all. Well
> when I get it, I will make up my mind then.
---> First one to come to mind was WAR, Inc. Go on continue
with your little game.
- - - END OF STORY - - -
Tyler Baker
CAP wrote:
> > > ---> The BIGGEST problem of CS is the fact that the new units can't be
> > > played in multiplayer nor skirmish (exectp one sole map). And to top
> > > it off you can't even build any of the new stuff in single missions.
> > > As for saving in multi-player not being revolutionary????? GET WITH IT!
> > > Ask ANY 'Net player what the biggest problem with 'Net play is...playing
> > > a game for 30 mins or even 5 mins and getting disconnected!!! For what?
> > > To start ALL OVER again? I'd say that "other" games "may" have this,
> > > BUT for RA it's a first!
> > >
> >
> > else make your own. I find RA to be horribly designed and I only play
> > the mods these days as RA is totally boring now.
> >
>
> ---> Tried the thing, no big woop. Don't see much support in the thing.
> What little of it that exists will die soon, and you with it.
>
Geeze CAP there is not a ton of support cause it is FREE. I have seen
about 8 RA mods so far on the net that are a ton more fun than RA as it
is despite the splitting image icon problem. Oh yah, and in v1.8 the
icons will be fixed plus there will be recon bikes, and a lot of other
old C&C stuff. Very soon the rest of the mods will be using custom
conquer.mix files like ultRA, but then again you will probably still be
sending mail to WW at this time whining about CS, rather than trying all
the mods and having fun.
Well as for Dark Reign, several people have emailed me with info that if
what they are saying is true, Dark Reign will be a lot cooler than I
originally thought. I cannot disclose the info I was informed about
here as I was asked not to by the people who told me.
Hehe, ultRA will not die soon but I might if I do not take care of my
ulcer. Nonetheless it will die eventually as with a lot of people's
interest in RA as it is. In fact, many people have personally told me
that ultRA has made RA fun again for them and that they were going to
never touch RA again, until they got ultRA and now they are addicted
again. Once you find out all the cheese in RA, it simply is no fun
anymore and ultRA addresses these problems as well as adding a lot of
other new stuff. And yes even I will get bored of ultRA eventually, but
by that time I will be playing someone elses mod, or else Dark Reign and
then probably C&C2.
Well sorry CAP but I see no reason why people are so upset with
Counterstrike since most people bought it only on the hope and hype
everyone gave it before it was even released, plus the fact that you can
indeed now create totally new units using new graphics in RA on your
own. The recon bikes for v1.8 of ultRA are in fact from the old C&C
conquer.mix file. I did not do this but someone else did as some custom
graphics retouching also had to be done to make the pallette colors
match.
Also, if I remember correctly the guy at NexusGamingOnline had a good
article about Counterstrike and you raised some big stink about his
article for no reason. Now you are whining about Counterstrike again.
ultRA is FREE and always will be so I would not exactly consider me
advertising. I have a mailing list of over 150 people who have
positively enjoyed ultRA. I have not received one negative comment via
email about it. Yah some people did not like the earlier versions, but
it has come a long way since then. People who whine about support for
FREE products or add ons, I find lame. The ultRA docs are now about
100K I think in text. This is a lot and should be sufficient for most
people.
My point about this is Counterstrike had some cool single player
missions, and WW did not say anything about the special hero units being
available in multiplayer period. In fact, I knew 3 weeks before CS was
going to be released that the new units would not be available for
multiplayer. Apparently, you were out of the loop.
Tyler
Michael Davis
I agree with Liam Jackson.People should be free to make their own decision
on CS.Just because one person doesn't like like a review that doesn't mean
he can go blabbing on to everyone else and badmouthing his site.I own a Web
Site and we have a good review of counterstrike (if you want to read it go
to www.crystal.com.au/~davis/counterstrike.htm) and we in the process of
providing a players guide to every level. So CAP get a life! we all have
one.
As Liam said:"Why not let fellow gamers check out the site and the review
and make their own judgments. If the review is so bad, as you proclaim,
why do you not let other gamers check out the review, and let them see that
you are correct? It
would only help your reputation"
--
Michael Davis
Australian Gaming Center
Gaming like you have NEVER seen
Http://www.crystal.com.au/~davis
Tyler Baker
Michael Davis wrote:
>
> I agree with Liam Jackson.People should be free to make their own decision
> on CS.Just because one person doesn't like like a review that doesn't mean
> he can go blabbing on to everyone else and badmouthing his site.I own a Web
> Site and we have a good review of counterstrike (if you want to read it go
> to www.crystal.com.au/~davis/counterstrike.htm) and we in the process of
> providing a players guide to every level. So CAP get a life! we all have
> one.
> As Liam said:"Why not let fellow gamers check out the site and the review
> and make their own judgments. If the review is so bad, as you proclaim,
> why do you not let other gamers check out the review, and let them see that
> you are correct? It
> would only help your reputation"
>
Yah CAP just has something up his you know what. Some people could care
less about the single player missions, like me. However, others really
do enjoy the missions, and in that case CS is a good buy. But if you
like multiplayer and are bored with RA, then just get an RA mod like
ultRA, extRa, exCS, or okRA, RAApocolypse, or make one yourself.
Pretty soon, people will be making Star Wars RA or some mod like that as
messing with the mix files is no big deal now.
Tyler
CAP
On the subject of game reviews, here are a few sites
I've found with good stuff in them. And to answer
the question of Jane's 688i Hunter/Killer...
It's in there.
http://www.pcme.com/
http://www.cdmag.com/
http://www.ogr.com/
688i HUNTER/KILLER
http://www.cdmag.com/simulation_vault/688_preview/article.html
SUBSIM REVIEWS
http://www.computron.net/users/neal/SImreview5.HTML
I would include another site but this company does NOT
deserved a free ad from me. This company advertised
bogus information on a "new" patch for MW2: Mercs (V1.1)
on their plastic covering, magazine cover, in a paragraph
and CD-ROM. <STUPID ME>I spent $6.95 for this magazine/CD
combo with a patch that was not present on Activision's
web site and found out it was JUST MW2 1.1 patch!</STUPID ME>
Pissed off just by the fact that it is pretty hard to
make the same repeated mistake, I e-mailed the idiots from
this company for a refund since I had absolutely no use
for the magazine and ESPECIALLY crappy demos on the CD.
I never got a response from them
Just to give them another chance I Bcc'ed them on this
and if anyone wants the name of them I'd be more than
willing to pass it one to you.