|
Game Geeks 112: Pathfinder RPG
Lucky him, getting the book early. Grrh. Watching it now, but the reviews by him are usually very good, and he covers a lot of games.
Very good review..
I would suspect this gentleman received a reviewer copy.
(Unlike the guy with Blog that said his his local game store called him up because they were selling it early)
We should drop him an e-mail thanking him for the good rview, he said he got a lot of hate mail when he praised the Beta over 4E. His e-mail is in the review about minute 5:32.
Oh, I've seen Kurt give a bad review...but I'm not surprised PfRPG got a good one.
I also suggest writing an appreciation note in the comments box of his Youtube video. Someone is trying to spam "Pathfinder sucks. 4e is god!" :P
Methinks someone needs to get a life.
I think the review was pretty poor, really. I would call it more of a teaser by an avid fan, rather than a review of a RPG system.
Shows the nice art though!
Yeah, but we've got to work with what we've got. I encourage everyone to comment, answer questions, and vote on comments. Represent, people!
Well I personally don't think that an RPG is something you can review until you've played it for a while, and PF doesn't need to be reviewed for me, it is a 3.5 update written by a company that produces good stuff!
I had to laugh at this comment on youtube though:
"In this review I learned:
- Kurt hates 4E.
- Kurt hates d20.
- Kurt will play d20 if the rulebook is pretty enough.
Informative. "
About what I thought of the so called 'review' as well!
I hear ya. I just view these types of things as an opportunity to influence public opinion. Maybe from this sparse intro, he'll provide a fuller review later, with the proper encouragement.
I hear ya. I just view these types of things as an opportunity to influence public opinion. Maybe from this sparse intro, he'll provide a fuller review later, with the proper encouragement.
I dunno it is just so not-professional (digging at 4E 'cos of the class and race choices for the first book.. every edition made them) that it encourages rampant edition wars, like the complete tool spamming '4E rules'. Anything positive gets lost in the static.
yeah I hope he does a proper one latter as well.
My next favourite YT comment.. (paraphrased) 'I would rather play spit catch with dried up dog poo than play 4E..' I laughed a lot!
I like Kurt Wiegel and his reviews, I've watched a few now after the PRPG. The way I see it, it was just a preliminary review of PRPG considering he probably just got the game a day or two ago. I think he could have gone into slightly more detail, with more comparisons to 3.5 and exactly what they improved, but time was probably an issue, his reviews are kind of short and overviewish.
There's a place for this...esp. for folks who haven't spent the last few weeks reading our boards. : )
All I can think is that if all I needed to do to get an early copy of PfRPG was to put up some RPG reviews on YouTube I'd have been on that months ago... Bummer, lost opportunity.
Some guys have foresight, I guess.
There's a place for this...esp. for folks who haven't spent the last few weeks reading our boards. : )
Agreed.
I actually don't expect much more from a review than a warning that "this really sucks", because everything can be subjective to some degree or another.
I suppose "reviewing reviewers" has it's place if the reviewer just can't be taken seriously. Otherwise I leave it to rpg.net and those that enjoy that community.
That's not a put down, it just ain't my kinda crowd.