Need more reviews like this...

Discussion in 'CivBE - General Discussions' started by markusbeutel, Oct 26, 2014.

  1. AriochIV

    AriochIV Colonial Ninja

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,963
    Location:
    Nehwon
    Naturally this is subjective, but I think a 40% score is generally considered to be a failing grade, meaning the game is unplayable. I recognize it has shortcomings, and perhaps it doesn't live up to some expectations or its true potential... but I don't think you can really say it's unplayable. I find it quite playable.

    Surely there's some middle ground between "sugar coating" a review and what Tom Chick does.
     
  2. graspee

    graspee Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Messages:
    29
    Location:
    NW England
    A lot of people who bought Elemental and therefore got Fallen Enchantress and Legendary Heroes for free are very happy with Stardock, and you can see why. Less happy are the people who bought Fallen Enchantress and saw it get replaced by Legendary Heroes and have to pay for that game.
     
  3. screamingpalm

    screamingpalm Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    31
    Speaking of Stardock, I remember how the dev was making fun of people who were claiming that BE would just be a "reskin" lol. Wish I could find the quotes now...
     
  4. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Tom Chick is honest and doesn't mince words. He is tough but fair and the gaming industry would be a lot better off with more Tom Chicks out there.

    Anyway, here is his rating system:

    http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/our-ratings-system/

    Here is his FAQ that kind of deals with his rating system:

    http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/03/24/the-official-journey-review-faq/
     
  5. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Someone for Stardock was claiming that???

    If anything, the owner and his employees have had nothing but praise for Civilization 5.

    As to Civilization 5: Beyond Earth, it is more of a mod for Civilization 5 than it is a reskin.
     
  6. screamingpalm

    screamingpalm Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    31
    Yeah I know he did, was just pointing out that he was adamantly giving people a hard time that were saying BE would be a reskin. Then again, he almost implemented a Real ID system upon having a bad day one time...
     
  7. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Ah, ok. I understand.
     
  8. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    1 star, 2 stars, 3 stars, 60%, 90%, 8.65/10 whatever. All rating system and reviews are subjective, none is "honest". The only thing that matters is if someone judges a game on the same points that you are.

    Read the review and if what someone doesn't like matches your tastes then follow the conclusion.

    People should spend less time arguing single digits (or stars) in a rating and more on the arguments provided for it.
     
  9. prideaux

    prideaux Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    27
    the problem is that people look at anything to do with Civilization a little too close and a lot pedantic, even more than most games these days.

    Though in some senses it is well written, he is looking at it so closely it is hard for him to be fair. Dont get me wrong I love BE but there is so many things I hate about, like CiV before it. But never once did I expect these games to make all the most perfect choices, if I wanted to be like that I would learn to mod and change it myself.

    Some things he is very right on but the two star score seems based on the game he WANTS not the game we GOT. Big difference.
     
  10. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Agreed. I do hope Firaxis busts their butts to address the criticisms and problems brought up in the review. I think everyone can agree with that. :)
     
  11. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,026
    I didn't really know about Quarter To Three, but I'm glad to find a reviewer I can disagree with and still respect. Not about this game, mind you, but some of the other reviews you guys mentioned.

    Anyway, I think his 2/5 requires no justification. Why? Because apparently he's the only d*mn reviewer out there who uses free-thinking to come up with his own scoring system. His stars are like Netflix's or Amazon's stars; they don't try to be objective (which is completely impossible unless you want to let other people make your buying decisions for you).

    I would've given this game a 2.5/5, but that's when I'm doing the review. He's perfectly justified to make his review 2/5, which basically means a half step below sub-par; which means he just doesn't really like it.

    That 2/5 isn't supposed to be a 40% "grade", which implies a total bomb of a failure. I guess if we were to convert his 2/5 to a typical mass-media percentage system it would probably be somewhere between a 60% and 75%? Why do I even care?

    So I agree; good review.
     
  12. Biz_

    Biz_ Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Messages:
    482
    a reviewer's job isn't to guess whether the average gamer will enjoy a game or not

    he can write a review for any target audience of his choice - even if it's only 1 person (himself)


    if that target audience includes people who know how to play strategy games, then the reality is the game has huge weaknesses. how that translates to numbers is pretty subjective...
    but if you look at how polished games in other genres are and if your global reviewing scale has some number that translates to "good and without game-breaking flaws", then civ5/BE is nowhere near that number for the target audience I mentioned
     
  13. jokii

    jokii Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    85
    I agree with reviewer. 2/5 for broken game ( ...and for the third time in a row from Firaxis )
    Civ 5 and Civ BNW are not competitive games. They are builder games, like SimCity. They are broken by a bad AI. And after 4 years we got another game, broken, like those two. In Civilization Beyond Earth AI is not opponent but just a decoration. And I think only noobs would disagree.
    You may distract yourself in a economic game, making decisions, and love the game for it.
    But you will find that your all decisions are pointless, and you are playing " against yourself " just if you try war part of the game.
     
  14. Mckertis

    Mckertis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    29
    Right. We're talking about a guy who said Deus Ex was <snip>.

    Anyway, i do enjoy reading Tom Hack's articles because he certainly does have a way with words, but his evaluations are generally complete bollocks and i dont care about those in the least. I almost always find myself to hold the opposite view to his.

    Moderator Action: I doubt that is a direct quote. Please do not try to avoid the autocensor.
    Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
     
  15. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    6,021
    All of that's well and good and positive, but does any of that mean that Elemental was a good game and deserved good reviews?
     
  16. Fabien

    Fabien Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    Location:
    Switzerland
    Given Stardocks track record and the fact that the Person in Question gave Elemental a good Rating and Civ 5/BA a bad one makes me wonder the Person in question is even able to tell a working game from a not working one.

    Elemental at the time of ist release was in a completely broken state far, far worse compared to where BA is right now.
     
  17. Kissamies

    Kissamies Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Messages:
    576
    Location:
    Finland
    Heh, "Katamari ball of inconsequential decisions". I love that metaphor.
     
  18. leandrobraz

    leandrobraz Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2014
    Messages:
    3
    I disagree with this. I naturally recognized that BE isn't Civ VI and that they wouldn't be able to make a complete overhaul on the AI. There's some improvements but off course they wouldn't be able to actually address the issue.

    I naturally hope that in Civ VI they will rethink the whole one unit per tile system, maybe use a limited stack (2 or 3 per tile). They will be able to improve the AI in a significant way only if they redesigned the whole thing, which clearly isn't what BE is trying to do, after all, it's a Civ V spin-off, not the actual next entry in the franchise.

    Aside from that, it's a pretty fair review. He recognize what is good about the game but criticize what is problematic. It's good to see a negative review that do it, in the middle of so many user reviews that are just childish whine.
     
  19. Jimbo30

    Jimbo30 Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    575
    Location:
    Scotland
    2/5? Get real. I'd never sink 25 hrs into a game (over 4 days) that only deserved 2/5.
     
  20. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,026
    I'm going to defend Tom's philosophy a little here, even I hold some games in high regard that he didn't like.

    You use the term "deserved". Reviews shouldn't be there to tell you what a game objectively deserves. It's up to you to make that call. Tom doesn't very much like the game. That comes out to about a 2 out of 5 (if you read the way he rates his game).

    Tom isn't attempting to tell other people what the game "deserves", he's only sharing his opinion on his own personal enjoyment. And if you read his entire article, he explains all of the reasons rather eruditely. I defend this way of reviewing because I think it's the only honest way to do a review, personally.
     

Share This Page