There is definitely a bandwagon mentality. It's also true with good games rated low. Once a couple reviewers give it a lukewarm review, it becomes a sacrificial lamb; proof that "we don't give a game a high score just because it's from a popular company". It's the constant fight between pleasing advertisers and convincing readers you're not pleasing advertisers. Nothing is clear-cut, but it's hard not to sense it sometimes. I doubt video games are much worse with this than other industries. This game had (and has) great ideas. Chiefly, 1UPT and hex grid is implemented quite well for a Civ-style game. I can hardly enjoy Civ 4 (even the amazing mods) anymore because of those two changes. But there were obviously many glaring issues. Even a full year later, there are certainly some areas everyone would like to see improved. Naval AI for starters. Honestly, it's good to see what your favourite reviewers have to say, but if you want to know, and have time to study it, look for a fan forum like this one. This forum has a huge variety of opinions and personally I don't see a vocal minority; if you average all the opinions together, it paints a pretty good picture of Civ 5 imo.