User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:22 pm

Old Game, New Tricks - Two Inventive Twists on Chess

Tue Nov 01, 2016 5:48 pm

Developers are always attempting to find new ways to put a spin on classic games. Tetris has had a thousand ports over the years, usually to enhance graphics and add...

http://www.pockettactics.com/news/old-g ... -on-chess/

User avatar
EICJoe
Posts: 605
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:50 pm

Re: Old Game, New Tricks - Two Inventive Twists on Chess

Tue Nov 01, 2016 5:58 pm

Would be interested on some feedback on this one guys. Main issues with this were:

* Didn't really feel like there could be a lot of content to write about each game individually, so a combined feature felt more appropriate.

* But with that being said, the CMS can't really support a dual-review format like this in terms of providing scores and the big store link under-banners etc...

So really, while these aren't 'official' reviews, you could treat them as such as Mark did he would have scored RBC 4/5 and MC 3/5, but I'd have to write that in manually (not sure if Metacritic would even pick that up).

I chose not to in this instance as I did ask for a feature over actual reviews, but would be interested in knowing what you guys thought. These types of articles are easier to present over on Wargamer as they don't use scores anymore.
"Determining the appropriate level of influence in somebody else's war is never a simple matter."
- Special Circumstances

Editor-in-Chief
Wargamer.com
PocketTactics.com
StrategyGamer.com

User avatar
Js619
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:46 pm
Location: NJ, USA

Re: Old Game, New Tricks - Two Inventive Twists on Chess

Tue Nov 01, 2016 6:18 pm

Would be interested on some feedback on this one guys. Main issues with this were:

* Didn't really feel like there could be a lot of content to write about each game individually, so a combined feature felt more appropriate.

* But with that being said, the CMS can't really support a dual-review format like this in terms of providing scores and the big store link under-banners etc...

So really, while these aren't 'official' reviews, you could treat them as such as Mark did he would have scored RBC 4/5 and MC 3/5, but I'd have to write that in manually (not sure if Metacritic would even pick that up).

I chose not to in this instance as I did ask for a feature over actual reviews, but would be interested in knowing what you guys thought. These types of articles are easier to present over on Wargamer as they don't use scores anymore.
I don't mind the dual review at all, especially when the games reviewed are filler games, so to speak. I think my main issue with this one is this -

"Really Bad Chess is a dumb game, both in its production and core mechanic. In Gage’s own words he has “ripped out the core of chess”, but by doing so he has made an experience that – at least to begin with – is approachable to those who have never even seen a chessboard. Instead of tangling and dumbing down the AI, novices can start off overpowered and learn the nuances of each piece, allowing themselves to get ready for the big step up when they feel comfortable."

It says that RBC is a dumb game, but then never elaborates on why it's a dumb game - in fact, at the end, Mark almost seems to recommend it. This kind of left me confused as to whether it's worth playing or not, and that leads me to think that maybe trying to squeeze two games into one article doesn't allow for enough of a review?

SleepingGiant
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 1:55 am

Wed Nov 02, 2016 5:05 am

Yes, this is a dumb review and I recommend it. Just kidding, no offense intended.

On a serious note, I have no problem with multiple reviews/opinions in one article. The reasons I personally read all PT articles are:

* finding out about new games I didn't know about
* thoughtful reviews about whether a pricey game is worth the money
* specific focus on tactical/strategy, non-twitchy, non-vapid games
* interesting writing on gaming as a genre within modern culture
* what makes games enjoyable and increases enjoyment from playing

So, my favorite features are Nick and Tof's regular Monday and Friday articles, reviews of really good games, and deep thoughts about why we like gaming. This one hits a few of those points, so it's really not bad at all, but since these games are free and easy to try out, it doesn't add much value, anyone can just grab these games and rate their own experience for themselves in about the same time.

SleepingGiant
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 1:55 am

Wed Nov 02, 2016 5:13 am

And I want to add that I really like the reader community contributions in all of those aspects too, and I also appreciate how much you, Joe and writers, are asking for and listening to feedback and continually improving. Keep doing what you're doing!

SleepingGiant
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 1:55 am

Wed Nov 02, 2016 5:29 am

And I'm sorry to post multiple times in a row, but:

Not just whether a game is worth the money, I know there was a whole imbroglio about whether that should be factored into star ratings around mini metro, and I agree with the policy that it should not be, but also that the writers should be welcome to comment on their value judgments about cost in the reviews. Also is it worth the time investment? Will the game be satisfying?!

I'm going to stop commenting now, I'd really like to hear what others in the community value most about PT and want to see going forward in terms of where to direct reporting energy...

Return to “Pocket Tactics Front Page Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests