The Supreme Commander GamePro review score bribe scandal |
Ó
We all know that it's common promotional practice to send advance copies of their games to Gaming publications for review. But to accept a bribe to give a game a low score? That's something else right there.An article on Gameworld Network glances over the buzz surrounding the supposed controversial review of Supreme Commander written by GamePro's Australian division. What arises suspicion here is that most other reviews have given the game reasonable reviews. Scores average from 80 to 90 percent.
However, GamePro Australia's review gave the game a score of 5/10 with remarks like "virtually unplayable" and "saddest moment in history of the genre" found within the review.
The rumor is that Electronic Arts - whose Command and Conquer 3 ships at the end of the month - the competition of Supreme Commander developers Gas Powered Games, allegedly offered a large bribe to GamePro Australia in exchange for a low score for Supreme Commander.
It used to be the perception that companies paid for decent review scores for mediocre games they've made. Now it's much, much worse. Saddest moment in the history of the genre our asses. If this is rumor true, then it definitely doesn't look good for the whole industry.
The truly horrific part is that others are starting to think that this has happened before.
What about you folks? What games in recent memory do you think got an unreasonably low score? Who do you think was responsible for it?
Also, if you're interested at going over the recent rivalry between the two titles, click here.
Via GWN
Contact Us:
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - December
User Favorites - December
Categories
Archives
Accessories
Artwork
Betas, Testing
Deals
Demo
Drivers
Events
Featured Articles
Genre
Guides, Tips, and Tricks
Hardware
Humor
Interviews
Lore
Mods
News
Off Topic
On Shelves This Week
Opinions & Analysis
Patches
Previews
Reviews
Rumors
Scans
Screenshots
Site News
Steam
Titles
Utilities
Videos
Windows Live
XNA Studio Homebrew
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments
who reads gamepro anyways?
Yea gamepro is a S*** mag. I picked it up yesterday, as i was browsing magazines and spotted the Sup Com review. I exclaimed "WTF" out loud, after reading the 'virtually unplayble comment', put it down and bought a PC Powerplay. Thank god people are taking that shocker review seriously!
I mean, I gave a 1/10 for this game on gamespot. Thia game is crap, I love starcraft, warcraft, the westwood games, age of... games, but I really hate supreme commander, it's simply ugly and yes, unplayable. I mean, you always have to roll the view up and down so you can move your troops with strategy OR you can see them.. not the two of them at the same time... also, you HAVE to use the + key countless time if you want to play the game since it's sooooo slow for constructions. And on top of the that, the units are simply looking sooooo bad, I mean, robots? so overused and gay... C&C3 is way better, way faster, and way more beautifull and fun that supreme commander, lol, the building take 4-10 seconds to constuct and you can construct more than one at the same time. The thing is that you simply cannot afford a lot, so you gotta protect them, so C&C is a war of ressources, and that's way smarter. ( and more realistic too ). waiting for the complete C&C3 to pop :D
are you blind or you your computer is too old for this type of game. i have downloaded demos for sup com and c&c3 and i assure everyone, sup com is my choice. i have been long playing the CnC series, played each and everyone of them and CnC3 is just another sequel to the aging red alert 2 engine. zero hour fares better to sup com. and having wheel on mouse makes zooming in / out a breeze thus making the sup com game likely a world at war. sup com is a very nice game, the only CON thing is the resource hogging, but still playable with my core 2 e6600 and geforce 6600 256mb and ddr2 1gb memory.
loved gamepro during the nintendo-sega war days. but since the bad editor took over gamepro's rep is slowly going down the drain. nowadays i hardly visit 1up or buy their mag due to inconsistencies and biased articles. anyways gaming age does a better job even though they're somehow affiliated. gamespot is good too but they miss some good news.
If it's true that someone at Gamepro is taking bribes to bad mouth games, then that person needs to be fired and should hang up their controller. When you are a reviewer your not supposed to or shouldn't let money influence you decision on what you are talking about. For a person who is supposed to be a game reviewer to take a bribe (supposedly) to tank a game is repreheinsible. Gamers count on them to make sure they aren't buying a piece of crap. At the same time people shouldn't be taking bribes to boost a game that is crappy also. Hopefully the truth will come out. >^,,^
Sigh.... Senjetsu is just another 12 year old who can't write a review for crap...did you even bother to realizei n SupCom that you can assign multiple engineers to build a building? With 10 engineers building a factory you can produce it faster then you can produce it in C&C 3. Your a fool and understand nothing about RTS games or the elements involving them. Robots gay? Like I said...your 12 years old whos only negative adjectives are "gay"
I have played both demos and found C+C3 is really poorly put together just for the profit of it. I loved C+C series when Westwood was in control. EA sucks. They should stick w/ their baby-generation games like sims or pogo! Leave the RTS to Blizzard and GasPowers!
This is EA in a nut shall
@xche78x: 'based on the aging red alert 2 engine' what the ***** are you smoking man? C&C 3 is based on a combined engine of BFME2 and C&C Generals. The Red Alert 2 engine was dumped A LONG ASS TIME ago. It only looks somewhat like it because they designed it to be like that, to match the old Tiberium games. And now, I've played both demos and both have good qualities and bad. I personally wont be buying supreme commander just yet because the demo ran like ***** on my computer even with an AMD Athlon 64 3800+, 512 MB ATI Radeon X1300 and 2 GB of ram. and i barely got over 10-20 FPS. Also SupCom is VERY hard to play for a new RTS user, and it takes a lot of skill to go through it. Where as C&C3 can be picked up by anyone and in a few short minutes you can figure out how to play. All and all both games are good but they go to different groups of RTS fans. And to anyone who says C&C3 sucks go *****ing kill yourself because C&C3 is a really great game. Yea it's missing a few things but thats why we have mods.
its just you need to come in first.
