2010 PC game of the year according to gamespy is... CiV!

[Guardian_PL]

It's not mediocre as far as sales and publicity are concerned!

You just have no clue... If not for the outstanding success of Civ4, Sid Meier's name and loads of marketing Civ5 wouldn't sell nearly as good. It's a crappy game, made by cutting corners to save money (hey we're green now, who needs manual? You can buy it for 14.95 from Brady Games if you want but we are green ), full of idiotic design decisions to milk more money from the franchise in times of financial troubles.

But hey, some people are loving Jay Z and I'm fine with that. Problem arises when that style is being sold to say metal fans as "the next best thing, organic and streamlined"...

There was no love when making Civ5, only greed. If you want to see a game made with passion play Betrayal At Krondor. Or Civ4, where there was layer upon layer, and everyone, be it a hardcore or casual could enjoy it.

 

[Medopu]

You just have no clue... If not for the outstanding success of Civ4, Sid Meier's name and loads of marketing Civ5 wouldn't sell nearly as good. It's a crappy game, made by cutting corners to save money (hey we're green now, who needs manual? You can buy it for 14.95 from Brady Games if you want but we are green ), full of idiotic design decisions to milk more money from the franchise in times of financial troubles.

But hey, some people are loving Jay Z and I'm fine with that. Problem arises when that style is being sold to say metal fans as "the next best thing, organic and streamlined"...

There was no love when making Civ5, only greed. If you want to see a game made with passion play Betrayal At Krondor. Or Civ4, where there was layer upon layer, and everyone, be it a hardcore or casual could enjoy it.

you can download manual from the internet you know. And I've never seen one strange metal lover spaming on Jay Z forums time and time again. As if anyone wants to listen how Jay Z only wants money (metal and Civ4 are given out for free).

 

[builer680]

you can download manual from the internet you know. And I've never seen one strange metal lover spaming on Jay Z forums time and time again. As if anyone wants to listen how Jay Z only wants money (metal and Civ4 are given out for free).

One thing I "used" to like to do a lot was read the Manual while in the cra... err, bathroom. That and the Tech / Unit tree. Not including the little "extras" just screams cheapness and corner cutting. If it was about being "green" they could have used recycled paper for all I care. But of course it wasn't, it was about making it cheaper to produce. Fine in principle, but it sure leaves me feeling like I got the shaft.

When combined with what appears to be an unpolished/unfinished game in literally dozens of aspects, compelled usage of DRM to "stick it to pirates", enormous load times, the 2 minute-plus End of Turns, inexplicable frequent crashes with no meaningful support since release, changes to mechanics that took 19 years and 4 previous games to create, only to throw them out the window in favor of ideas that simply were not tested and balanced nearly enough... it just saddens me to see the game in this state after playing Civilization since I was a little boy in 1991.

Literally NOTHING I can think of in this game, not even the packaging and its contents, can be considered an unqualified, unconditional improvement over what came before.

These things all scream "money-grab" in their own different ways. The multitude and magnitude of Civ 5's shortcomings is simply undeniable.

 

[Thormodr]

you can download manual from the internet you know. And I've never seen one strange metal lover spaming on Jay Z forums time and time again. As if anyone wants to listen how Jay Z only wants money (metal and Civ4 are given out for free).

You would see angry strange metal fans if their favorite strange metal band decided to release a new album that sounded like Jay Z.

 

[Medopu]

compelled usage of DRM to "stick it to pirates", enormous load times, the 2 minute-plus End of Turns, inexplicable frequent crashes with no meaningful support since release, changes to mechanics that took 19 years and 4 previous games to create, only to throw them out the window in favor of ideas that simply were not tested and balanced nearly enough

To that, I agree to some extent but stick with me. There have been similar problems with Civ 4 at start which sooner or later got patched up and have made game playable.

This fight against pirates seems reasonable. I know they think they could get more money if there were no quandry with pirates and we could talk about that a whole day but the point is that they naively think their DRM will block the pirates, the hell it's even possible to play multiplayer on cracked version.

