Civ4 BTS Review on GameSpot: 8.5/10

Thunderfall

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Oct 25, 2000
Messages
12,534
GameSpot has also posted their review of Civilization IV: Beyond the Sword, giving the expansion 8.5 out of 10. The rating is actually 0.1 lower than the 8.6 score they gave Civ4 Warlords. They like the new enhanced features and the mod content, but said the interface remains somewhat clutter and that the new espionage feature doesn't work that well. Here is an excerpt:

Beyond the Sword's additions are primarily to Civ IV's core gameplay, so the expansion doesn't make a huge leap forward in terms of graphics or sound. But that's just fine, since the game's thematic, instrumental score continues to work well with the game, and the new graphics (in the form of new mod units and movies, as well as new leaders with new animations) fit into the game without a hitch. Unfortunately, Beyond the Sword doesn't address the somewhat cluttered interface that Civ IV had; in fact, it adds a bit more clutter with the event system, which pops up windows in the upper-right corner and logs them in a scrolling box at the top-center of your screen. Some of the clutter may still seem intimidating to beginners, but this expansion isn't necessarily for people who have never played Civ. And if you have, you shouldn't have many problems picking up the nuances of the interface, and you'll probably be too busy trying out all the new gameplay features that fundamentally change, and in some cases, revitalize, an already-classic game. Though not all of the additions in the expansion are perfect, there's plenty of new stuff in Beyond the Sword for Civ fans to play with, and plenty of reasons to dive back into the game and start taking "just one more turn" all over again.

>> Read the review
 
Gamespot recently changed their rating system - it used to be an average of different scores for graphics, gameplay, value, sound and other stuff, now it's just a number between 0 and 10 with half point increments that the reviewer picks to give an overall appraisal of the game. They felt like the old system was artificially precise - an 8.6 was not necessarily a better game than an 8.5 of even than an 8.3, that was just the way the averages fell.
So the 8.5 given to Beyond the Sword does not mean Gamespot thinks it's a worse expansion than Warlords.

That said, I read the review and I'm not that impressed (with the review). Why harp on the interface? But I guess the review is aimed at people who aren't already "civfanatics" so to speak who might actually care that the interface is cluttered.
 
Don't pay attention to the numbers. Though their review of Warlords is terrible. I watched the video review...the guy has no idea what is going on. Did he not notice the expansion has...nothing in it?

Gamespot's reviews are bad. See Solver's on Apolyton CS, he goes into great depth on BTS.
 
yeah gamespot reviews have gotten very very bad, this one for example shows how amateur their "journalists" are.
 
From the Gamespot Review:

"Beyond the Sword adds new world leaders to play as, as well as new leader traits that help expand certain strategies, such as the "protective" trait, whose defensive properties aid players who seek to conquer the world using scientific research to win the space race, and the "imperialistic" trait, which greatly speeds the production of "settler" units that can be used to stake new claims in uncharted territory by building new cities."

Did Gamespot miss that these traits were added in Warlords?
 
i get the impression that the reviewer has only spent a coupe of hours playing the game to base that review on. Sure enought that a couple of hours on a FPS game or a RTS game may be sufficient but CIV requires many play sessions to access many of the new features. Especially since many of the features are based on the modern era, it seems from the review that the reviewer didnt get that far.

Also, "Improved game features" seems to be slured in this review as obviously the reviewer prefers nice fancy graphics and sound. I find this annoying as the industry as a whole is crying out to make games better though better gameplay!
 
From the Gamespot Review:

"Beyond the Sword adds new world leaders to play as, as well as new leader traits that help expand certain strategies, such as the "protective" trait, whose defensive properties aid players who seek to conquer the world using scientific research to win the space race, and the "imperialistic" trait, which greatly speeds the production of "settler" units that can be used to stake new claims in uncharted territory by building new cities."

Did Gamespot miss that these traits were added in Warlords?

Is he even aware of Warlords content ? They just grabbed the guy who makes coffee for the FPS staff and voila !
 
"but this expansion isn't necessarily for people who have never played Civ."

Is it allowed in the country where gamespot is hosted to spread lies? the savegame MAF = gamekilled 100% for anyone who likes to play large games. That has been taken care of first after 1,5year by the BtS team! All other Civ4 team(s) never fixed it on any civ4 patches nor on the warlords patches!
First with BtS they fixed this MAJOR BUG!

Either gamespot is NOT reviewing, but just writing something fast to get people to their site and they get advertisements income, or they are just complete morons!

just saw the other "more positive" reviews...i can agree with all positive reviews...but this comment from gamespot that you don't need this expansion is really BS! ANYONE who likes to play a decent game MUST have BtS! gamespot is full of BS..really! I doubt they ever played the game for 1 second. I am the most devastating critisist on the planet for any company! and BtS is, given alot of minor issues, which is normal on software release, a true BIG BUG FIXER and adds tons of good and nice new stuff!

BAN gamespot from civfanatics i'd say! Anyone who doesn't like BtS to fix the MAF, and not even notices it, is either a moron, a lier, or just totally nuts! yeah, some lockup issues are left in BtS release...pretty sure Firaxis will fix them pronto..it's just BS, you can ask anyone on the forums how i critisized warlords expansion and the MAF and they didnt fix it....BtS does it all! Decend extras, MAF fixed..what a BS reviews gamespot produces..

Thunder, Ban them! please, they are totally nuts..I'd say any program which fixed MAJOR bugs, adds alot of new cool balanced stuff...and just has some minor issues left(which is normal on software release) earns a 9/10 at least!

and what good is a 8.anything ranking, if you put negative words in the article! which are lied also! You can give a 10/10, but if you tell people bad things:"adds nothing special" or anything similar, that's the same as writing down 4/10! people, BUY BtS! you won't regret! That's my review!
 
these professional review sites suck... different person reviewed each expansion.

1) scoring. it isn't always a score based on how good the game is. some newb at gamespot is trying to tell you how good of an expansion it is based on stuff like price and added content and comparison to the original. essentially, they tell me the expansion is worse than the original game somehow when i look at the scores. in 2 years standards have changed so much... yeah right

2) reviewer & audience. these guys play lots of games without going in depth and they are writing for a casual audience. they will overvalue single player almost every time because that's what their readers care about. they play the bare minimum (rush through the scenarios or whatever) so they can get their review out before the other sites.

3) bias. there's no real standard for comparison anywhere. the reviewer arbitrarily gives a score that cannot be compared to other games in the same genre. they give console games higher scores than PC games. they expect more from "better" companies and sometimes dock points for lack of "innovation", but sometimes they just give some of these games high scores because they're popular and readers want to see that.

i'll bet the reviewer didn't play the game very much. they wouldn't have completed everything. they just see what gets added and they know what civ is basically like. it's like first impressions. that may work fine for rpgs or adventure games you see on consoles and stuff but it fails for deep multiplayer PC games.

honestly, i would prefer some "random n00b's" review over a big website's every time as long as they're being honest and not trolling.
 
Gamespot ratings mean NOTHING. I mean, look at the user score compared to their scores. It's always off by AT LEAST .5 points every time. All those reviewers need to DIE. :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
 
Its quite easy to tell that the guy reviewing this has not actually played the game much (if at all!) :lol:

What a joke...I dont think i'll be bothering to look at gamespot anymore (not that I do much anyway)
 
Back
Top Bottom