This game SUCKS

[Slobberface]

Personally, my opinion on this game depends on what they intend to do next with the franchise regarding consoles.
If CivRev was step 1 in a plan to bring out another more intricate version next, then im absolutely fine with it and i like it.
If CivRev is the one and only Civ brought to 360 or ps3 then im very unhappy.

 

[Namaste1999]

I've been playing Civ since the beginning, and was looking forward to the 360console game, in that I thought it would finally have a decent multiplayer. I knew to expect a downscaled version of Civ4-style strategy, graphics, and etc. given the switch to the console, and so was not disappointed with that, in that I knew what to expect.

However, after playing the demo, and then renting this, I must say the game is horrible and one of the few in recent memory that I felt like throwing my controller at the screen.

Namely my beef was with the corny animated characters and design, which I found childish and silly compared to the realistic graphics and design I am used to with the computer versions. I found almost all the "jokes" and attempts at humor in the game to be annoying, stupid, and unfunny. The sense of "whimsy" that permeates the whole misguided project is off-putting and, well, no other word for it, dumb.

The Advisors look imbecilic and speak in a very grating and annoying "Civ-Glish" gibberish that borders on the offensive. The racial stereotyping in the different nations...esp. the pygmy ("spear-chuckers") barbarian races, coupled with Civ-Glish...dangerously totters close to being racially insensitive, but that wasn't what was most annoying...what was annoying is that more or less every character is a ethnic, racial, or national stereotype, and then speaks in complete gibberish. The Asian characters speak in a mock "oriental sounding" gobbledy-. .. .. .. . that would offend anyone truly Asian or with Asian friends. The same can be said for the attempts at humor with the Greeks, The French, the Aztecs, all the races really, which are all ethnic and racial stereotypes, speaking in gibberish versions of their own language bastardized by the imaginations of the game's creators at some misguided attempt at "humor".

My admittedly p.c. styled critiques of the game's horrible ethnocentric "humor" and advisor screens should not mask the fact that the battle/combat system in the game is inherently unfair, the winning strategies completely arcade/score based, the room for creativity in specializing and creating an empire completely absent, along with a sensible or decent map pack (no Earth map included in criminal!).

The game is just dumb. The advisors will litter the screen with silly buffoonish drivel as you play sub-par strategy on poorly designed maps with goofy looking units which shall drive you to distraction and annoyance.

I hated it and was glad I only rented it.

 

[salty mud]

I've been playing Civ since the beginning, and was looking forward to the 360console game, in that I thought it would finally have a decent multiplayer. I knew to expect a downscaled version of Civ4-style strategy, graphics, and etc. given the switch to the console, and so was not disappointed with that, in that I knew what to expect.

However, after playing the demo, and then renting this, I must say the game is horrible and one of the few in recent memory that I felt like throwing my controller at the screen.

Namely my beef was with the corny animated characters and design, which I found childish and silly compared to the realistic graphics and design I am used to with the computer versions. I found almost all the "jokes" and attempts at humor in the game to be annoying, stupid, and unfunny. The sense of "whimsy" that permeates the whole misguided project is off-putting and, well, no other word for it, dumb.

The Advisors look imbecilic and speak in a very grating and annoying "Civ-Glish" gibberish that borders on the offensive. The racial stereotyping in the different nations...esp. the pygmy ("spear-chuckers") barbarian races, coupled with Civ-Glish...dangerously totters close to being racially insensitive, but that wasn't what was most annoying...what was annoying is that more or less every character is a ethnic, racial, or national stereotype, and then speaks in complete gibberish. The Asian characters speak in a mock "oriental sounding" gobbledy-. .. .. .. . that would offend anyone truly Asian or with Asian friends. The same can be said for the attempts at humor with the Greeks, The French, the Aztecs, all the races really, which are all ethnic and racial stereotypes, speaking in gibberish versions of their own language bastardized by the imaginations of the game's creators at some misguided attempt at "humor".

My admittedly p.c. styled critiques of the game's horrible ethnocentric "humor" and advisor screens should not mask the fact that the battle/combat system in the game is inherently unfair, the winning strategies completely arcade/score based, the room for creativity in specializing and creating an empire completely absent, along with a sensible or decent map pack (no Earth map included in criminal!).

The game is just dumb. The advisors will litter the screen with silly buffoonish drivel as you play sub-par strategy on poorly designed maps with goofy looking units which shall drive you to distraction and annoyance.

I hated it and was glad I only rented it.

I think you are taking this too seriously. I for one am not offended by anything in the game, and I think that having a stereo-typical appearance for characters is a good thing. By your argument, since I am an Englishman, I should be offended by how Queen Elizabeth speaks and it portrayed in this game? I'm not, and I haven't seen anyone else complain about this issue so I don't think I'm the only one.

Relax, and find a game what you DO like.

 

[Slobberface]

I've been playing Civ since the beginning, and was looking forward to the 360console game, in that I thought it would finally have a decent multiplayer. I knew to expect a downscaled version of Civ4-style strategy, graphics, and etc. given the switch to the console, and so was not disappointed with that, in that I knew what to expect.