Loading times are long and painful for me and so are crashes. Game could do with some improvements to preformance, fixes and patches, so those things can change and improve. I won't give up on them just yet.

And I probably have even more problems with the game than you have and I hope things will get patched up. In the end, I paid for this game, I'll certainly try to squeeze as much as possible from my purchase even if it does turn out to be horrible.

 

[killeah]

Can´t give CiV 5 the "game of the year" stamp, sadly. I agree with several here that few alternatives exist for the title, if any.
However CiV 5 just need fundamental correcting before it´s enjoyable. Believe me I´ve already passed the 400 hours played in CiV 5, witch I reckon is enough to know the game - and there´s just too many bugs - a game of the year should have close to none.

let me list just three to keep the list accessible and to the point.

1. The fact that you can´t finish maps / games on larger settings (Differs from comp specs, but everyone is struggeling on huge for sure)

- A game of the year means you can play all the content not just half.

2. As mentioned earlier the enormous waiting times, from you start the game, while you play it and when you want to access interface in game. not even 8 GB of ram and quad core is helping this to work at an acceptable level

- would be something one could accept for a "game of the year 1995", we´re writing 2010 here!

3. A game that sells itself for "outstanding multiplayer capability", is so bug ridden and unstable, that CiV IV, which was notoriously know for being a multiplayer hell, works better.

- you can´t develop a game in 2010 with a multiplayer angle and promise, and then give the buying customers a litterally broken feature.


My two Cents.

And I didn´t even start with the A.I - oh wait they fixed that

 

[gingerbill]

It's a good game. I'm loving it.

same here . And so did all the major reviewers and lots of other people . Just not the type of person who sits round various forums all day moaning " games were better in my day " .

 

[TheDanish]

On a lighter note, I was very happy to see that CiV won not one award from IGN.

 

[Venereus]

On a lighter note, I was very happy to see that CiV won not one award from IGN.

It's IGN. Even if Civ V was a good game, they'd still like Leisure Suit Larry better.

 

[fantsu]

No way the best, not even in the TOP 100 of 2010.
What comes to Starcraft 2, it is worse, on every front.
Overhyped mediocre game.
Mass Effect 2 was huge dissappointment too.

Maybe Amnesia? Just Cause 2? Minecraft? Mafia 2? Bad Company 2? Plain Sight? GTA4:EfLC? Super Meat Boy? Napoleon Total War? ArmA2:OA? Tropico 3? Metro 2033? Even Black Ops is ok.

Just to think few games that made it better this year.

 

[MadRat]

Hmm seems some of the "good stuff" was send to the gamespy offices.

I have given up reading gamespit 4-5 years ago - are they still amateur and juvenile?

Rat

 

[DavidPBacon]

You would see angry strange metal fans if their favorite strange metal band decided to release a new album that sounded like Jay Z.

Errrrr, not wanting to be anoying, but remember Jay Z and Linking Park Partnership in Numb? I think we have to find another comparison.

 

[jtwood]

haha this is just more salt in the CiV wound

 

[jtwood]

If you've ever been curious about Civ but intimidated by its complexity, this is the one you absolutely need to check out.

are they really implying that people should try this version out because it's less complex?

 

[Guardian_PL]

Errrrr, not wanting to be anoying, but remember Jay Z and Linking Park Partnership in Numb? I think we have to find another comparison.

? Where's metal in all of this?

 

[bryanw1995]

One thing I "used" to like to do a lot was read the Manual while in the cra... err, bathroom. That and the Tech / Unit tree. Not including the little "extras" just screams cheapness and corner cutting. If it was about being "green" they could have used recycled paper for all I care. But of course it wasn't, it was about making it cheaper to produce. Fine in principle, but it sure leaves me feeling like I got the shaft.

When combined with what appears to be an unpolished/unfinished game in literally dozens of aspects, compelled usage of DRM to "stick it to pirates", enormous load times, the 2 minute-plus End of Turns, inexplicable frequent crashes with no meaningful support since release, changes to mechanics that took 19 years and 4 previous games to create, only to throw them out the window in favor of ideas that simply were not tested and balanced nearly enough... it just saddens me to see the game in this state after playing Civilization since I was a little boy in 1991.

Literally NOTHING I can think of in this game, not even the packaging and its contents, can be considered an unqualified, unconditional improvement over what came before.

These things all scream "money-grab" in their own different ways. The multitude and magnitude of Civ 5's shortcomings is simply undeniable.

sounds like you're either using a min spec machine or you're playing huge maps (or both). stick to small/standard maps and quick/standard playtimes and those 2 minute between turn issues should be alleviated. also, turn down your graphics until you get a newer card. and before you complain about having to do all of this remember that cIV wasn't exactly easy for an average computer to play back in 05.

drm is a pita, true, but I personally like having all my games in one spot instead of having to cart dozens/hundreds of cd's around forever. I just bought the cIII/cIV pack for $10 on steam just to keep them all in one place. guess what? they run better/smoother/load faster now and I have zero issues with either of them, whereas playing with the cd was a chore.

 

[PredatorFett]

I think there's been some shady dealings in dimly-lit alleys between 2K and GameSpy.

True, I second that.

 

[PredatorFett]

I guess this could be true because let's be fair, most PC games these days are junk. Sorry to sound like an old fart ... but I mean, I think the PC's best days as a gaming platform are behind it. The future is in web apps, like Civ for Facebook, or games that run in Java inside your internet browser, etc.

You are dense. Moderator Action: Please make your point without any insults. Facebook games are awful. They require fewer brain cells to play than Civ V, or dare I say it, Simcity Societies. You can't lose. EVER. The games on facebook are all the same format, and bland as hell.

 

[Mustakrakish]

While it suffered on initial release from slightly boneheaded A.I., that's been pretty much fixed in the latest patches

Whatta!? Wha? What!!?? What the f... WHAT!?!?!?!?

 

[builer680]

sounds like you're either using a min spec machine or you're playing huge maps (or both). stick to small/standard maps and quick/standard playtimes and those 2 minute between turn issues should be alleviated. also, turn down your graphics until you get a newer card. and before you complain about having to do all of this remember that cIV wasn't exactly easy for an average computer to play back in 05.

drm is a pita, true, but I personally like having all my games in one spot instead of having to cart dozens/hundreds of cd's around forever. I just bought the cIII/cIV pack for $10 on steam just to keep them all in one place. guess what? they run better/smoother/load faster now and I have zero issues with either of them, whereas playing with the cd was a chore.

My rig (in particular my RAM, CPU, and GFX card) is FAR above the minimum AND recommended specs. I play about half Standard, half Small maps. I have played multiple full games on all speeds, difficulty levels, and with all numbers of Civs and CS's, including 0 CS and 1 other Civ for a look at OCC.

The game is slow and poorly optimized, there is no getting around this. This is most evident late game, when turns drag for minutes, no exaggeration. In any event, advising users to limit gameplay options such as map size and game speed is a poor attempt at disguising what I can only imagine is very sloppy and inefficient coding.

I suspect this because the games that came before were undeniably more complex (in that they had more units and data to process in general) and in many cases had superior graphics.

My issues stand, and aren't attributable to my system. They are the result of a rushed, watered down, and poorly put together game that wasn't made with love, it was made to get out the door ASAP so they could start getting their money. Nothing else.

Edit: I am happy you like compelled DRM. I don't. I would rather it be optional except for the initial installation to give your key over the internet and verify ownership upon installation. The "CD as dongle key" issue is the lesser of two evils for me. Not only for the myriad issues that can arise if my or Steam's ISP goes down for a few days, but for the larger issue of if Steam's business model fails in the future... we are all left holding the bag with absolutely nothing to show for the money we paid. This is magnified the more games you buy. If you like having your games all in one place, then it's as simple as making a new folder and installing to it. And it's free.