Isn't that in turn a bit harsh? Civ5 is much closer to Civ4 than CivRev in my opinion (I have never played the full version of CivRev though, only the demo). Civ5 It is still a PC strategy game, it is still a Civlization game, it still has the spirit of its predecessors. It is less complex than Civ4 in terms of variables that you can influence but it is in itself still a complex game.
Civ Rev, as a lover of the civ series IMO is a failed experiment to move away from a complex thinking game (chess) to a simple thinking game like (checkers).
I am not saying these isn't a market for it on the console, of course there is, but on sites like this and others, this is NOT what the majority was looking for. We want variables and some of us micromanaging. Its a PC game, its supposed to have more depth!
I should not be able to win 75% of my games on deity after a month. Where is the replay value in that? Where is the hook that makes Civ so fun...ala ONE MORE TURN
All the civ games are flawed to one point or another, no AI can compete against the human, but trying to pawn Civ V off as a successor along the series line is a no no. It's a slightly more difficult Civ Rev, and a way to easy version Civ 1-4.
If the Civ series is going to follow in the footsteps of Civ Rev, which it practically admitted in the podcast (dont' want to lose casual gamers) then I fear we will never see what they admitted was perhaps the most balanced of the Civ games (CIV IV BTS)
why move away so radically, it represents a fundamental shift in thinking, and I think that is what pisses so many fans off. Civ Rev never had a bit following anyways, why would you cater to that atmosphere?
CIV IV BTS is the standard now, CIV V should have built upon that, not moved away from it. Interesting concepts, poorly implemented, with an AI that seems unsure as to what its strategy is. Game has balance issues which currently ruin it.
So....back on point, Civ Rev does not represent an individual as being "stupid". It represents an individual who can ease into a complex series with a slightly easier edition. Far less intimidating. I get that, but what about those of us who want more (many of us)?
Civ was the pinnacle of strategy TBS games, in its current rendition, that is not the case.
I am not saying my opinion is right, or that even those who like some of what I have to say will agree with everything, its just an opinion.
What I hate is fanboi's who can't see whats really happening here, who just blindly love anything even though the flaws are numerous and ruin a potentially great game.
The other thing I hate is reviewers who give absurdly high grades to a game they obviously put little time into...come on, I want an honest review, not some garbage that was paid for by the PR department.
Lastly I really want a big company to come out and admit that the all mighty dollar was the real reason we released a game that was not beta tested properly.
$100 for the Deluxe edition.....haha money grabbers.
Piracy is wrong, but I understand some peoples motives for doing so, aside from obvious greed. When you can't trust the companies making games, or the "official" reviewers to give it an honest review, things can get chaotic.
anyways, probably get warned again about the piracy part, but if someone can't see that a part of piracy stems from garbage, and being burned for 60-100 bucks a pop, well...you are truly blind.
I will agree that a lot of piracy is pure greed however, and that piracy as a rule of thumb is just WRONG.