Empires in Arms - The Wargamer review

On 5 feb, 12:16, von Schmidt <von_schm... RemoveThis @mail.com> wrote:
>
> IMO that's more of a summary for a preview, or a review of an
> unfinished title. After all, should you really rate a title in the
> hope that the "issues" will be fixed and "promised features" will be
> added?

Nope. You should rate it as it is today. Or wait with your review.
Happens more than you'd think.

> Should the product not be reviewed as it is now,

Yup - see above. Are you saying the review is not 100% accurate in
that regard ? Just asking as I haven't delved deep enough into the
game to know.

> especially
> considering that the original development took half a dozen years and
> it *still* lacks certain features?

The main feature lacking (in my newbee eyes) is a tutorial - and that
one is coming. It might look like a small thing missing, but in this
case and for this game, it's pretty major. Bad call on the part of
Matrix to release it without one, but a mistake they're rectifying
right now.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx
 >> Stay informed about: Empires in Arms - The Wargamer review 

> Hi,
>
> http://www.wargamer.com/reviews/empiresinarms/
>
> A rather long review, so here's the executive summary :
>
> "Empires in Arms is a diamond in the rough. There are some issues that
> need to be resolved and some promised features added to make the
> computer version of the game complete."

That's it... Post news don't flame unnececarily! )))
Be a good boy! )))


Mario
 >> Stay informed about: Empires in Arms - The Wargamer review