CFC rating

[Matrix]

With one exception, Civ4 has not had any rating below a 9.0! But what rating will the CivFanatics give?

I'll give you an average, median and modus once we get little more votes.

I myself give a nine. I certainly think this is the best version of the best game yet, but it's not perfect as I think the requirements are too high. I got quite a new computer (Duron 2600+, 512 MB RAM, macho-videocard) and Doom III runs better than Civ4. But the game itself is wonderful.

How about the rest of CivFanatics?

 

[BeefontheBone]

Ah, thought you wanted to know how big a contribution this would make to global warming.

 

[Equisilus]

I gave it a 9, and that's something from me since only six other PC games that I've ever played have gotten a score between 9 and 10 (with the highest a 9.3; four were RPGs and the other two were Adventure).

 

[SuperBeaverInc.]

9. It is really a great game.

 

[Mercade]

I certainly think this is the best version of the best game yet, but it's not perfect as I think the requirements are too high. I got quite a new computer (Duron 2600+, 512 MB RAM, macho-videocard) and Doom III runs better than Civ4. But the game itself is wonderful.

Apparently my 7 is the lowest score so far. The gameplay as such has improved over C3C, but I find the resource requirements too demanding and I don't care much for the eye candy and the constant zooming. Matrix hints at this, too. Plus I find various inconveniences in the interface, e.g. information not available when you're asked for a choice. The music is great. I don't care for the Sean Connery sound-alike tech-narrator.

 

[King Flevance]

I say 8. It is a very NICE addition to the civ collection and they did an awesome job with the new features and gameplay.

Although I figure, they have also not thought out all the new changes. Like the messed up war system, where it is better to raze cities as you conquer another civ. Yet, you cant raze or abandon a city you control. (I think any city with population < 3 should be Disbandable as an option, even if it just razes. (Prefer a settler out of the deal though.)

Technology tree needs work and the world could be larger, less tundra/jungle/desert would make it more fun as well. Dont remove them, just lay off. I walk out of the tundra and into a desert, which is followed up by some small woods and then jungle? What planet is this? And how did humans show up here?

Overall it is a very awesome version of civ, the best yet. I cant wait to see 5.

 

[Paalikles]

8. The current bug list is reason enough to remove 2points from 10 IMO

It could be divided into these cathegories:

sound: 10
gameplay: 9
bugs: 6
requirements: 6
interface: 8

but no need to calculate the average from my scoring, since different weights is added to each cathegory

 

[Furiey]

Can't even get it to run - UK DVD version just asks me to insert to correct CD-ROM and restart the application . Had to give it a 1.

 

[walt526]

I gave it a 7 for right now, mostly because its not as mod-friendly as Civ III was out of the box. Once the SDK is released and lives up to expectations (along with some third-party utilities that are currently in the works), I will readily reconsider a 9 or 10. But for me (and I think most of us), being able to customize the game is a critical element of the Civilization-playing experience. So in that respect, its been a bit of a disappointment compared to what I had hoped it would be right out of the box.

But I am very optimistic that the game will eventually be everything that I expected. And it definitely seems to be a very fertile platform for future expansion, so I'm expecting that I'll still be playing it for hours year+ down the road--which is more than I can say for most games.


EDIT: Also, the Civilpedia was a totally unexcusable disappointment. With very little extra effort to add hypertext capability, it could have been as user-friendly as Civ III's. Also, it poorly explains (or ignores) a few key game concepts (such as the impact of power on factories). That knocks it down at least half a grade.

 

[vodkamattvt]

I gave it an 8, at release. I had to do some major tweaking to get it running on a Athlon 64 3200+ and Radeon 9700 pro (downgrade the drivers to 4.12). New improvements are great, but lack some polish in some areas.

Actually I would get it an 8.8, only because it has a lot of potential in the future and multiplayer is not an afterthought. However, I rounded down for this thread

 

[AER]

The gameplay as such has improved over C3C, but I find the resource requirements too demanding and I don't care much for the eye candy and the constant zooming.

You may want to turn of combat zoom in the options - it makes the game much smoother, IMO.

I don't care for the Sean Connery sound-alike tech-narrator.

That's Leonard Nemoy! I don't think he was trying to sound like Sean Connery

That said, I think he does the voices for the English units as well, which is kind of annoying. All my warriors sound like Spock.

Anyway, I rated the game a 9 - anything that can keep me this absorbed for this amount of time deserves a 9. I would rate it at 9.5 or higher if not for all the bugs, and some of the odd tech decisions (late cannons, near-useless Internet, etc.)

 

[Novaya Havoc]

I think the poll here is a little skewed.

10: Perfect.
9 - 7: Solid.
6 - 4: Adequate.
3 - 1: Poor.
0: Horrendous.

When you make a 6 "just adequate," 7-10 are going to get the highest votes by far.

 

[AndrewN]

I voted 9. Its not perfect as nothing ever is. I think it is better (for its time) than Civ II and Civ III, I am not sure if it beats Civ I.

I do have a number of problems, the main one being I can't finish a game, but I put that down to my crappy computer and I am anticipating most of the problems I am facing will disappear next week when my new one arrives

 

[Roland Ehnström]

9 from me too. Will be a 10 once they fix the bugs.

-- Roland

 

[MarkUCLA]

Well, Im one of the few that gave it a 10, and I think a 10 is well deserved.

The anxiety I had waiting on this game to come out was immeasurable. After the game installed, and I watched the opening movie in awe, I felt I was in a place I've been to only a few times before. Only a few select classic games can give you that feeling. You guys know what I mean. The old classic games where you try to savor the 1st few days you play because you'll never enjoy that kind of feeling again once the newness and the excitement wear off. Or later on, you reflect on how great the first few times you played were. Its why we continue to play computer games at all. To capture that feeling again. Civ IV did this very thing for me.

Im not a very good Civ player, but I do know one thing about this version. I started with Civ III and I never played long enough to even reach railroads. I just loved to start the game, get so far, then when the competition got heated, I'd make an excuse to start a new game.

So far in Civ IV, I've not only reached railroads, but I can not wait to play this game till its final conclusion. I've had absolutely no inkling of starting a new game. Not till this one is complete.

There is only one kind of "perfect" game, and that is a game that you make yourself. Because this can not be the case, it's very easy to point out one thing or another that you would change, but the game is made for the masses in which you have to sacrifice for the whole. So those little changes we'd want to see in a game will not detract from me the way this game has played out so far.

I love this game to death and with the upcoming modding, patches, expansions, fixes, it can only get better from here.

There can only be one game that will ever be better than Civ IV to me, and that is.........Alpha Centauri II......... Till then, this one rules all.

 

[BlueLikeYou]

1

Until the game is fixed so I can get through without crashing, the game is worthless to me.

 

[neriana]

I give it a 9, but definitely not because the requirements are too high, as I don't think they are at all. Rather, there are bad bugs for too many people (though not me), there aren't enough civilizations, and there aren't enough female leaders. But the gameplay is nearly perfect. I would slow down the industrial era, add an "enlightenment" era, and change some other weird tech things, though.

After a year or two, I think I'll be rating it a 10, because the bugs will be fixed and expansion packs plus mods will rectify my other issues.

 

[Phoenix_56721]

(I gave it a 9) I'm drooling at the final Civ4 (Civ4 complete) when everything running great and they added all the expansion Civs, Then I will give a 10...

 

[Lorteungen]

I gave it a 7.

I like the game a lot and I'm very happy with some of the gameplay decisions they made. It's not perfect though so I wouldn't give it more than a 9.

However, I had to deduct something for the atrocious performance! It is absolutely inexcusable and it's a mystery to me how firaxis let alone any of the beta testers could fail to notice something like this. After reading this thread however I'm sorry I didn't give it a 5. What were they thinking releasing a game that eats away 600Mb of memory just starting up?

 

[Belboz]

9/10. My favorite of the series so far. Fix a few of the glitches, and I'd probably give it a 10.