Combat Mission Shock Force - PANNED !!

[Maple Tree]

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/combatmissionshockforce

Only 65 points for CMSF at Meta-Critic, looks like it is not worth buying !!

[Vincenzo Beretta]

> http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/combatmissionshockforce
>
> Only 65 points for CMSF at Meta-Critic, looks like it is not worth buying
> !!

and 4.1 on 10 from users (let's not forget that among the "critics" there
are "the 8 out of 8s"...)

[Giftzwerg]

In article <fEQEi.11913$Th1....@tornado.fastwebnet.it>,
rec...@hotmail.com says...

I enjoyed the terse review that went, "buggy, crashing, features
missing."

Yup.

--
Giftzwerg
***
"You permitted Bush to complete his first term, and stranger still,
chose him for a second term, which gave him a clear mandate from you -
with your full knowledge and consent - to continue to murder our people
in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then you claim to be innocent!"
- Osama bin Laden
"Yup. Sounds like every other dumb fucking moonbat in the pueblo."
- Giftzwerg

[kev9000]

The older one gets, the less patient one gets I find.

This is my new wargaming purchasing technique.

Let a game come out. See what state it's in. If there are big
problems, forget about it. Completely. It could take years to sort
out, including sorting out the bugs injected by the patches.

If it's in reasonable shape, take a watching brief for a couple of
patches. Then take another look.

If it's from AGEOD or Panther or (mostly) SSG, buy it. It'll be good
quality and I pay to support their efforts as opposed to buying their
titles.

Saves time and money. I recommend the technique.

This is not being a fanboy. This is being short on time.