Here is the online version of their article that I received today. It's made me angry.

http://www.pczone.co.uk/reviews/reviews_story.php?id=123700

We should start a FORMAL complaint, and get a visible apology printed.

Obviously they (he?) visited some demo-server... :P

Honestly, what does the guy expect when reviewing a demo?

it doesn't make good reading, and WILL put peeps off buying the game, from what i can tell he's just jumped in for a few races with the demo, it's not a fair appraisal of what LFS is all about. the guy needs to actually PLAY THE GAME HE'S REVIEWING, not the demo of it.

the demo servers are a warzone at the moment and it isn't doing sales any good whatsoever, and without sales - NO LFS.

the demo is LFS's main selling point, it's just a free game to a lot of the demo players and it's only once they've played it a while it gets bought. (i'm generalizing here!) stuff like this won't go away if the servers don't improve me thinks

Apparently, that man has no idea what he's talking about Since I look and honk at everybody while passing for courtesy/safer driving. But he wouldn't know that, he doesn't have S2. =/

wasn't this already discussed in the RSC forum? I don't know if it's the same article, but it sounds like it.
There was also some feedback from the author.

off with his head!

Plus, it's also called a review when he reviewed the S2 Alpha Demo? Didnt review mean an article about a FULL and FINISHED product?

http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=216207&page=1

Maybe they thought lets wind up all those LFS players with a dodgy review so that our crappy ads get more hits. Whoever thought those ads were a good idea needs pain illepall

Who reads those articles anyway? But still, really stypid to review a demo of a game

edit: maybe the Devs should send them free account to review, or the community could do that

How about we invite that saddo who wrote the review to a proper server with all the best drivers there, then we'll see him change his tune and put the score up!

You know you can add comments to that review? Click the little blue speech bubble button at the bottom.

why are magazines even reviewing alpha software?

Here is a tip, write the author and explane to them how you feel in a constructive way, if they are like the one I contacted then you may find yourself writing an indepth review as a guest author.Which reminds me I need to finish that article....

this review is old, it was on RSC about 5 months ago. We were all disgusted then and we still are now. There's nothing that we can really do about it. Games have to deal with positive and negative press all the time, there's no use complaining about it as our positive press outways our negative press by 100 to 1.

I think the review would have been much better if they'd started with the plus points (the second half) and then had to mention the bad racing on the demo. I suspect they mainly did it to get the attention of readers.

Quote :

this review is old, it was on RSC about 5 months ago.

Err, did you possibly mean 5 weeks?

no, it was posted as a photo from a magasine ages ago.

Quote from Kryten :

You know you can add comments to that review? Click the little blue speech bubble button at the bottom.

because they are gay and make you wait 24 hours until they accept your registration because they are fools that do really bad reviews (in general)

lucky pczone is british.. if they were american.. they would have lawsuits so fast.... i would make sure of that

its a shame because normally pczone are really good with reviews

they really dropped the ball on this one though

the reviews weird too,basically all bad points then 90% score,wtf

That's what happens when you drag a dumb nerd away from his Sonic The Hedghog game and give him something to do that takes skill and patience. Live For Speed simply rejected him.

Quote :

All things considered, and bearing in mind that there isn't room to consider even one tenth of them here, Live For Speed is really very good indeed. Its main accomplishments are to make the car feel gratifyingly real ?and to do so in an authentic multiplayer environment. If only the servers weren't packed with equally authentic arseholes.

Can't argue with his conclusion.
It is a great game and there are a lot of arseholes on the servers (sadly, since s2, also on the registered servers).

The thing is, everyone agrees with the writer Phil Wand that there are a lot of fools on the demo (mixed in there with the good guys).

The only criticism of his quite humorous article is there is absolutely no mention whatsoever that this is on the demo servers and it's all different on the licensed servers.

The problem is that most people who read the article aren't going to think about trying it, because who wants to "hang out with the arseholes" ?

The score was great but the article didn't help LFS much. In fact i watched the admin pages from a few weeks after the original publication. A total of 3 new people from the UK claimed that they had discovered LFS from a printed magazine article.

I know Phil's aim is to sell magazines, not copies of LFS. But can he have realised quite how negative it looked to anyone reading?

Well, maybe since he tested the demo, he didn't have a chance to fully appreciate the immense community behind LFS which comprises of cool guys who like to race. But despite the review, can't complain with a score of 90, can you Scawen?

It wouldn't have been so bad if the guy wasn't throwing a hissy fit while writing his review. He also managed to entirely overlook the organised leagues and teams which have been running for years. Our community could never have evolved thus far if we were all arseholes online.
Perhaps that was just his alpha-demo-review and he ruined his own article because he restarted it too many times?