Ok, it's true that Sup Comm is a resouce hog, but the point is that it is a revolutionary step forward in the RTS genre while tbh, i feel C&C 3 (im a fan btw) just takes the old and somewhat dated RTS mold and puts a new lick of paint on it. Good job EA! I don't think i've missed the old Westwood studios more... Sup Comm is not hard to understand, especially if you have experience with TA (no one has an excuse for not playing this amazing game), so i think people should stop their complaining and realise that games that require more than 4 IQ points have a *****ing learning curve to them. just for the record, senjutsu is just a *****ing retard and apparently has never played anything similar to TA, so as far as i am concerned his 'opinion' is moot.
To be honest, i bought c&c tiberium sun. I only bought it because a magazine i used to read (pc powerplay or something probably) gave it a score around 80 or 90 percent. For the sad few that actually got to play tiberium sun, you should know that it did not deserve such a high score. At that moment, back before i was even a teenager, and with no concept of the evil world of marketing and media, i decided in my own mind that magazine ratings were heavily biased by the amount of money being paid to the magazine. And if anyone thinks this doesn't happen... be realistic!
Can anyone confirm that bribe? There's like no evidence. If that IS true, the readers of GamePro Australia should know about it. (That'd probably wipe out the magazine ^^) About SupCom vs C&C: SupCom is pretty much the game I expected. (knowing TA and the new interface concept) If C&C also turns out "as expected", it will not stand a chance in comparison. I must admit I like hardcore gaming, I don't need "easy" or "normal" games. Thus, now that I know SupCom, I feel limited by any normal RTS command interface. Seriously, there is NO other game with anything like it! Just to name a few things: - Pointed zoom - Unit Range overlay, Radar overlay - You can move the control bar around on the screen (with the last patch there's also a small+transparent mode) - You can enqueue orders and modify them later (move the construction positions, delete, endless loop, add orders to a building before construction/upgrade is done...) - Automatic attack timing - Repair and reclaim patrol (no micro on workers!) - SPLIT SCREEN! DUAL MONITOR! Zoom on minimap! This REALLY feels different. In all the former C&C games, I was the clicking freak. In SupCom I *am* the Supreme Commander. It's still far from perfect, but better than what I'm used to. :) If they don't adapt their controls for the new C&C the game won't be too interesting for me.
5 out of 10 huh? yeah thats def wrong it dont deserve that this game looks like it was made in the 90s and the graphics suck for such a power hungry game I sold this game the day after i bought it its utter trash command and conquer 3 however is F****G awesome!
All that vhero's comment shows his inability to play and enjoy supcom. Most people that dislike SupCom are looking for simple games to play anyway with cheap thrills and no depth. Though CnC has a large following and the super hype that surrounds like a forcefield, it will get it a good to ok review. Supcom may have just gotten a bad review at gamepro because the reviewer was biased(like vhero and others above who've made comments because they cant play it it or dont have the skill), or the reviewer couldnt grasp how revolutionary Supreme Commander is... Supreme Commander is a step forward it adds depth to the genre, cnc 3 is a step backward it has everything that is tried and tested in the rts genre. Though you cant say CnC 3 is a bad game, its quick and somewhat fun though it feels like its been done before(which it has). And as an end note its better to keep an open mind and play both games and see which one you prefer but you cant really call either a bad game.
I don't understand why CnC has a large following, it just suck big time compared to TA. I agree with ungodlike that those players tend to become hostile to games where they can't really excel into. The comment "virtually unplayable" simply shows that they don't have the SKILL to play such games and opted to mark high scores to games so simple they're proud of. As a hardcore TA fan, i am hurt by the review of Gamepro for SupCom, I know what Chris Taylor's made of in term of his RTS, only RTS!! Forget his about RPG coz Dungeon Siege suck. Hope, he just concentrate on making SupCom much much more enjoyable in its expansion. To GamePro editors: All of You Suck!!
Supreme Commander's a really fun game with excellent strategy concept improvements over past RTS games. With that said, the comments made by the GamePro reviewers are completely accurate. The "virtually unplayable" comments that this game garnered were the result of IMMENSE computer resource allocation, and not the style of play. They weren't insulting the game's play style in the least, they were merely lamenting the requirements one must have in order to use this machine. It's the same lamentations that heralded the half-life 2 release. To be succinct, "It's a beautiful game, but it's so damn heavy, and unless your stuff is up-to-date you're gonna wanna stay clear." And to this, I completely agree- Supreme Commander, while beautiful, should probably be overlooked for some gamers who don't have dual-core processing, a good 256 video card and a gig or two of ram.
The thing about CnC3 and supcom is that comparing these games is just wrong .. cnc3 and supcom are not for the same kind of player.. cnc3 sets for playability, and therefore has a good control/"playing smoothness" (or whatever) ratio, while supcom is for people (such as myself) who like to be amazed with all the commanding options and find new ways to keep things under control.. i speak for myself, but most of supcom players actually SEARCH for that particular kind of RTS, as a lot of us tried and enjoyed TA, and as the game got old, we craved for a more modern title for the same type :) so i'd say that cnc3 and supcom are games that were produced not for different "playabilities", but for different players ...
Add New Comment