The ultimate rage on a game

[Neomega]

* In case you bought the board game, you got some nicely crafted chess pieces, which you can place somewhere to make you look like an educated man. This is so much more than only some virtual bits and bytes ;-)

You got me! I have a chinese style chessboard set up on a coffee table all the time!

Honestly, it's not to make me look educated though, it just really fits the coffee table its on, looks like a Chinese castle, and kind of fits my apartment's theme.

 

[katipunero]

I've seen other clever uses of the straw man argument from different parts of the interwebs but this one is just off the charts. I'd say you are a true connoisseur of the fallacy if ever I saw one. You create a dummy of sorts that's easy to knock down by exaggerating choice aspects of how some consumers react to a poor product. By misrepresenting the opinions of some of the people here and the manner in which they are expressed, you now happily attack the foolish and ignorant posts made by a few people in this forum in an effort to bring down or make hash of the intelligent and valid complaints about the game.

I haven't played the game yet and believe me I really want to, the poor welcome notwithstanding. But the reviews of quite a number of posters here about the glaring deficiencies of the game are just too hard to ignore. These reviews are not shallow and pointless trolling and whining as you would like to make it appear in your post.

Someone pointed out that 5 was the long-awaited cure to civ addiction. Anyone who can come up with such a funny and perhaps sobering observation must be a person who deeply and honestly believe that the game is just that terrible. For me that's a telling statement of the current state of the game.

Thanks.

 

[ChaplainDMK]

I'm not sure which thing you're referring to...

Trying to put their 20+ years old fanbase off?

Trying to sell a board-style wargame disguised as Civilization series game?

Trying to cut out every interesting decision I can take? (usual "challenge" is: "hmm, attack with archer first, or next? Oh wait, Nobunaga is my enemy, then it's no brainer - I have to finish him off with a ranged unit booy I'm smart!" )

Trying to chop a game in tiny little pieces and milk us from our money with DLC's?

Trying to create the same impersonal and soulless AI leaders that you interact with in the exact same manner, regardless of whom it should be?

Trying to cure us from Civ addiction?


...If any of the above then yes, well done!

Trying to cure the Civ series of the 20 year old cesspool that was combat?
Getting rid of squres?
Your acting like evrey previous Civ was released flawlessly and obviously didn't have giant holes for expansions?
So what was the challange in Civ 4? You move all of your stacked units against an enemys stacked units and die of boredom when your 50th tank gets destroyed by a caveman?
Put all your workers on auto roads to spam roads evreywhere with no penalty?
Better then the dumb "jokes" old Leaders were throwing around...

 

[thunderlips]

Change is always better. The PR specialists at various Corporations keep telling me so.

Here's some examples of great games that were 'misunderstood' by 'old foggy fanboys' of previous titles in the series:

Ultima 9
Master of Orion 3
Hearts of Iron 3
Empire Total War
Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor

These were all fantastic games that made a lot of changes, it's just that the old fashioned change haters didn't appreciate them.

 

[Grell_74]

Chess, unlike civ5 has:
-a multiplayer that doesnt crash (depends who you are playing )
-balanced, consistent yet simple gameplay (granted civ5 has simple)
-strategic depth
-any computer released in the last 10 years can play a chess program without techinical difficulty
-and the ai at the hardest setting WILL actually fit Civ5s diety setting claim (unlike civ5)

Your starwman of 16 pieces, monochrome is odd, no one is complaining about the graphics (expect the hideous rivers).

As someone else pointed out its seems to be OK to use sarcasm in attacking civ5 complainers, but civ5 complainers arent, they get a moderator warning.

As for spending $40 and claiming to be god... thats absurd. So we should fork out money for an unfinished product and not dare warn others or raise any concerns? The comments on winning for nothing are even more bizarre.. isnt this one of the main areas people are saying is lacking in civ5?

Your attempt at humour falls flat (seems more trollish to my mind) but since it is anti-civ5 critiquers, no doubt the same old posters will jump in patting themselves on the back, posting one sentence about "yer chess sux lolz" arent we hilarious.

 

[PieceOfMind]

As someone else pointed out its seems to be OK to use sarcasm in attacking civ5 complainers, but civ5 complainers arent, they get a moderator warning.

Moderator Action: Anyone is allowed to use sarcasm so long as it is within the forum rules, so please do not misrepresent the work of moderators. If you have a complaint about a particular moderator action (or lack of), send a PM to the moderator who performed it (or report a post).

 

[Charles Martel]

In a recent live interview the lead game programmer of Paradox Interactive, Johan Andersson, has stated: “Tactical combat does not work in a strategygame. It makes the strategygame into a joke.”

 

[Horizons]

OP is what we might call a 'fan boy'?

 

[r_rolo1]

Change is always better. The PR specialists at various Corporations keep telling me so.

