Fallen Enchantress IGN review -7.9 /10

-7.9/10? A bit harsh to give out a negative number...

Deserves a better score, but atleast IGN finaly made a review. All PR are good PR!

Has quite a few factual errors.  Yes, what a surprise.

What are you talking about?  Look at my Metacritic prediction thread.  It's not like I'm some Nostradamus or something... I just call them like I see them.  I predicted the Metacritic score would be 79 so it should come as no surprise when a review gives FE 7.9/10.

I find it interesting that the review made no mention of the wildlands to conquer in the game. It really seems like they played maybe 50 turns of the game and quit, and wrote a review. I know that there is a lot more depth to be had in the game at later turns, but it is what it is and it very well could be that the game didn't grasp the reviewer.

This reviewer is saying the same thing the others have:

• Sandbox mode doesn't have enough RPG intergrated into the experiance.
• Diplomacy is overly simplicated.
• Tactical combat isn't advanced enough.
• Content is lacking, but community can thankfully fill that in.

I think the score of 7.9 is fair all considering...

I kind of got this feeling too, but there has also been a couple of other reviews I felt the same way about. 7.9 is a fair score, and I tend to agree. I would rate it, in current state, at 8 - 8.5

I ignore the scores, and only look at the content.  If the content of the review is suspect, the score isn't worth a damn to me.  I doubt it is to many others, as well, since very high scores in the last few years to just about everything have devalued the whole idea of scoring a game, IMO.

Tactical combat isn't advanced enough?  BS.  You can:

• Knock opponents back (and to the ground) with Titan's Breath
• Break through ZOC using Thunderstrike
• Make enemy units hit each other!  Hilarious!
• Debuff the whole enemy army with Mass Curse/Wither
• Inflict damage over time effects
• Berserk for extra damage but take a point of damage each turn
• Take control of enemy units

And that's just a few notable things off the top of my head.

Obviously whoever reviewed the game played it for like an hour and didn't use any of the really cool spells, and should be fired for incompetence.

It sounds like he accidentally re-reviewed WoM, not FE.

I also keep seeing something on "Diplomacy is overly simplicated." 

particular quite a few reviewer saying that AI is too arrogant and most of the time, brute force is the only ways to solve conflicts..

Another common one i read is on immersion

Rock Paper and Shotgun (WOT series)  also talk on this, but their major complain is on FE's immersion including lengthy dialogues which need to get into them otherwise  dragging.

good review, does not mention stupid AI but oh well.

IGN also gave MoO3 a 9.2.  Their credibility in reviewing 4X games is lacking.

Exploration strongest part of the game - agreed

Tactical combat weak - agreed

Lore bland - agreed 

Fair review, fair score.

Seriously, now: you don't like a specific review they had in 2003--that's nine years ago--so that kills their credibility?  What do you do if an infant pukes on you, wait for him or her to grow up so you can foreclose on their home mortgage, and put nails in their tires? 

Now that's what I call a diabolical revenge plan!