Tom Chick must have been the only reviewer who didn't get the 2K goodie basket

Well, in case of the AI, I was hopeful; but this reviewer is correct. Not only that, but unless you play on high enough difficulty, the game cheats in your favor in combat; making you win a battle sometimes when you normally should not have (horrible thing to do). And they made the AI dumber on low levels as if that was necessary. The AI isn't good on high levels; so whoever made that decision obviously didn't playtest the game.

This is one reason why you can't trust hardly any reviews, because they probably play it once and say it's great. This guy actually spent some time with it and therefore could give a proper analysis.

This brings in the argument that stacks have in favor for them, they don't rely on AI that has to be as good as a human being. Because the AI will probably always suffer like this (unless a miracle happens), it makes the game far to easy to exploit.
 
With the exception of their favorite games most reviewers at the major sites don't seem all that familiar with the games they review. Also they're in a rush to get the review out ASAP and Civ takes some time and experience to pick out some issues accurately. This makes most game review sites useless for anyone who has or will spend a lot of time with a game.
 
Wow, he was 100% on target with that review! Sums up my opinion of the game perfectly.
 
Chinetter said:
Perhaps this is relevant:
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/14323-civilization-v-developer-firaxis-loses-20-staff/
Click to expand...
I suspect this lay-offs was ordered by their superiors back in New York (where Firaxis's owner Take-Two Interactive is headquartered) most likely because Take-Two were still suffering from losses. I remember reading news about their poor profit condition so often from GameSpot, despite their slate of blockbuster hits like Sid Meier's Civilization franchise, Rockstar North's Grand Theft Auto franchise, etc. Looks like they were forced to make pretty deep cuts, even into QA Department, this time around. I'm sure Firaxis isn't the only TT2 subsidiary to suffer this, though.
 
Civ 5 has been a big disappointment. I feel sick... I ahve been a fan since Civ 1. I remember playing it for 10, 12 and even 18 hours at a time. I have logged in not days or weeks but full months of playing civ1 to civ4. Now I have given Civ5 a long look and have to say this reveiw hits it on the head. I love Civ but hate Civ5.
 
I often wonder what kind of backscratching goes on with some of those websites devouted to reviewing games and the developers of said games.
 
The ratio of positive reviews to negative reviews pretty much matches the ratio on polls of people who like Civ 5 and people who don't.
 
shadowplay said:
I often wonder what kind of backscratching goes on with some of those websites devouted to reviewing games and the developers of said games.
Click to expand...

Tons. I can't think of a single game in the past 4-5 years with tons of pre-release hype that got below a 9.0 average from gaming mags/sites. True, many of these games actually are good and deserve the hype, but others fall short and only reviews from regular gamers actually reflect this.
 
Chief of Staff said:
I suspect this lay-offs was ordered by their superiors back in New York (where Firaxis's owner Take-Two Interactive is headquartered) most likely because Take-Two were still suffering from losses. I remember reading news about their poor profit condition so often from GameSpot, despite their slate of blockbuster hits like Sid Meier's Civilization franchise, Rockstar North's Grand Theft Auto franchise, etc. Looks like they were forced to make pretty deep cuts, even into QA Department, this time around. I'm sure Firaxis isn't the only TT2 subsidiary to suffer this, though.
Click to expand...

That seems like a good explanation. I have been saying the same thing for awhile.

2K Games is not in the best financial shape so they cut staff and pushed to get the game out ASAP.

With somewhat disastrous results. The game is unpolished with severe balancing issues. It does have enormous potential but releasing games in this state is not a wise thing to do.

I feel sorry for Firaxis. :(

Tom Chick should be commended.
 
I wish I had read that review before buying the game. Not that it would have stopped me from buying it but at least I would have been mentally prepared for the dissapointment instead of spending the last week desperately playing "just one more turn" always in the hope that the game would grow on me and it would start being fun like the previous 4 games of the franchise.
 
I think he makes a lot of valid points about the AI. However, I think the rating of C was far too harsh.

The AI in Civ (1,2,3 and 4) has always been pretty dumb, so I was not expecting Skynet...

However, in some of the games I've played the AI has made some great moves and earlier on, even on Warlord, surprised me with a pre-emptive attack that had me scrambling.

I commend Tom Chick for speaking his mind, but I am having so much fun playing Civ V right now, (Currently Steam tells me I'm at 48 hours played - by the way LOVE the Civ Achievements - they're FUN!) I feel bad for anyone who is really disappointed by the game... and here's the real deal, it's only going to get better.

*shrug*

and as far as the AI being super dumb, play a Large Pangea Map on King and choose Bismarck, Alexander, Hiawatha, Ramses, and the Arab guy as some of your opponents.... see how you do ;)
 
SkepticalSinner said:
I think he makes a lot of valid points about the AI. However, I think the rating of C was far too harsh.

The AI in Civ (1,2,3 and 4) has always been pretty dumb, so I was not expecting Skynet...

However, in some of the games I've played the AI has made some great moves and earlier on, even on Warlord, surprised me with a pre-emptive attack that had me scrambling.

I commend Tom Chick for speaking his mind, but I am having so much fun playing Civ V right now, (Currently Steam tells me I'm at 48 hours played - by the way LOVE the Civ Achievements - they're FUN!) I feel bad for anyone who is really disappointed by the game... and here's the real deal, it's only going to get better.

*shrug*
Click to expand...
You make a few good points which I wholeheartedly agree with. I think that AI are probably the most difficult and challenging aspect to program and that the new tactical combat system will take some time getting used to when adapting AI programming to it. Certainly, AI has pulled off some moves in Civ5 that I didn't expect from them sometimes in game.

It's a great game, just need some polishing (shoe polishing, anyone? ;)) and like you say, it's only going to get better, of course.
 
I can't see how many could have "rushed" their reviews of Civ V since they had the game for two weeks before the deadline embargo, which was the Friday before the US release.

All the big sites are well served by PR depts and would have received their review copies in ample time to delve into it.
 
Now... this is a good review of Civ5... this guy seems to actually have played the game for more than a single hour (C score is bit too harsh by the way)

Civ5 does good on a few things but it's a step backwards compared to Civ4 in (many) others... it's a great strategy game but from the Civ4 successor you would expect more.

I'm sure the first expansion will fix most of the issues and fill the holes... let's just hope it will come soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_J
30 years Civ - all the little things you didn't know
2
Replies
32
Views
10K
Horizons
Horizons
bite
  • Locked
Civ 5 Confirmed Features
55 56 57
Replies
1K
Views
616K
bite
bite
Formaldehyde
Do Mentally Handicapped People Have The Right To Not Be Raped And Sexually Molested?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
4K
Masada
Masada
Top Bottom