First of all, it's really nice to see a database of such unique character. In this case it's women's cycling which is unfamiliar grounds for pretty much... everyone minus the crew and some selected fans. Second of all, it's also really nice to see a database that isn't a piece of semi-completed what-could-have-been. Yes, there are some mistakes which might lead down to personal taste, but there is also two issues I can't help feel should have been obvious to do.
First of all, let's get some facts down:
We have 43 teams, which ranges from the World Cup contesting squads, down to some small national outfits that start with 7 or 8 riders from the same nation.
The list of riders of riders is great. Again ranging from World Cup contesters (Vos, Cooke, et cetera), but also your common national rider and some 15 year old Belgian ladies with suspiciously high starting stats. Plus a lot of rider pictures.
Totally reworked calendar. New races, new stages and by far my favorite: a properly working World Cup instead of the ProTour.
New female body (which I argue to everyone that will listen has some ”features” that seems a tad mis-shapen).
3.5 out of 5 men will be playing this database from this angle
Career Mode:
Personally, I'm a great fan of career mode. I rarely get far into a season before quiting them, but that doesn't make them less important. Fortunately Womenbase does have a decent career mode, complete with changed names for scouted riders, removal of places where it said ”he” and a reworked calendar. But that's when the first pitfalls occur: First of all: The nations scouting ratings have had very little change (if any) from the original database. Second of all: Pretty much no rider under 18 have a FL stat below 65. Basically, the stats for the younger riders are way too high, and many seem too identical and generic.
As a matter of fact... All the stats in the database are wrong. They are way too high. The stats on the top riders are fine had they been riding the full male distances. But when you only ride half the distance, but with the same stats combined with smaller packs, the game will be unbalanced: I've had cases where breakaways got too much breathing room because of the relative strength of the breakaway.
Other than that, though, it's all right, albeit a bit on the short side when it comes the number of races.
Nicole Cooke wins a race. By the infamous Cya-Logic, she wont win again for the rest of the season. That or win every single World Cup race she attends.
Single Races:
There are many criteriums. And sadly, no proper mountains whatsoever. Maybe that's what women's cycling is like, but if you like mountains, you should consider running the Tour de France as a custom tour with database. On the bright side you still get to finish on Mour de Hoie in Fleche Walonne. In general, the stages are nicely made, but still with a bit too many of the same type of stages. Its like ”Here's a criterium with two small hills. And here's another one of them. But here's a criterium with only one small hill”. A bit boring on the long run. It's not all dreary though: You still have some cobbled classics to attend.
Conclusion:
The Good: Its fairly unique, got a new colour scheme and it's a fairly stable.
The Bad: Overly high stats. Not large enough when it comes to non-european teams and races (not that I know any) and finally, the simplicity of all non-WC races. The Oh-my-god-why-did-that-happen-qualities-of-horrible: An Italian man once said that a beautiful car has the lines of a beautiful woman. If you designed the car with the curves of the rider model used, you would get a Lada. No offence to Miya which, as far as I know, modelled the the rider, but it's some rather subtle changes really: some breasts, a ponytail and some thinner arms and facial features.
The top riders of this database. Notice how inflated their stats are.
Score:
Graphics:4/5 – It's still a solid piece of work when it comes to jerseys and such. Some special features save it from getting a 3.
Uniqueness: 4/5 – It's not like it's yet another 2007 Mega-database. But had it been female cyclocross on other hand, it had been a sure 5.
Completeness:3/5 – More work could have been put into making a larger season. Again, I point out that I dont know much about women's cycling, but I bet there are few more teams and races out there.
Riders stats:2/5 – In general the stats are just too high. Way too many World Cup contenders around. And the youth riders seem generic. All with pretty much the same stats +/- a point here or there.
General feel:4/5 – If you like the original PCM07 database, you would like to see this as if Cyanide had just popped up with Pro Woman Cycling Manager 2007.
Verdict: Try it, but don't expect it to become the most played database until PPDB comes around with another large update, or until PCM08 hits the street.
ow yeah, the stats are high, you know why?
if we would compare them to the males, they would all have lower stats, but then you would heva problems with the scouted cyclists, they could own after 3 seasons
What the ***? Do you really know something of PCM? When you add lower stats you have probs with the scouted cyclists. Ooee they ride 50 in stead of 40, who gives a ***? And the graphics are top, i dont know another DB with such a nice graphics. And the scouting was a prob they deleted from the DB at the last, do you want a DB with probs? Doesnt think so... And the breasts are top work! Some of PPDB their shirts sux, but the womenbase shirts are all top!
You want cyclocross? You want less riders, less races? Hahaha
This DB is the most original i ever had.
My Verdict: Womenbase is TOP, everyone need to download it! best database ever!
Maybe the writer have to interest himself a bit in women cycling before he make some very strange conclusion about the stages and some other thing.
And over the high stats, you have to understand that the stats have to be higher than normal, because there are in this first version less stages, so the riders don't grew so fast in there stats as the men in the real PCM.
So one thing: You can't take this review very serious. If the one who wrote this knows a bit of women cycling, I can accept this report. But this is ridiculious.
Sorry for my dubble post, I missed one thing. We have chosen to take the women UCI cycling calender to start this db. More races where you can participate whith a more realistic ridersfield isn't possible.
Nice to see a review of our database. Some just points are made, but I assure you it's all been considered during development and this is in fact the best solution to assure realism. Like the reviewer I am a fan of career mode, but like the sim-eraser says, lower stats can't be helped. I can only conclude the results of simulated races are very realistic compared to real life results. Some sacrifices needed to be made, considering the game's perspective on the database. It's very hard to make an adaptable database on anything other then male cycling. There are almost no mountains in female cycling.
The youth riders should indeed be lessened a bit. But mind that the distribution of talent is not like in male cycling. There is no way a 20-year old male would own the pro tour quite like Vos does... Adding the younger belgian and dutch cyclists is mainly to appease the main audience of the database. If he actually ever played PCM though, he would know better then to call these stats (of the top riders) inflated, which they are not.
Thanks for your fairly accurate review. It's nice to see alternative databases being accepted fairly well.
Hurricane, you were involved in the making of the db so your views are irrelevant.
You might want to try looking at how others have accepted it rather than telling them it's the best.
The review was made by an impartial, unbiased person and he said it was good, but had faults. There's nothing wrong with that, and you can't tell him he's wrong because issoisso agreed with him.
If you're involved in making a db then there is always going to be critisism, you just have to take it on the chin and either ignore it or take it into account and make it better, not tell everyone who points out small faults that they're wrong.
The way you should take reviews like this is like Marginolo has done. Also like sim-eraser, by asking why and trying to understand why the db has a couple of faults, and Jaap explaining why things are like they are. Not at all like you did
I'm not having a go at you, I'm just saying that you need to learn how to take a bit of critisism now and again
Well, i knew people was going to critizize me for this, but i cant give everything i see a big shining thumbs-up, then i wouldnt be the right one to review DB's.
Im not directly saying it was horrible, but i have to point out those small things (and not so small things) because they matter for the overall gaming experience. Dont get me wrong, its an all-right DB you guys released and its nice to see something thats not a Mega2007 DB or a crappy 2008DB, but its not like i pointed out how my game crashed when i clicked on Russia in the scouting section, or how the custom menus were too dark for my taste.
Basically, i dont think my review is wrong or impartial. If it was, i simply wouldnt have published it. Thats how i roll.
Put bluntly: If you cant take some bashing of your DB, you shouldnt have released it as is. Learn to take critizism and stop calling me wrong, im not the only one with the opinions stated. Again, if you dont like the review, TRY HARDER (and dont try make a mini-review yourself Hurricane)
But thanks Marginalo for making some valid points. And BTW Sim-Eraser: There isnt anything wrong the jerseys really. They're good.
Waghlon dont listen those guys..that was great review..
i have seen early how db makers will defend he's "child"..this is normal. I hope when PCMdaily will release he's db we stay has we are been so far.
First of all I want to thank you for this review, which shows your respect for our database. It's clearly that you've tested the Womenbase a lot and that you wanna tell your experiences to all people of this community.
BUT
You only give expressions and impressions of someone (you) who only plays this database and who has (in my eyes, that's very clear!) no knowledge about PCM itselfs and its possibilities. So your comment is (for me) written from a wrong vue (if you know what i mean? my English isn't so good).
So, it's clear that you haven't got many experience of writing reviews OR you don't know the perfect manner of writing them. I hope you understand, but most of all I hope you will try harder. How? By getting much more knowledge of the game.
If it's too difficult for you to know how PCM works (or not works ), you can't do anything wrong by first interviewing or asking some questions to the people who made this project. Because who are you to give us points (.../5)?
You know, I am a teacher and I don't a score (like you do) only by looking to the result. That's you fault my friend, the proccess (what we know in this case) is much more important when you wan't to evaluate (review).
LOL! First, I didn't participate in the making of the DB, and as an objective viewer, I can only say that this is the most complete and finetuned DB I've ever seen! The creators of this DB have brought women cycling to life in this game, the stats and graphics are awesome. Some things might be not 100% as they are in real life, but let's keep in mind that PCM07 is a game with a lot of limitations! No offence, you're trying your best but I can only say, try this DB and make your own verdict, because this review isn't very accurate in my eyes.
If the review wasn't good enough it wouldn't have been approved by PCM.daily. Fact is that Waghlon tested the DB intensively, he reviewed it, and we approved it. There's nothing to discuss. His points are more than valid - what he mentions in the review is something he actually experienced. It's not like he makes up the problems of your DB.
Now, end of discussion. You guys better learn how to handle critism, because this is just stupid.
Theres a way to take criticism, and some of you, who have an entirely biased opinion, certainly do not possess it. Most of the complainers have never made a post on this forum or if they have, the majority are in the womenbase topic itself. Jaap and Sim-Eraser do not fall into this bracket and I therefore respect their opinions. Marginalo too, since he hasnt acted immaturely and respected the review, even if he doesnt fully agree with it.
Waghlon never said there was anything wrong with the jerseys so stop acting like he did.
Uniqueness should definately have been 5/5 instead of 4/5.
Completeness could maybe have been a 4/5, since afterall the Women's calendar isnt as large as Waghlon seems to think.
Stats: You blame it on the scouting problem, but Plakker has managed to edit the scouted riders for PCM06 so it should be possible for PCM07, so it shouldnt be treated as a completely impossible thing to do. I havent seen any response to the fact that the young riders stats seem to be generic.
And Im glad to see noone's defending Miya's body design. Innovative as it may be, women cyclists arent supermodels.
You do have a point about both uniqueness and completeness SN. But a 5/5 in uniqueness could only be used in cases where several people would go "He wanna do what?!" in a positive way. And well true enough, i dont know as much about women's cycling as one might want me to do. But im still sure i would be possible to find a bush-league race somewhere in the world with a hill higher than 1000m above sea level.
I don't think that they have problems with a review where the reviewer say some true things, but it's very normal that they are upset when a reviewer is asking and expecting unrealistic and impossible things.
Some examples:
"Not large enough when it comes to non-european teams and races (not that I know any)."
It's better to inform yourself first, there are simply just 43 uci registered teams. So you cant give them bad points here.
"All the stats in the database are wrong. They are way too high. Pretty much no rider under 18 have a FL stat below 65. Basically, the stats for the younger riders are way too high, and many seem too identical and generic."
What is he expecting? They can't let the womens ride slower. And they can't lower the stats, the game can't handle that well for several reasons, for example, the scouted riders would own already in their 2nd season. And you can't compare women and men cycling for young riders. Girls have their puberty earlier and they are at a much younger age already a topcyclist. Look to the uci ranking and look how much young riders have a lot of points and win a lot of races. Why should they give them bad stats because they are young while they deserve the stats for their results?
"There are many criteriums. And sadly, no proper mountains whatsoever. In general, the stages are nicely made, but still with a bit too many of the same type of stages. Its like ”Here's a criterium with two small hills. And here's another one of them. But here's a criterium with only one small hill”. A bit boring on the long run."
How can you blame the db makers here, it's totally unique that they make a whole new realistic calender, do you know how much hours of work it takes to make more then 100 realistic stages? And it's not their fault that there are no serious mountain stages and a lot of criteriums. If you have a problem with that, then you must mail the race organisers. And no, there is no women cyclingrace irl with mountains from more then 1000m heightdifference.
"It's still a solid piece of work when it comes to jerseys and such. Some special features save it from getting a 3."
The designs of the women shirts aren't so nice as the men shirts, true, but again the shirtmakers do just their work, they can't make unrealistic new designs, you should mail to the teams to ask for better shirt designs then. The shirts are from topquality, and made by some of the best international shirtmakers.
