Terrible reviews right?

[jamesc70]

I love A&A, had many great summer nights playing the board game with friends. Even the really old PC version was okay to get a fix. But, this game seems to have a lot of negative reviews... deservedly so or is it just EA pains?

I thought with Beamdog making this, that it would be a quality product.

[bearfieldlee]

Its a great version. Mostly I think the negative reviews are because of online disconnects which Beamdog are looking at constantly.
Some people have issues with some small rule changes as well but I don't think they are major. (No co op use of aircraft carriers or transports)

I tried the game the other night for the first time and it felt exactly like axis and allies is supposed to and indeed caused me to get up late for work!

[aardvarkpepper]

Originally posted by bearfieldlee:

Some people have issues with some small rule changes as well but I don't think they are major. (No co op use of aircraft carriers or transports)

It is a major change. Huge. The defensive profile thing is also a huge change. Absence of bid is a problem. Absence of editor is a problem.

I played for 36 minutes and wrote up a 14 item list. Probably it'll be 30-40 items by the time I finish looking at the game as it is, writing, and editing.

As to the OP, well, if you just want any sort of officially supported Axis and Allies game, even if it has some pretty major changes compared to the board game it's based off of, then sure why not. Even if panning is choppy, even if . . . well okay I won't get into a list here. But if you want to go for it, hey why not, it is what it is.

Is this, right now, a standout title? Not so much. If you're into the casual socializing aspect, well, there's no in-game chat client that I'm aware of. You can pop map notes on, which is cool, but hey. If you're one of the more serious sorts, there's absolutely no in-game analytical tools, plus the aforementioned serious rule changes which are, well, serious.

But if you're a casual player and maybe you can set up chat in Discord or something and if you're willing to overlook some stuff then . . . hey why not.

There are some nice things in the game. Asynchronous play is a good idea, just I have some differences as to how it ought to be implemented. Even if the map panning is choppy and the sound breaks up, at least you can zoom in and out, and at least differing levels of zoom offer different levels of information. So yes okay, there are some nice design elements, just not *enough* to my mind.

But you may as well give it a try. Probably the games dropping will be fixed. Probably.

[Brutalitops]

I would say EA pains

[jman]

It does play just like the actual board game. Negative reviews are from the online issues which they are working to fix since this is an Early Access Game. The other negative feedback seems to be from players who want the game to have all the house rules and adaptions they used over the years. The game is what it is and fun and worth the $20.

[jasonwclark]

Most of the grumbling is probably about the dropping issues in the first week, or critiques of the GUI. But others I'm sure take issue with some of the rules implementations. If it was an exact port of the boxed game that would be one thing, with that exact ruleset, but it actually introduces some new rules. So once you open that can of worms, its not surprising if some people say, "why that rule or feature but not x y z as well?"

Steam is pretty all or nothing with it's Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down approach. There's no neutral review option for example. I haven't reviewed the Early Release, and not sure how useful I'd find it when the development is ongoing. But if you read a negative review right now, I would interpret that as someone telling you they think you should wait for the actual release before determining whether it's worth dropping the cash. They are probably not trying to tell anyone that the game is complete trash (unless that's what they said in the review), but rather that they are expecting more from it or that it needs more work to earn their kudos, so the default there is thumbs down instead of up. The longer it stays in Early Release and the more updates before actual Release the better in my view. Its a perennial issue in A&A (the boardgames too) that they get rushed to print before the kinks are ironed out. So I'm happy if they keep it in the works until its ready. Unlike some other types of games, you really need to have open playtesting to gather feedback in A&A.

I wish that there was an Early Release with tons of playtesting, for the actual 1942 boardgame before it went to print a decade ago. Even if it got horrid reviews, because they probably could have fixed a thing or too in that process. Beamdog won't just be dealing with reviews of their implementation, but also of the base game on which it's based, which got kind of harsh feedback itself in comparison to other editions. So that might be part of it too, if peeps haven't played A&A in a while and this is their first time coming back to it since earlier versions.

[aardvarkpepper]

Originally posted by jman:

It does play just like the actual board game. Negative reviews are from the online issues which they are working to fix since this is an Early Access Game. The other negative feedback seems to be from players who want the game to have all the house rules and adaptions they used over the years. The game is what it is and fun and worth the $20.

As I wrote, Axis and Allies 1942 Online has significant deviations from Axis and Allies 1942.

Not house rules, not adaptations,important differences to the core game rules.

A number of negative reviews comment about online issues, other negative reviews and some forum comments mention technology and national advantages. But there are a number of other legitimate concerns besides those, many of which may never be addressed by development.

Some issues *may be* addressed, like the current lack of tutorials; I've heard development plans on putting more in. (edit - there ARE tutorials in the game right now, but new players tend to get lost. With good reason, I think. Note I'm a veteran, but even I know that if you never explain what a neutral territory is, how is anyone else going to know what it is?)

But I have heard absolutely zero about them addressing allied transport/carrier use, and zero about them changing away from defensive profiles to player casualty selection. Quite a number of other things as well.

. . . which is to be expected. But the program is what it is. It isn't what it isn't.

If players are still on the fence, they may buy and try and try to request a refund. But Steam refunds are not automatic. If Steam determines, at their sole discretion, that you are "abusing" the refund system, they reserve the right to refuse refunds.

Bottom line, if you don't really care about reviews or what anyone says, and you just want to throw money at the developers for a relatively inexpensive game that has okay looking screenshots (even if moving around the map is choppy and sound breaks up) - sure. Go ahead and buy, because you're already happy with the product as it is in its current state, and if something weird happens like the program's altered so you can't play it maybe you can get a refund (maybe).

But if you DO care about reviews, or if you're a veteran player that has an appreciation for the finer nuances of the game, or you're just a wargame player that likes a lot of nice user-friendly details in the program you're using - well, you might want to wait until later down the line and see what happens with this title before buying.

[wmct276]

Its early release, that gives me the impression that the developer wants our positive and negative feedback so they can fix glitches and make improvements.

[Julius Borisov]

Originally posted by wmct276:

Its early release, that gives me the impression that the developer wants our positive and negative feedback so they can fix glitches and make improvements.

Exactly. We want the truth, because only it can help to make the game better.

[Aribad]

Well, moving units is terrible pain in the ass. It was so annoying to play the game that i'm more suspicious about the positive reviews than the negative ones. But if you guys like the game, great, i wish i was you. The older version was great to play, but it doesn't work on the new Windowses.

[Rygar_23]

easily worth the $20, and beamdog has been great with helping users in this early access period

[matmylod]

dice can spoil the game sometimes, generally the better strategy wins. don't like the bombing raid on complexes being double production capacity...0 production is better for strategy i think.

[Julius Borisov]

This is a necro to a thread from August, 2019. The review ratings have changed drastically since then. As for the dice, the next patch will be bringing Stabilized Dice as an option.