• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

The most pathetic review I have ever read

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
iTzDusty

iTzDusty

Grizzled Veteran
Aug 12, 2011
69
71
Vancouver, Canada
#1
Hope you feel like getting angry :

http://blog.machinima.com/insidegaming/2011/09/22/red-orchestra-2-heroes-of-stalingrad-review/

I know these guys have been major sellouts for a while, but have they really become THIS bad? This is in line with the G4 review of ROOST.

I mean, he thinks the delayed kill feed is a BUG. He also apparently thinks that a LOT of people can choose the sniper class, and that that ruins the game.

Bleh, I don't even want to go on. It just makes me mad thinking people like this guy get paid to write garbage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StuG_1944, Royalfork, Vegard and 6 others
#9
I agree, it's an unfair review, but is it really any worse than this:

[URL]http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/red-orchestra-heroes-of-stalingrad/1194575p1.html[/URL]

?

I mean, really, the game is about a 6 in it's current state, and if the bugs and crashes are fully fixed (meaning bugs & crashes, not awkward controls, cntrl key funkiness, etc.), about a 7-7.5. So, the way I look at it, this reviewer was closer to being fair and unbiased than Gamespy's reviewer was.

And btw, I think by "snipers," he meant "campers." You didn't have to have a scope to be a "sniper" in the first half of the 20th Century and prior.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Timppaface, Royalfork, Blainy and 3 others
Upvote 0
#10
My "favorite" review so far - it was actually incredibly similar to this one to the point where I wonder if this reviewer read the one I am talking about - was a review where the reviewer mistook the suppression bar as a regenerating health bar, and then went on to complain about how the health bar didn't work very well. Don't remember the site, but its always a good sign when the reviewer is getting basic game mechanics wrong.

As for the "sniper" thing, there is a certain type of gamer who considers anybody who dosen't shoot him from 5 feet away a "sniper." I usually don't like to complain about "cod kids" and whatever, as I find that sort of childish but there are certain people who earn the stereotype.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blainy, Makino and Amerikaner
Upvote 0
#12
iTzDusty said:
It just makes me mad thinking people like this guy get paid to write garbage.
Click to expand...

Paid? Don't be so sure. A lot of these guys get paid peanuts if anything to write this crap. You can tell from the complete lack of anything one might call journalist integrity. If the guy doesn't realise the delay on the kill feed is intentional, it means he hasn't done any research and as such is no better judge than any other slob off the street who has never played a game like this before.

These guys are "content manufacturers" not journalists. They don't care what the review says, as long as it gets page views. Hell, the URL even says "blog", and we all know every single one of those is full of ****.

Give him a week and he'll write the complete opposite review to get another load of page views. A hack has to earn a dime somehow.

Check it:

"this game in no way justifies its surprisingly high price."

Call of Duty
 
Upvote 0
#14
Some of his points are valid but the whole thing was very amateurishly written with some terrible arguments. Day of Defeat is ultra realistic? Then there's the condescending attitude towards the community as if we're all named obscure Eastern Front soldiers and ramble on endlessly about war trivia. And as dweeb pointed out, he apparently considers anyone killing him outside of close combat a "sniper".
 
Upvote 0
#15
I hate to say it - but if they did update Day of Defeat 3.1 I would have been back there in a flash - back in the day alot of us regarded RO1 as a poor cousin when the WON network was down. This games pace is just too slow. I can forgive the rest - but running for 10 minutes only to get KAR'ed in the leg by a prone rifleman in some rubble at your feet is less than entertaining.

Also one tank per side? Can't we have 4 or something? Didn't they have RPGs? Theres so much work still to be done on this....and with MW3 and Battlefield 3 on the horizon I worry about the playerbase for this game :(.

I am not expecting a perfect game for 40 bucks - but I would expect it to be better than DoD (10 dollars) which it isn't for me.

OMG what a bunch of haters - what was there not to like in my post?! I swear we should be able to see WHO gives bad rep so we can return the favour.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: StuG_1944, Kenza, Royalfork and 17 others
Upvote 0
#17
Herne said:
OMG what a bunch of haters - what was there not to like in my post?! I swear we should be able to see WHO gives bad rep so we can return the favour.
Click to expand...

I stopped playing popularity games when I left high school twenty years ago, so I didn't give you bad "rep" , but I can tell you why you got it. Because you took RO2 as being a new game, bought it, and are not too happy, while they are guys who have been waiting for the game for years, couldn't care less about the crappy arcade FPS games, and would rather not play with people who would even think of leaving RO2 for them.

They may even hate RO2... but it is in comparison to RO1, not CoD, or BF. Those games aren't even in the same league.

So that's why you got bad "rep". Because you appear to be exactly the kind of player they feared would show up if RO2 was not like RO1. You are being stereotyped and, essentially, bullied because of what you represent, rather than anything you have said or done.

It's meaningless bollocks, so don't even think about it. Anyone who cares enough to give or receive "rep" is going to be spending a lot of time with hurt feelings. Who needs that?
 
Upvote 0
#19
It appears my comment to the site is being blocked by admins or some such. Fair enough, imagine if one of their main reviewers was revealed as a colossal idiot. So, here is my post, I hope in lew of this the admins will allow the comment but, eh, what're you going to do?



Never before have I read a review of a game by someone so fantastically idiotic as this, congratulations, you deserve an award.
I almost stopped reading with, "I personally have enjoyed many ultra realistic shooters. I spent hours with Day of Defeat." What. The. ****. Day of Defeat is by all means a decent game, but it is a frantic run and gun style game, if you think that is ultra realistic, please, don't write any reviews. And yet then you say you enjoyed Flashpoint (I hope you mean flashpoint 1) whilst calling the gameplay in Ro2 a devolved "dual of patience", "never worth the time invested." Ro2 is fast paced compared to Flashpoint and Arma, so I don't know what point you are getting at there.

And as to your "getting sniped all the time" problem, I don't know what you were doing, but it sounds like you were running around like a headless chook trying to shoot entrenched enemies. This is a bad idea, even in the more arcade battlefield games I would never do this, you would have to be mentally disabled to attempt this tactic.

The controls are in no way complicated, wasd, crouch, crawl, sprint, aim and switch weapons, as found in, say, ANY fps released with the addition of a cover mechanic, all done with one button, if you are having trouble staying down behind a wall.

To be honest, it sounds like you played a grand total of 5 minutes, ran out, got shot, cried, attempted to troll (what are you, 13?) and then came on here to whine about how much the game sucks, rather than accepting your inadequacy. Maybe you should have thought twice about writing a review.

Sincerely, Sam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StuG_1944, Redemption, Archchunk and 1 other person
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu