Gamespot Review: 6.5

You have to understand that anyone reviewing the game in it's current state will be drasticaly lowering marks because of the connectivity issues. That is hardly fair of a review, but you can't quite review a game positively if can't even get a chance to play it to it's fullest.

Or in other words: Yes, the game right now isn't all that great, but only because you can't connect and play.

So Gamestop's royal F-UP even creates problems in lower review scores. Lovely.

my review of the game right now is 2/10. I'm waiting to be impressed though.

I can see the net connection problems being a complaint, but I don't see why not having a storylined campaign is such a critical thing for a game like this. Never usually play them anyway myself, and when games do have them people just complain they are way to short anyway.

Owwwwwww.

6.5, that's pretty dang harsh.

The review itself is very valid and I agree totally on the singleplayer front. I don't play multiplayer much but I can see online instability being a *major* deduction. No official and stable replay system, utterly unimaginatative singleplayer presentation... but a 6.5/10?

Maybe it is deserved but my gut reaction is that at worst Demigod earned a 7.0.

*shrug* Oh well, I hope GPG and Stardock just roll with this punch and work that much harder to enhance Demigod's shortcomings.

('-')y

They really don't get the whole thing,

Demigod is essentially a multiplayer game, that right now has connectivity problems that are known and are getting fixed.

Its like saying team fortress 2 sucks for the lack of single-player, thats totally bullshit.

The review is unfair, only one part of the game is not working, if you look at the whole thing youll see that demigod is unique.

Quoting guitarxe,

reply 1

You have to understand that anyone reviewing the game in it's current state will be drasticaly lowering marks because of the connectivity issues. That is hardly fair of a review, but you can't quite review a game positively if can't even get a chance to play it to it's fullest.

Or in other words: Yes, the game right now isn't all that great, but only because you can't connect and play.

Did anyone force Stardock to release the game months before it should have been? I believe they made the choice of when to release the game and many people have said that it was far too early.

If they spent another 3-6 months creating much needed content for the game and refining the technical issues. It would have easily gotten a very respectable review. I don't want the game to be bad, i spent my hard earned money on pre-ordering it. I have just constantly been disappointed with their lack of vision on this game. Hopefully after 6 months worth of patches + content patches I may be able to enjoy playing it... until then it's just a waiting game.

I agree with them I'd even give it a 2 or 3 out of 10.

Honestly I realy like the game and think I may really enjoy it later. But it's basicaly only a multiplayer game. And the multiplayer doesn't work. It's very sad and never should have been released in this state. I honestly thought Stardock was trying to not be like every other publisher rushing boxes of crap out the door to bump up their first quarter numbers but I suppose I was mistaken.

I can't say that I disagree with them. I do think that their review is a little early though. The lack of maps means little as they wind up being pretty epic matches.

Metacritic is where to go for reviews...

wow.

damn, unfair review

Same thing happened to Age of Booty PC review from IGN.

Quoting Chucrute,

reply 6

They really don't get the whole thing,

Demigod is essentially a multiplayer game

The review is unfair, only one part of the game is not working

I think you don't get it.

- As you said, Demigod is essentially a multiplayer game
- As you said, One part of the game is not working (the multiplayer connectivity is broken)

If the multiplayer is not working in a multiplayer game, why is the review unfair?

The video review at gamespot is much more fair I think.

Stardock forgot to bribe Gamespot for a good review.

Quoting Chucrute,

reply 6

They really don't get the whole thing,

Demigod is essentially a multiplayer game, that right now has connectivity problems that are known and are getting fixed.

Its like saying team fortress 2 sucks for the lack of single-player, thats totally bullshit.

The review is unfair, only one part of the game is not working, if you look at the whole thing youll see that demigod is unique.

^^ This is so true.

Since Demigod is clearly a multiplayer based game, the review does not do this game justice since the connectivity issues are hindering the multiplayer experience. With the issues already being addressed by Stardock, people just need to be patient and wait for all the kinks to get worked out. Rome was not built in a day. And the early release by Gamestop sure did not help the connection problems at all either.

As for the complaints about single player, this is pretty clear. Demigod is a multiplayer focused game, and Stardock did a great job making the multiplayer game (once you get in a game) absolutely amazing. I am pretty sure Demigod was not intended to focus on single-player, and that was evident to me after first browsing around the forums and the site.

Complaining about the lack of a more in-depth single player game shows the lack of research on the buying end. If you researched anything about the game, you would clearly see how the focus is a fun multiplayer experience.

Don't blindly buy a car and get mad at it for not being able to fly. It makes you look stupid.

About the review, I understand slightly where they are coming from, but I believe when the problems are fixed up, they should re-review the game to take this in account, and trust me, I know Stardock and GPG WILL fix whatever is wrong one way or another. About the maps, 8 does seem like a small number, but seeing the EXTREME detail put into each map and how each map changed how the game is played (from straight on head to head to a winding road that takes a long time to get back to ones own base). Think about other games like TF2, only 6 maps were there for release. Lastly, I can not understand why not having a campaign is such a huge issue. Sure, the story is interesting, but it is just a backstory for fluff and to explain why it is happening. Do people really want another RTS campaign such in AoE3 or RoL, extremely repetitive and only there for a story. I want to see games play TF2 getting points off for not having a single player campaign! /rant off

Lol, I lost faith in gamespot's review scores a long time ago, they are always overly critical of minor things that can / are / will be fixed in patches and drop scores 2-3 whole points based off of an otherwise good game, bring back the days of Jeff Gurstman

Quoting Chucrute,

reply 6

They really don't get the whole thing,

Demigod is essentially a multiplayer game, that right now has connectivity problems that are known and are getting fixed.

Its like saying team fortress 2 sucks for the lack of single-player, thats totally bullshit.

The review is unfair, only one part of the game is not working, if you look at the whole thing youll see that demigod is unique.

I agree with you and I'd like to state when does GameSpot ever fairly or view a game as a nonbiased reviewer (maybe when cash is passed, or I should say when its not and bad scores are given). This can be the same for any adventure game that goes through GameSpot or PCGamer (some of the worst ever reviews), its guaranteed to get stupid jokes like where is the dragons to kill (the PCGamer URU review), but you get my point. They always seem to send in reviewers that hate or don't even know what to look for in a particular genre of a game and give it the worst feedback they can think of. Why have a FPS braindead reviewer who likes to point and shoot only review something he never plays? Its a guarantee that he's going to score it low and be way off on what the game is really, or did he even really play it? This results in other people that actually take those reviews and base a decision on making a purchase or not, hurting sales and sometimes companies making their last game.

I don't even visit GameSpot, IGN, GameSpy and a couple others do to this fact. Noobtoob guys, even though they are not really that funny or entertaining to watch, they do usually have an open mind to whats being reviewed. Still they are a little biased at times and it does show in some of the reviews but nothing like the 3 mentioned above with scores out of wack. I still remember reading PCGamer reviewing a game I really enjoyed (Aura, I like adventure and rpg games) and he goes on saying, what is all this useless junk in this room and what the hell am I supposed to do with it. He continues on like this and gives it an extremely low score (under 10% I believe it was). Well adventure games are made to figure things out, solve puzzles, explore new worlds etc... he couldn't grasp this concept. Then you check out an adventure gaming site and they will have an completely opposite score.

I'd just ignore those sites and wait till things are running smooth and then see the true reviews start to popup.

Well, I have to say, with just getting DoW2, but being REALLY excited waiting to get DG, I can't help but compare the two: Putting asside how much I hate/dread the DRM/GFWL in DoW2, it had a pretty complete rulebook; a decent campain (that also helped me learn the game as I went); good skirmish with darn good AI; I never had a problem hosting or joining any game; and watching replays is as much fun to us (and help us learn) as playing the MP itself.

I like the core game of DG MUCH better than DoW2, and I wish it had all the stuff Dow2 has and that the stuff that it does have worked, I really do, but it does not, so you can't blame people for being disapointed. I would give it a 7 and hopefully with patches/updates in the comming months, it will be a 9, then I can recomend it to friends and give a couple for Christmas. But lets be honest, it's SURE not anywhere near a 9 in it's current state, and you can't base a review on what a game "may be like" in the future.

I know this game has some issues right now that shall be resolved in the near future, but let's be serious about it. Those fucktards from Gamespot shouldn't have given it 6.5. It deserves at least 7.5-8 on my part.

Yeah, I hope for a re-visit of it once the net stuff has been worked out. I imagine they have to rush these things out, being a major review site, but as it's been said by others, there have been many games that came off with tons of problems to start, and they've given them high marks anyway...

LOL its no wonder game companys relase unfinish games, you people seem to not even care the game is done and expect all games to come out broken to be fixed later.

One day there will be a class action lawsuit vrs a company and that will change everything, hell the goverment is already passing laws to force game companys to put there DRM info on boxs there free ride of raking idiots over the coals is coming to a end.

As far as the review score? more then fair, been stated already there is no real SP, its a MP with a broken MP how the hell would ANY profesional review give it high scores with the main part broken? regardless if its gonna be patched.

When I was working as a TA, I constantly had to explain to students that I was grading the programs that they turned in to me; not the amount of effort they put into it, not their ability to convince me that they really, REALLY understood what the teacher said, and certainly not the fact that they really knew how to write a better project and just hadn't managed it this time. By that standard, this is a fair score IMO. You can't enjoy a game that you can't play, and I don't think it's fair for the reviewer to review a game based on what the company might do to fix its gaping problems in the uncertain future. That said, I think a few things the reviewer complained about are just silly -- I'm glad to see a game that doesn't waste time on a single-player campaign, and I don't get what the problem is with "only" eight maps.

I enjoy Demigod, multiplayer games are lots of fun when I can get in one, and I hope that it'll eventually be a really great game. But in its current state, right now, it's just half-baked. I don't really care; I'm looking forward to seeing what we get after the oven has been on a bit longer.

Personally I could give two shits about a single player campaign, I mean if you were looking forward to the game you would have know it was for its multiplayer aspects. The game also just launched so of course the game is going to have a few problems, but please feel free to name a multiplayer game that has not had bugs when it first released.

That being said, I think Demigod is a great game and once the multiplayer bugs are fixed its going to be smooth sailing

The Forums Are Now Closed!

The content will remain as a historical reference, thank you.