Winter Assault reviewed in german mags

[Citadel_Sealt]

Yep, in the October issues of all the german gaming magazines DoW:WA was tested and strangely enough got the same score in each of them:
- PC POWERPLAY 85% of 100%
- GAMESTAR 85% of 100% (Also got a Gold Award)
- PC GAMES 85% of 100%

It's a pretty good rating, since 100% isn't really reachable with the % system (would be the perfect game), no game ever got more than 93% I think.

I just own the Gamestar and only skipped through the other ones. So heres what Gamestar had to say:
In the review they are mostly full of praise for WA and generally talk about stuff we already know so I won't go into it, but one thing they mention is that the singleplayer campaign really improved. Missions are much more diverse,each takes quite some time to complete, some got little extra quests and the story is supposedly exiting too. Also: *Tiny Campaign Spoiler* The Imperial Guard and the Eldar actually seem to ally during the campaign.
One of the few things they critizised was that the AI and the pathfinding didn't improve much from the original.

And this is the Gamestars more detailed score:
Graphics: 8/10 Points
Sound: 9/10 Points
Balance: 8/10 Points
Atmosphere: 9/10 Points
Controls: 10/10 Points
Scope: 8/10 Points
Missiondesign: 9/10 Points
AI: 6/10 Points
Units: 9/10 Points
Campaign: 9/10 Points

Theres a video on the DVD too, but I didn't watch it yet, but I will update here if theres something of interest in it.

[Slow_Runner]

One of the few things they critizised was that the AI and the pathfinding didn't improve much from the original.

Oh well... maybe in 1.5 then ;).

Seems like good reviews though. Only three more weeks lads and lasses. :D

[General Blaze]

Oh yeaah...I'm definetely getting it, seeing as the Campaign is known to ROCK!!!


One of the few things they critizised was that the AI and the pathfinding didn't improve much from the original.

Should'nt be too bad. Maybe it'll be better than 1.3's AI. ;)

Edit: let me put it this way. Vanilla DOW's AI is 5/10. 1.3's AI is 4/10. Seeing as WA and 1.4's AI is 6/10, that's a good sign. :D

[LarkinVB]

TatatatAAA. Captain Thudmeizer : "AI mod team, assemble !!!"

[them apples]

that ai mod that can manage to make a game 7-8hours on harder :)

I played the entire day and eventually had to quit because of standstill,but i got the most points.

[MeatPacker]

Balance 8/10 is hopefully promising. I hope they understand the game well when they made that determination, and played all races and not just the imperial gaurd. Wonder how they would rate 1.3 balance?

[Chaos_Smurf]

well ui cant get much worse than 1.3 can it?
but 8/10 is pretty good...
come on UK PCGamer.... just one more day...
US got any mags comin out soon thatl have reviews in um?

[LarkinVB]

8/10 balance by Gamestar does translate into 4/10 to 9/10 possible real score. So take it with a grain of salt.

[The_Fallen]

Why the hell do germans always know when too review cool games and in the netherlands we ussually get crap.......
Sometimes I'd wish I was german or could know the full german language
**crying in a corner , still waiting for dow:wa whitout a review**

[Citadel_Sealt]

Okay, watched the video now, it was mostly about some details in the campaign. Got to hear a little bit of the IG Guardsmen Voices "GO,GO,GO!!!" and also the new Farseer voice mentioned in the other thread. One thing I noticed is that the Eldritch Storm now has a circle that marks the area of effect. (This IS new isn't it??)

Also, like Larkin said:
I wouldn't take the balance rating for certain, they probably only tested it for a few days, did some skirmisch battles against each other and thats it.
I doubt any of them really tested WA for real MP imbalances, like "guardian rushes",etc...

[Smit1000]

You gotta wonder... did they do this review on the demo THQ sent out.

I do not trust this review.

[Tiresias]

Chaos smurf i have the latest pcgamer, and it has a preview as I have posted. It was harldy likely to have a review since it will have gone to press a while ago.

[thudmeizer]

1.3's AI is 4/10Wow.. someone obviously hasn't installed the latest incarnation of our project since our AI is vastly superior to the vanilla one! By leaps and bounds..

Further, how the hell do they review an expansion THATS NOT OUT YET? Stupid marketters as per usual. WA AI got 6/10 ? Not surprising - when does a commercially-released AI ever get the attention a third-party one does? As long as Relic's new AI guys exported more functions then we'll have some real fun come late Sept. I don't expect them to have written any major new code in except to accomodate some low level IG manuevers.

[Druidika]

Gaming networks and magazines usually get review copies a few weeks before the game hits the shelves.

