GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

GameSpot put their review of Space Empires V up on their site. Here is the link:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...sv/review.html

I was really hoping GameSpot would wait another month before reviewing the game. As has been said before, it is unfortunate that the game had to be released before these bugs could be ironed out. It may make it more difficult to convince new folks how truly awesome the game is. I'm occasionally tearing my hear out when I encounter a bug. But I've already gotten 100+ hour of fun gameplay. So, I'm not complaining much. It's quite cool to email a new bug to Malfador and then see that bug addressed by the most recent version.

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

That was a great review. I think it laid things out for people exaclty the way it is. I may read more of gamespots reviews.

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

I agree, it was a very fair review.

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

Stability: Stable

haha. I really don't want to know what they call unstable. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Especially when their tag line is "riddled by bugs and issues, tough to recommend".

Their actual score is kind of weird. Gameplay rated the same as graphics and sound?

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

They put some time into the review and I agree that it is very fair. I wish they would have waited until next week though. With the new patch coming out on Monday it would have been better to wait. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif Oh well, we did warn them this would happen. 6.6 is not a bad rating, it could have been a hell of a lot better though.

They were very honest and up front about the support that Aaron puts into his games.

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

I would think that this would be a major bug. I don't believe that it has either been reported yet or fixed.

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

Its been reported, but not fixed (he did some changes to happyness, but not THAT part of happyness..)

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

Why the hell SFI didn't wait another few months before releasing the game is beyond belief.The game would have got 8+/10 reviews and sold a lot more.

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

Since when is a score of 6.6 ever good? A good number would be 7.5 or 8.0. Anything less is real bad. That is like the death sentence. I think gamespot was being polite considering this was developed by one person. When you release a game it needs to play out of the box. You may have a few bugs but the game play should be solid. In it's current relase it just sux.

This game really needed a larger staff to help develope. Not to mention features added that have been requested for a very long time. I honestly feel very let down by this release. I've been looking forward to this for some time and at this point I think GalCiv2 is probably calling now. (I've been holding off for a while) There are so many items wrong with this release I just don't know where to begin. Well my gripes with the game are with bad ground combat concept, problems with weapon design/balance, lack of unique ruin tech, no roaming monsters/pirates, etc. I know the "mods will correct this responce".

By the way Master of Orion 3 beats out SEV by a score of 6.7 Feb 2003 Gamespot. This has to be the worst release of this type of game ever. Even Birth of the Federation beats it by a score of 7.9. I hope Aaron is taking notes on this. I really would like this game to succeed.

Re: GameSpot Review Posted Online
 

The bugs were the main reason for the 6.6 fair review that GS gave the game. They were VERY fair to the game in the review.