Bound By Flame - Will be 30 Hours Long

[greywolf00]

It's never about the length, just how good it is. And if it turns out to be nearly as decent as Mars: War logs is, well, that works for me. I've not played the Orcs game as of yet.

For me, length plays a role in the price I'm willing to pay. Considering all the games out there, and how often they go on sale, it's easy to get good games for cheap. I keep track of all my games' $/hr value and overall game grade in an Excel spreadsheet to determine future purchase points.

I think Spiders does some interesting things, and I absolutely loved Of Orcs and Men, but $34 for 15-20 hours of gameplay (and action combat which I'm not a fan of) is definitely flirting with the upper limit of what I'm willing to pay.

 

[Morrandir]

Considering that with the pre-order option it's only 34€, the playtime is ok.
My rule of thumb is that I'd like to have at least 1 hour of gameplay for each € spent. I'm looking forward to the game and I'm quite sure I'll enjoy it, so I'd rather had 50 hours playtime for a price of 50€.

 

[Aberdash]

I think this argument is invalid or clear nonsense. I would be cautious about this review based on all these small bits of info. I can understand that the game may be shorter than initially anticipated. Spiders work under pretty restricted budget and with very limited time - its like "deliver one game a year" to Focus. But I dont believe that they omitted some choices and consequences which they had in Mars. This feature is important for them. And Mars has similar or even smaller budget.
It seems that reviewer pretty much run through the game and didnt pay much attention because its not bEAware-style RPG. So "short game" and "bad story" could be just product of his own play style or lack of interest.

Fluffyhotep: thanks. Your ratings info supports my suspicion about the review.

Would have to wonder how they got a copy when nobody else apparently has. Doesn't look very legit to me.

 

[Sir_Brennus]

Would have to wonder how they got a copy when nobody else apparently has. Doesn't look very legit to me.

This is insane. I am reading the mag since 1997 and it always has been the most reliable source for PC gaming info in Germany.

I got the mag early, because I am a subscriber. It will be on public sale from tomorrow on.

It is still the best selling PC-only paper mag in Germany and the online portal Gamestar.de is the biggest gaming community in Germany.

The review is not only legit, also the 71/100 is a so called "conference rating", which means that the number has been created in a meeting by all editors together.

Don't be suspicious without a reason.

 

[DArtagnan]

I fear for the Watch after starting to feel like one of the normal persons around here

 

[redman5427]

It sounds like a normal critical review and sounds about what I was expecting. Not sure if its more Dark souls than Kingdoms of Amalur. I haven't seen much gameplay but it does look like the focus is more on combat. I think its an ok value and I will probably pick it up at some time after ESO.

 

[Fluffyhotep]

This is insane. I am reading the mag since 1997 and it always has been the most reliable source for PC gaming info in Germany.

I got the mag early, because I am a subscriber. It will be on public sale from tomorrow on.

It is still the best selling PC-only paper mag in Germany and the online portal Gamestar.de is the biggest gaming community in Germany.

The review is not only legit, also the 71/100 is a so called "conference rating", which means that the number has been created in a meeting by all editors together.

Don't be suspicious without a reason.

It's in their table of contents, and presumably they got an early production copy, maybe not the version that goes on sale but pretty much complete I guess. It's also likely they got one because, well, PR.

As for 'reputable', ahem, I would beg to differ. A 'big' magazine / site, sure, but it's basically comparable to Gamespot and IGN; a large videogame site / magazine that has a tendency to 'over-rate' big titles. Sometimes that blows up in their face, as when they felt forced to downgrade their Diablo III rating when the shit hit the fan regarding that game.
They're not terrible, but think: Mainstream, and probably friendlier to big publishers than is good for one's critical attitude. The fact that the 'final verdict' is that of a group of editors, rather than the actual reviewer, probably reinforces that trend. Some of those editors have been in the business for a loooooooooong time, and have cultivated their relationship with publishers for decades. Any critical reviewer will probably be 'corrected' by the larger group of editors. They do allow for some critical remarks, but it tends to get watered down in the 'final ratings' in my experience.