[Citadel_Sealt]

@smit1000

Oh? And why is that?
All the gaming magazines in Germany review WA and you think they're suspicious?

[Hostage]

watch the video!

[Rafta]

i read that review too. crap, they don't even really know the game.
gamestar IMHO is a crappy magazine, like all the other germans magazines too.
they got sticked to the single player campaign and didn't mention much about the online part or any news about it.
DoW is a multiplayer oriented game not a singleplayer game like C&C.

it's like testing UT2004 and writing about its singleplayer part! :yech:

[Smit1000]

The game has not yet gone gold, they can not have played the FULL version, and there is no such thing as a "Magazine" copy.

This review was done based on the one level for disorder and order.

Based on what will be the future demo.

It would be never unlikely that a producer would release a full version to be reviewed this early.

But hey, i could be wrong.

[Tranj]

The game has not yet gone gold, they can not have played the FULL version, and there is no such thing as a "Magazine" copy.

This review was done based on the one level for disorder and order.

Based on what will be the future demo.
This review was done on a full build, but it was not a final build of the game. Specifically there were a couple pathfinding bugs that were addressed after this review build that may have helped in that arena.

[Rafta]

like i said, crappy magazines!
how could they call themselves "professional" and give a score on a non-final version?!

[Smit1000]

This review was done on a full build, but it was not a final build of the game. Specifically there were a couple pathfinding bugs that were addressed after this review build that may have helped in that arena.

Ok, thank you for clearing that up. So if they had reviewed the final product...it could have gotten a better score? Thats very risky to me, for what really is a kind of beta game to be reviewed to the public.

Has this build been sent to all the normal magazines and internet game sites?

[Fuct]

lol?
Reviewing a game based on a nearly-finished full build is common practice. I can't think of a game that was reviewed in it's retail version. That's why most reviews (print and internet) are out before the game is released.

Get over it ;)

[Druidika]

As far as I know, magazines are only allowed to review non-final builds if they got the permission from the publisher, or if the build they reviewed is specifically called a review build, or review copy.

[DatonKallandor]

like i said, crappy magazines! how could they call themselves "professional" and give a score on a non-final version?!

EVERY magazine does that, unless the publishers try to screw them over and release a game without sending the magazines a copy.

Also, since the WA singleplayer is one of WAs strong points its obvious it gets reviewed in detail - especially since its common gamestar practice to adjust the multiplayer rating games get after seeing the feedback of the player base. You need thousands of people to find imbalances - if none get mentioned it means there are no too grave ones.


Daton

[Smit1000]

I do not know whether this is common practice or not. I know it is common practice to send mags and sites pre released games, before the release date.

But i thought these versions were the gold version, the complete version. It just makes common sense thats all. The last minute tweaking a game gets is sometimes the most important.

In this example, one of the main complaints was AI (path finding), but this will not be as such a problem in the final build. If they had reveiewed the final product, it may have gotten 90%+ or around that mark. That would increase sales.

Time is probably a factor.

But like i said, im just talking out of my ass :)

[thudmeizer]

Tranj - do you know if there were some AI optimizations or is that still hush-hush? Haven't seen Tacit and the gang in months. Regardless.. so looking forward to this expansion. Sept 19th seems too soon.. :bandit:

[TBS]

Some gaming mags will only review games that have gone gold but others will review earlier builds (so as to get their review out fastest).

[Demonhorde]

control and balance scored high... good to know!

[Schepp himself]

Common...it's just that...common. Imagine a game that hits the shelves only a couple of days after the mag. Waiting a month would be a major flaw in the producing(consumers of the mag want to know, and deserve to know, how the game already in the shelf is)

And WA getting 90% just because they tweaked the routefinding is rediculus. No game get's +5% just because of that. Maybe 1-2% if its crucial.

And in all honesty, even though we all wannt WA to get 101%, it's not gonna happen. It's not that revolutionary or a must buy for any gamer out there(which is what 90%+ reviews are meant to say)

So get over it and be happy they didn't find any major bugs or balance issues.

Greets
Schepp himself

P.S. Game mags cannot compete with self-testing.

[Smit1000]

Common...it's just that...common. Imagine a game that hits the shelves only a couple of days after the mag. Waiting a month would be a major flaw in the producing(consumers of the mag want to know, and deserve to know, how the game already in the shelf is)



Games are 90% of the time reveiwed a few days before the release day. These reviews are only in German magazines, not in the USA September issues, not in Australia's September issues (which i just brought, PC Gamer Australia, Septmber issue).

So these magazines will have the review AFTER the game is released.

