I like this quote. It’s from the worst review i’ve read in my entire life.
I’m not saying this because they give BattleForge a 5 of 10 but because the review is terribly written, contains almost no information and is basically just a rant about microtransactions and money winning the game. For example:
“People have every right to be wary of downloadable content and microtransactions. [...] PC gamers don’t put up with that sort of thing as much, which is why we suspect this will not be a hit.”
Things are written in this review which do not make any sense except for showing the reviewer’s inability of supporting his arguments, or even making an argument in the first place. I think it’s hilarious when David Jenkins of Teletext.co.uk wonders why EA bought Phenomic in the first place:
“They seem a curiously non-casual company for EA to want to buy but that’s none of our business.”
I concur, it is none of their business. So why does Mr. Jenkins even bother writing it in the first place?
Of course, there are also sentences that make no sense at all. Could be a simple typo but it shows the lack of effort that went into this review:
It’s only the fact that the underlying game isn’t terribly interesting that stops this being all a scandalous con.
BattleForge got a few reviews in the 60s and i can understand their argumentation. But what is becoming more and more obvious is that the lower the scores, the more the reviewers seem to hate micro-transactions. So this one marks the low end of BattleForge reviews, and what’s been (and will be) reviewed around this area of review scores (meaning below 6 of 10) is in fact the article writer’s disgust of the payment model. I would be surprised to see a review below a 6 of 10 score whose argumentation doesn’t build mainly on conveying reservations (to say the least) against the micro-transaction business model.
Hi And Welcome!
Recent Comments