I just read the review of GB at www.computerandvideogames.com) and it seemed to me as if the reviewer didnt know anything new about the game or really what he was talking about...
He said something like the empire was the best in the air?
We all know that there not...

This guy or girl should have done their homework on the game thoroughly...He/she didnt reveal anything new about the game (except for the screenshots)

What are your thoughts?

Ya I thought that was strange to, Tie's with no shields, strong? HUH!?

They probaly arent Star Wars fans you know, alot of these places bash good games if they arent into that genre. Its stupid what happened to objectiviness and professionalism in not letting your personal feelings get in the way of your un-biased opinion? Oh well We know its good and thats really all that matters

They may not be Star Wars fans but it's a game they've gotta review. I mean it's sad if someone over 5 years old doesn't know what a tie is. Even if it's not their thing.












:naboo: :naboo: :naboo: :naboo: :naboo: :naboo: :naboo: :naboo: :naboo:

It's a good game and i wanna hear from Gamespot and Gamespy before I jump to any conclusions.

Gamespot can be alittle biased too, during there year end round up of the best games and the game of the year catagories they like to leave out great games like the Final Fantasy series even though those are awesome games.

forgot to add this, no matter how bad a game is made by one of the legends of Game Development like Sid Meier or Will Wright or Peter Molyneux they always go on about how great the game is even giving it a full 10. Like for instance B&W kinda sucked and it didnt even have all the stuff it was promised and lots of people complained about the game and they are writing suff saying its the best game of all time and its probaly going to be Game of the year and crap. They kiss up to the big dogs in the Industry.

This is true. I've seen many video reviews/previews and the people there are a little biased to their own section of games, but i still think Gamespot will give it a good review cuz AOK got 9.1 (I know it was original but.. this is Star wars) so why shouldn't battlegrounds improve upon that. It even has some improvements to AOK it's not just a copy. Gamespot will say it's a good game. I believe it will range (not flaming the game) mid 8's to high 8's MAYBE and I MEAN MAYBE they might get 9.0.

Im just hoping they dont give that crap like "the game isnt original, it seems more like a AoK mod" because that isnt the case with the game, its really good.

Might I suggest writing a Nice letter back to the reviewer telling them your thoguhts and what you think they did right or wrong.

I have done it with other games and without exception I always get a response back and a reason why they think what they think. Or, I have goten some that said "you are right, I missed that." type of statement.

Goo ahead try it. But the golden rule is be nice and be clear. Write a letter you would not mind getting.

Toothless-OMO

In all actuality Gamespot has already given good props to the game. They have already stated that it improves on AoK by adding in Jedi and Air units to the game. Jedi in the sense that they are like not wimpy priests but ass-kicking converting units. You can usually tell by the gaming community that this game will sell units, the demo has pretty good support and I predict like AoK did, that once the full game is released that one wimpy demo room will turn into 5 full game rooms.

They have dedicated 3 full 5 page previews to the game, they usually don't do that for crap games only the best-selling cream of the crop games like RTCW/Soldier of Fortune II/B&W (which sucked but still sold plenty). If they give it a craptacular review I would be shocked.

In the case of this review, has anyone considered the possiblity that these people sniff glue before they write?