Check IGN.com, they review games a few days before the release, not a month!

My point is, do not trust these early reviews.

[LarkinVB]

One of the few things they critizised was that the AI and the pathfinding didn't improve much from the original.


To be more specific they complained that the AI is still scripted ("enemy will always attack same placed, even if heavily defended by 10 turrets") so they definatly were NOT talking about the skirmish AI and we can't judge its quality.

Its a very positiv review, the game also received their "gold star award" , congrats to Relic and THQ.

[thudmeizer]

Well.. at least thats not OUR AI. :D v1.3 will fit quite nicely into WA.. lets just hope new functionality arrived as well.

[The_Fallen]

I really don't care about skirmisch cause I ussually I play online , I only play campaig skirmisch only when whole the network from the neighbourhood droppes out ( happesn liek once every year and ican live with ai rushing into my defenses)

[LarkinVB]

I don't care for online, just skirmish :-)

[General Blaze]

Canpaign mode if done very well, it will add extra replay value that vanilla DOW's campaign mode didn't have.

In this case, it's the Singleplayer campaign that I'm really looking forward to. :) They promised us a diverse campaign structure, and that's what I'm looking forward to.

[Tranj]

Some gaming mags will only review games that have gone gold but others will review earlier builds (so as to get their review out fastest).
Generally the difference is location based. European mags demand review copies much earlier than street dates, whereas US mags refuse non gold versions. It's pretty goofy to review anything not gold in my mind, but I don't run international marketing, so I let them do their thing. I don't know if the game would have gotten a beter score had they had the pathing fixes, but it's possible. The pathing is still not perfect, but it will be one of our highest priorites for improvement.

[LarkinVB]

Can you comment on the skirmish AI, Tranj ? Same as DoW with new race added or is it revamped ?

[TBS]

I know PC Gamer in the UK made a big deal about only reviewing gold games back when I used to read it (before I learned to rely on the internet...probably almost 10 years ago now).

The improved pathing may have given you a couple of extra points on AI but I doubt that getting 85% rather than 87% is going to put anyone off buying the game.

[Citadel_Sealt]

Well, they also say about the Campaign that the overall difficulty has been increased and that each mission can take up to two hours to complete, which probably is an effect of said increased difficulty. Sounds to me like this time we really get quite some playtime for our bucks.

And yes it's common practice here to test near gold betas, the reasons for this have already been mentioned,...more than once.
The last time some of the mags had to wait for a retail copy was for the test of Earth2160, since "Zuxxez" is a pissy bunch that takes personal offence from getting low scores for their games and from then on will try their darnest to sue anyones ass off who would even dare to think about printing a preview,or *gasp*....a screenshot.

[DatonKallandor]

Besides, Gamestar will adjust the score based on patches and retail version.


Daton

[LarkinVB]

Can you comment on the skirmish AI, Tranj ? Same as DoW with new race added or is it revamped ?


No answer can be an answer too ;-)

[shadowmage]

The other thing to consider is the lead time for magazine printing which is usually 2 to 3 months. So the build the german magazines reviewed is also a few months old.

[JaqTaar]

@Shadowmage:

This review was done on a full build, but it was not a final build of the game. Specifically there were a couple pathfinding bugs that were addressed after this review build that may have helped in that arena.
Doesn't sound like a month-old build to me. And I seriously doubt lead time is 2-3 months, at least not for monthly game magazines.

[Druidika]

The lead time - for Gamestar - is a week.

[Tranj]

No answer can be an answer too ;-)
No answer can also mean that we are so close to gold that I just didn't get a chance to answer. The AI is actually change a bit in 1.4, but it's not a complete overhaul. In skirmish it is more aggressive at the higher levels (kicks my ass).


The lead time - for Gamestar - is a week.
No, the lead time for any magazine printed at least on this planet is much longer than a week. The only reason we got the space in those mags was because it was scheduled long before hand.

[thudmeizer]

The AI is actually change a bit in 1.4, but it's not a complete overhaul. In skirmish it is more aggressive at the higher levels (kicks my ass).I'm holding to your words "actually change a bit" as being more AI functionality (ie. exported function calls) or a general increase in the # of IF and THENs. An Aggressive AI at higher levels, however, doesn't make em a smart one! General rule for AI RTSes: AIs can easily spam itself across a map **BUT** what is power without control? You have to know with what tools you will be able to circumvent a pro player. You can throw a hundred men out onto the field but without a strategy, massing can only take you so far. I do hope Tacit worked something out with your current "AI guy" and has some goodies under the new WA hood to further the DoW brain to the newer pedestal.