Everyone is bound to disagree with videogame reviews at some point. This is especially true if the game in question happens to be made by the company that you run, and the reviews in question happen to rate that game around the 45 percent mark.
In a recent interview, Spark Unlimited CEO Craig Allen adamantly defended his development team's recent release, Turning Point: Fall of Liberty. He said that the game is too much of a "high concept idea" for the "core gamer," and that "if people look at it in the right way...they really enjoy what they see."
Unfortunately, Mr. Allen, arguing with review scores isn't going to change the inherent quality of a title. Somehow, Turning Point is obviously failing to be as enjoyable as most would hope.
As far as Turning Point's "high concept" goes, I think it does sound quite interesting. It is about what might have happened if the United States had never entered into World War II, and Nazi Germany had emerged victorious from that conflict. I haven't actually played the game, though, so I can't offer a solid critique. If other reviewers are to be trusted, it would appear that although the idea behind the game is indeed interesting, it simply fails to deliver in either the gameplay or storytelling departments.
Even Lady Liberty is showing us her sad face.
I have a feeling it'll be better than Blacksite: Area 51.
:-( I recently played that.
/mistake
Yeah same, just for achievements. Felt dirty. (the multiplayer ones are so freaking easy).
I don't know what he's complaining about, I guarantee this game stills sells close to a million if not more.
The reviews have not been kind to Turning Point, and from what I've seen of the videos, rightfully so.
I adore the story, hate the gameplay. The graphics could have been so much more with a little more effort. The graphics arent bad enough to make me hate them, but its not where what it could have been. Gameplay is MOH:Airborne at best, and thats kinda bad in my opinion since I HATED MOH:AB
HOLY POO JOHN CLABO!!!
Anyway, i still want to play it.
And the founder chimes in.
By the way, iskenedy, you know there is a demo on xbox live (if you have an xbox that is) But you are not missing much.
"too much of a "high concept idea" for the "core gamer,""
I take exception and offense at that statement. If he's going to shift the blame for his sub-par game not succeeding because his audience isn't smart enough to "get it," then he can simply rot and die. I don't care how high-falootin' you think your concept might be. If the gameplay sucks, then you failed.
"if people look at it in the right way...they really enjoy what they see."
What does this even mean? That I should stand on my head while playing it for a unique perspective? That I should put aside the fact that I'm playing a tragically boring game and instead contemplate the rudimentary and uninspiring art style?
Maybe if the game was a Psychonauts caliber title that absolutely no one was playing, he'd be on to something. Unfortunately, this is a generic shooter with an interesting take on an alternate history. That's not going to be enough.
I
For the mass market, does game reviews really have that big effect on ultimate game sales? I'm not sure, but they'll probably still sell a decent amount.
Also, insulting the "core gamer," whatever that means, isn't a very good PR move.