• We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days. For more updates please see here.

Reviews rise and fall

RohirrimElf

Emperor
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
1,263
on metacritc the first reviews are coming in. Overall very positive. Polygon has something interesting to say about diplomatic AI decisions. It is a good read.

(Cant copy and paste links with the devise i’m using currently. Should be made a sticky)
 
Do people still take 'professional' game journalism seriously? Take notice only of people who have played the game for a few days. Only a fool trusts his money to 'professional' game reviewers.

Even the non professional ones I don't trust. People like Angry Joe Show. I believe Youtubers become biased because they are given early access to stuff, and that affects their reviews of stuff. They don't want to tee off the gaming companies and lose that sweet early access.

That said, I prefer watching early gameplay videos, as I did with Civilization 6 with Quill 18, and I knew exactly what I was getting into. Actual game play is the best review possible.
 
IGN: http://m.uk.ign.com/articles/2018/02/07/sid-meiers-civilization-6-rise-and-fall-review

Polygon: https://www.polygon.com/2018/2/7/16981100/civilization-6-rise-and-fall-review-pc

Both of those look quite promising from my point of view as a relatively peaceful builder who hates the AI forward settling :cool:

I look forward to converting any AI cities that try to get too close :D

Do people still take 'professional' game journalism seriously? Take notice only of people who have played the game for a few days. Only a fool trusts his money to 'professional' game reviewers.

I like to read the reviews, but I don't give them a lot of weight in my final decision to buy when I'm on the fence. I like to read independent game reviews most, but those are pretty tough to find sometimes.
 
Do people still take 'professional' game journalism seriously? Take notice only of people who have played the game for a few days. Only a fool trusts his money to 'professional' game reviewers.
Well in my case I pre-ordered a while ago so reviews aren't about deciding whether or not to splash out. It's more that I find it interesting to see others' perspective on the game and to see if common complaints keep coming up. If everyone said it was awful I might consider cancelling my pre-order but that's unlikely at this stage!
 
Do people still take 'professional' game journalism seriously? Take notice only of people who have played the game for a few days. Only a fool trusts his money to 'professional' game reviewers.
compared to the no experience whatsoever the rest of us have, sure. as long as you keep in mind that they're on a deadline and that first impressions might not be right I don't see the problem.
 
Do people still take 'professional' game journalism seriously? Take notice only of people who have played the game for a few days. Only a fool trusts his money to 'professional' game reviewers.
The scores are nonsense, but the articles can be interesting to read.
 
Gamespot:
https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/civilization-6-rise-and-fall-review-a-new-age/1900-6416851/

Unfortunately, Rise and Fall doesn't appear to improve the AI inconsistencies present in vanilla Civ VI. Some AI-controlled civs still act almost randomly--Japan declared war on me twice in one game despite never sending its military my way--while others are a bit more clever, declaring preemptive wars or offering strategic trades at opportune times. And while the Loyalty and Governors systems enhance city management and encourage you to pursue a wider variety of specialties than just your intended victory condition, religion remains the least dynamic of the avenues without anything in Rise and Fall drastically changing it.

As Civ VI's first expansion, though, Rise and Fall works so well with the base game that lingering issues are minor. It enhances, rather than overcomplicates, systems that were already deep and layered to begin with, while introducing features that keep each game engaging from start to finish. Ages in particular provide room for struggling civs to climb the ranks in the late game and keep leading civs on their toes, and the Governor and Loyalty systems add to the city-specific strategies that helped make the base game great.
 
I'm looking forward the most to civfanatic reviews of the expansion :)

I really hope they've taught the AI to stop forward settling, that and a more threatening military presence would be great. I'm not as concerned with diplomacy as that can be modded relatively easily.
 
Proffesional reviews of Civ are always very positive, because they somehow always manage to ignore AI :p
The GameSpot reviewer is critical of the AI but seems to like most everything else.
 
From the sound of the reviews, AI is better but not great, emergencies could use an improvement, and the loyalty system stands out as the best new addition. They all seem to indicate that R&F is solid but not outstanding. Of course, it is still early in the review process...
 
From the sound of the reviews, AI is better but not great, emergencies could use an improvement, and the loyalty system stands out as the best new addition. They all seem to indicate that R&F is solid but not outstanding. Of course, it is still early in the review process...

Similar to gods and kings which basically only added religion as new major mechanic, and revamped combat. It was BNW which was truly mindblowing.
 
From the sound of the reviews, AI is better but not great, emergencies could use an improvement, and the loyalty system stands out as the best new addition. They all seem to indicate that R&F is solid but not outstanding. Of course, it is still early in the review process...

Paradox eu4 has a better system in place for knowing which allies will join or not in the next coalition of wars. I think the emergency system will get an update within a year. It could make or brake your games when you dont know if AI’s will participate in the event or not. Potentially battling a scary powerfull opponent alone when you think others will join you.

Same with loyalty. This should not be the end of it. Religion and domination victories should be viable on say huge maps. The new loyalty system will slow down domination games even further.
 
Paradox eu4 has a better system in place for knowing which allies will join or not in the next coalition of wars. I think the emergency system will get an update within a year. It could make or brake your games when you dont know if AI’s will paricipate in the event or not. Potentially battling a scary powerfull opponent alone when you think others will join you.

Same with loyalty. This should not be the end of it. Religion and domination victories should be viable on say huge maps. The new loyalty system will slow down domination games even further.

Yeah emergencies remind me as a sort of CivIII "warlords." Not that interesting on their own but were a taste of things to come as they evolved into great people.
 
I really hope they've taught the AI to stop forward settling


As I mentioned actual gameplay is the best way to evaluate. No forward settling in this game. Of course it's just one game. Still not a brilliante AI. Cyrus does a formal war instead of a surprise war negating his most powerful ability. Not to mention shuffling units around without clear focus. He wasn't discovered early by Cyrus either, so forward settling wasn't that likely.
 
Back
Top Bottom