Here's some examples of great games that were 'misunderstood' by 'old foggy fanboys' of previous titles in the series:

Ultima 9
Master of Orion 3
Hearts of Iron 3
Empire Total War
Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor

These were all fantastic games that made a lot of changes, it's just that the old fashioned change haters didn't appreciate them.

Change is not always better ... if i cut your arm off , you will be changed , but I'm sure that your life didn't got better just because of that That alone kills your whole argument.

And ,as I'm still laughing ... ETW as a change for the better ? MTW II AI had a lot of defects but atleast it didn't tried to melee with ranged units until it got out of ammo

 

[afa2000]

Change is not always better ... if i cut your arm off , you will be changed , but I'm sure that your life didn't got better just because of that That alone kills your whole argument.

And ,as I'm still laughing ... ETW as a change for the better ? MTW II AI had a lot of defects but atleast it didn't tried to melee with ranged units until it got out of ammo

Let me add: Ultima 9 was a good change ? That killed a 10+ years old franchise.

 

[katipunero]

i'm quite sure thunderlips' being sarcastic. moo3 gave it away for me.

 

[afa2000]

i'm quite sure thunderlips' being sarcastic. moo3 gave it away for me.

Cant be any other way, I guess you're right

 

[Terrance888]

Hey, but what's up with this game!?!?
You have to buy books, and what? Packets of these cards for your dude?
What? It doesn't come with a game board!
It doesn't even have automatic book keeping!
And you HAVE to interact with other people to play this game? WTH, and one of them doesn't even really play?
And what's up with all the addons? Are they trying to milk me? I need to pay $.50 for my human fighter, and other $3.20 for all the orcs he is gonna fight!?!
What is this alignment thing? I don't care about all this charisma or constitution!
And they use DICE as an Rng?
Wait, the gameboard is made on GRID PAPER! They are really cheep!
Each senerio is ten bucks each? That's it! I'm Outahere!

What is this?
The RNG is in our heads?
There are only three units?
No Strategy?
No Tactics?
No Diplomacy?
No Tiles?
No AI?
What are you trying to pull? That isn't a game!

 

[MadRat]

MOO 3 was not misunderstood. It was absent - 100% absent. The devs admitted as much. You could not be attacked on any level - you could win with a few ships. The game was spreadsheet in space, It was boring and lifeless where the whole game was just pressing the next turn key ad infinitum. What battles you got were mindless pixel on pixel action - 4 bit style graphics.

Moo 3 was piece of poop plain and simple not misunderstood or subtle or a hidden gem. It was derided by almost everyone. It was such a gigantic stinker that it killed the franchise.

Rat

 

[Junuxx]

P.S. I mean perfect - the AI is challenging, multiplayer works without fail, you have no issues with saving your games and everything is balanced

Chess, unlike civ5 has:
-balanced, consistent yet simple gameplay

Chess balanced? Wut? Then why does the white civ p) win more often than black?

 

[Guardian_PL]

Chess balanced? Wut? Then why does the white civ p) win more often than black?

That's because most folks think like that, and in order to be the winners they focus on developing and mastering strategies for White. Think of it like Incas and Rome in Civ4 - because it seems to be the strongest option people go for it, and spend more time playing them.

I for one played with Rome only once, Incas are fun occasionally but all in all I can assure you - playing with blacks is a challenge in itself, and can lead you to win just as easily as playing with white - it's all about strategy and deciphering your opponent

 

[Stefanskantine]

Poor customer support- thousands of years later, and chess is still waiting for the first patch.

 

[Bandit17]

Change is always better. The PR specialists at various Corporations keep telling me so.

Here's some examples of great games that were 'misunderstood' by 'old foggy fanboys' of previous titles in the series:

Ultima 9
Master of Orion 3
Hearts of Iron 3
Empire Total War
Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor

These were all fantastic games that made a lot of changes, it's just that the old fashioned change haters didn't appreciate them.

Ha ha ha! I was actually laughing with you as I thought you were making a funny and than I read your last line which caused me to laugh at you!

The ai in Civ5 doesn't produce rooks or knights. They only produce pawns and the occassional bishop. They also always castle their king sadly.

 

[drhirsch]

Change is always better.
Master of Orion 3

Ouch ;-)

That was a deep blow.


Could it really be that bad?

 

[pasq]

I feel similar, Bibor.
I mean, seriously! It's 2010! I want coloured 3D graphics, right? This isometric stuff just isn't up to date. And what's that stupid boundary system? Gosh, I think they already realized in the classical era, that the Earth was an orb, didn't dey?
Even today's Civ V features a torus-like map. Terrain? Just two types and there is only one unit where it is really of importance. And there is no effects, it's worse than Civ I and that one included DIPLOMACY! Read that? There is only two factions, this game is clearly even worse than Moo3, the biggest letdown I've ever experienced. It might even be the worst game ever!