As a final remark, and by way of another example, Gamestar awarded the PC version of Medal of Honor: Warfighter 73/100, a game that got 55/100 on Metacritic (the critic reviews, not the user reviews).
Does that automatically mean that Bound by Flame's 71/100 indicates the game sucks even more than Warfighter? Not necessarily, because Focus Interactive is one of the smaller publishers; there is less pressure for a, ahem, 'diplomatic' rating. But it can't be excluded, and maybe the game is a piece of junk. Or maybe the game's good, but the reviewer was annoyed by some of the weaknesses and felt able to tell it straight.
In short: Wait for more reviews

 

[Wisdom]

In short: Wait for more reviews

I don't understand all the fuss about reviews. Nobody is going to review a game exactly to my personal tastes. Screw the reviews. Play the game and judge it for yourself. Don't go into it armed with 30 reviews. All you are doing is subconsciously looking for the game flaws.

 

[Morrandir]

Well, there are guys out there who can't just buy every game they're interested in. Some have to be a little more choosy where to put the money. So that can't be a general advice.

A good advice would be to look for reviewers whose taste is equal to yours (just check by reading their reviews of games you've already played) and wait for their reviews.

 

[greywolf00]

$25.5 on GMG (Steam code) w/ 9HZ09L-D4RYEU-FIW8BE voucher

 

[sakichop]

$25.5 on GMG (Steam code) w/ 9HZ09L-D4RYEU-FIW8BE voucher

Pre-ordered thx.

 

[Aberdash]

This is insane. I am reading the mag since 1997 and it always has been the most reliable source for PC gaming info in Germany.

I got the mag early, because I am a subscriber. It will be on public sale from tomorrow on.

It is still the best selling PC-only paper mag in Germany and the online portal Gamestar.de is the biggest gaming community in Germany.

The review is not only legit, also the 71/100 is a so called "conference rating", which means that the number has been created in a meeting by all editors together.

Don't be suspicious without a reason.

Nobody else has got a copy to review. Why would a relatively small gaming magazine get one? I could see it happening if either spider or focus were german but they aren't. They are both french.

Although it could very well be a copy they played at a conference or convention and are trying to pass it off as a review of the full game. Seems far more likely than them getting a copy to review themselves.

 

[Morrandir]

Nobody else has got a copy to review. Why would a relatively small gaming magazine get one? I could see it happening if either spider or focus were german but they aren't. They are both french.

Well, Germany is Europe's biggest national market and is politically and economically really close to France. So as a French publisher or developer selling the exclusive rights for a preview in a paper mag to a German one doesn't seem to strange to me.

 

[Fluffyhotep]

Nobody else has got a copy to review. Why would a relatively small gaming magazine get one? I could see it happening if either spider or focus were german but they aren't. They are both french.

Although it could very well be a copy they played at a conference or convention and are trying to pass it off as a review of the full game. Seems far more likely than them getting a copy to review themselves.

In addition to Morrandir's comment: It's not strange, really. Germany occupies a central place in the videogame market in Europe, and Gamestar, regardless of my reservations, is one of the main German magazines and websites.
What is possible is that they reviewed an early production copy, which might lack some polish (not to mention bugs).
As a sidenote, while Gamestar's reviews have a tendency to dispense scores above or even waaaay above Metacritic averages (in the case of big publishers, at least), their Mars: War Logs and Of Orcs and Men reviews are in line with the Metacritic ratings.
If I could rely on this for a prediction, that would mean I ought to experience Bound by Flame as an 8/10 game. Unfortunately, that isn't exactly science…

 

[Aberdash]

In addition to Morrandir's comment: It's not strange, really. Germany occupies a central place in the videogame market in Europe, and Gamestar, regardless of my reservations, is one of the main German magazines and websites.
What is possible is that they reviewed an early production copy, which might lack some polish (not to mention bugs).
As a sidenote, while Gamestar's reviews have a tendency to dispense scores above or even waaaay above Metacritic averages (in the case of big publishers, at least), their Mars: War Logs and Of Orcs and Men reviews are in line with the Metacritic ratings.
If I could rely on this for a prediction, that would mean I ought to experience Bound by Flame as an 8/10 game. Unfortunately, that isn't exactly science…

I don't really put much stock in reviews. The people that write the reviews are way to close to the people that make the games. As well as the fact that in many cases the reviewer will only spend a couple hours with a game before writing the review.