"Uniqueness: 4/5 - It's not like it's yet another 2007 Mega-database. But had it been female cyclocross on other hand, it had been a sure 5."
simply bullshit that a women cyclocross db would be a 5 and the first women road db ever only a 4
"Completeness: 3/5 – More work could have been put into making a larger season. Again, I point out that I dont know much about women's cycling, but I bet there are few more teams and races out there."
All the uci registered teams are in the game, it has a totally knew design, a lot of details are changed, like 7000 scouted cyclistnames, the texts, changed cyclistmodels, a lot of changed little graphics things etc, the only thing about completeness that can be better is probably a little more races and the scouting areas. But this deserves a 4 at least.
"Riders stats: 2/5 – In general the stats are just too high. Way too many World Cup contenders around. And the youth riders seem generic. All with pretty much the same stats +/- a point here or there."
You don't even know a little thing about women cycling but you give the stats only a 2, how can you say that it's only a 2 when you don't know anything about it. I'm a stats specialist and I can tell you that this is worth a 3,5.
So the problem is that he is given so much bullshit things, that the few true things like the scouting areas en the not so large calender are lost. In all this bullshit and wrong statements you forgot other points to mention, like races on a wrong date, missing national championships are some unrealistic team startfields.
So conclusion, it's totally normal that they are upset with this review. You should do better research and take in your head that this game is made for men cycling and not for women cycling, so some things are impossible to change.
"Your opinion differs from mine, therefore you are wrong!" - Jeremy Clarkson
Clearly a wording that doesnt fit. Sorry if you dont like it. But this is my review, you can call it biased, wrong, inaccurate and a piece of s***. Go write your own reviews where you give all DB's top grades instead of writing walls of text or if you are the creator of said DB.
ow yes, ofcourse, I give every db high points
It's very clear that you don't know who I am, otherwise you would know that I'm one of the most critical persons when it comes to db's. I have many years of experience with cym en pcm db's, I know what is possible and what's not with a db, I know how the game works, I know a lot about cycling and how to give stats to riders, I'm a perfectionist when it comes to db's in many details. I know what I'm talking about, you clearly don't, sorry.
That being said, the points of Savoldelli de Valk are of course valid. It's okay to critize and say "this and that could have been better", like Savoldelli does - after all, we can also learn something from this.
Construtive critism is a good thing. The problem in this case has been that some of the DB-makers haven't been giving constructive critism, but only critism.
And Savoldelli's comment was one of the better ones since it does actually point out some of the weaknesses with the review. Also notice the fact that Savoldelli does mention some of the bad things in the DB which we in the review somehow didn't include.
Why doesn't everyone just grow up.
This is a stupid and pointless argument. Waghlon has said what he thinks, and people will always disagree.
The big picture is to discuss it, not say you are wrong.
It's fantastic in my opinion to see some of those who make it not say this is a rubbish review, but ask how they can improve it.
That is what makes a good DB maker
Savoldelli de valk has the legitimacy to make such claims, if you look at his resumé. As far as I know, Waghlon hasn't done much in terms of PCM-related things. Except for posting on this forum, he's a clean slate. As an outsider, I would accord more believe to his opinion than that of a potential newbie.
As for the list of bad things in the database you obviously didn't bother to point out, the season mode is currently unplayable since the top riders never ride anything. Don't lie to the people that you have tested it intensely, for you would have pointed out that huge error at least. Now it's an error we figured out during the release, and it will of course be fixed for the 2008 version, to be released in a few months probably.
Again, I'd like to say thanks for pointing out some stuff that the mainstream audience cares about. Like I said we will take it into account, but won't bother to change stuff that simply can't be changed for the sake of realism. If you don't like women's cycling, which is quite obvious in your case, please give them sh*t instead of us, who are just trying to introduce the community to the sport. In the future, we might release an unrealistic one with the longer male races or male jerseys, who knows. (it might happen since i'd love more mountains and longer races, but hey )
Hopefully this pointless 'discussion' will end like the people here hope it would. I for one think discussing a review is pointless already, but it doesn't hurt to let the community know it's 'just a review' (and currently the only one around so...) that reflects the beliefs of only 1 person, who might lack the necessary experience and competence to completely test a database.