However, after playing the demo, and then renting this, I must say the game is horrible and one of the few in recent memory that I felt like throwing my controller at the screen.

Namely my beef was with the corny animated characters and design, which I found childish and silly compared to the realistic graphics and design I am used to with the computer versions. I found almost all the "jokes" and attempts at humor in the game to be annoying, stupid, and unfunny. The sense of "whimsy" that permeates the whole misguided project is off-putting and, well, no other word for it, dumb.

The Advisors look imbecilic and speak in a very grating and annoying "Civ-Glish" gibberish that borders on the offensive. The racial stereotyping in the different nations...esp. the pygmy ("spear-chuckers") barbarian races, coupled with Civ-Glish...dangerously totters close to being racially insensitive, but that wasn't what was most annoying...what was annoying is that more or less every character is a ethnic, racial, or national stereotype, and then speaks in complete gibberish. The Asian characters speak in a mock "oriental sounding" gobbledy-. .. .. .. . that would offend anyone truly Asian or with Asian friends. The same can be said for the attempts at humor with the Greeks, The French, the Aztecs, all the races really, which are all ethnic and racial stereotypes, speaking in gibberish versions of their own language bastardized by the imaginations of the game's creators at some misguided attempt at "humor".

My admittedly p.c. styled critiques of the game's horrible ethnocentric "humor" and advisor screens should not mask the fact that the battle/combat system in the game is inherently unfair, the winning strategies completely arcade/score based, the room for creativity in specializing and creating an empire completely absent, along with a sensible or decent map pack (no Earth map included in criminal!).

The game is just dumb. The advisors will litter the screen with silly buffoonish drivel as you play sub-par strategy on poorly designed maps with goofy looking units which shall drive you to distraction and annoyance.

I hated it and was glad I only rented it.

I think any sort of argument of racist implications taken from this game is ridiculous. Every Civ and every barbarian clan is poked at equally.
/end post

 

[Namaste1999]

Well, everyone can take my criticisms of the character portrayals & gibberish language at exactly face value: for free, as they are free opinions. I expected as much. I found the game unplayable because of these silly buffoonish leaders and advisors...they literally made my hackles rise and completely wrecked any notion of realism or even immersion for me.

I was equally annoyed by the silly English and French leaders and fake accents as the other races and nations; it was an equal opportunity dislike and hatred of the portrayals and depictions on my part, and I could barely finish a single complete of CivRev it annoyed me so much.

In the case of the Advisors, they pop up at annoying junctures and slow the game pace, meanwhile, the female versions all speak in a nasally twang halfway between the old BananaRosaDana sketch from SNL and PeeWee Herman. NO THANKS!


Still, I think I've at least thought out why I didn't care for the game, and spelled that out. It was a very visceral dislike of the style and characters. I really did not care for it.

 

[Fujar]

Why?

If you like the game, play it. Post about it, if you want.

If you don't like it, don't play it. Go do something else that you enjoy.

Why is this difficult for people?

Maybe some people aren't happy about wasting $60 on a crappy game. I am definitely one of those people.

 

[Namaste1999]

Exactly. i'm in a habit of renting games I'm uncertain about whenever possible. I usually find that my initial intuition to do so is born out, because I can't recall ever purchasing a game i rented first. I'm usually dissatisfied & glad to rent rather than own.

One side effect of my disappointment with CivRev was it made me go back and load Civ4 & all its expansions on a newer computer I had...and I'm still very happy and enjoy this product....more so, after seeing the debacle that was CivRev, and seeing Civ4 on the higher-powered better computer.

I forgive you Sid, but CivRev sucked.

 

[enchanter100]

So you didn't like a game. Trade it in, sell it, don't rent it again. Move along now.

 

[Gwil]

And don't go replying to this about how I probably just suck. I'm ranked 30 or so on the leaderboards for head to head. And if the achievement list were able to be unlocked via online play I would have all of them.

If the game is as bad as you would like to portray it as, why on earth have you invested time and effort into being part of "the top 30".

 

[foulsmell]

i enjoy civrev, and will probably buy any new ones that come out for the 360.

 

[Killer Moogle]

This games target audience was people who had not played any Civ game in the past, or people who liked Civ games but didn't like playing for many hours to finish one game. Most comments from people in those catergories above have been positive.

There is no way a console game will ever be able to have the depth/complexity of a PC game. I think as a Civ game, it works very well given the limits of the console system (horrendous bugs aside).

 

[Palaistea]

I never played Civ before, and it was the demo for Civ Revolution that hooked me, because it looked like such fun. My husband and I bought it the first day it was available and we haven't stopped playing it since. We like it so much he asked for Civ IV for his birthday, just to check it out. More fun? We'll see. Another person we showed our Civ Rev game to went out and bought Civ 4 because he doesn't have a console and simply wanted to start playing Civ again (he'd stopped at Civ 2).

The thing is, this is a fun game! If the goal was to reach people who hadn't played Civ before, or who maybe stopped playing, it's doing that.

 

[CharlieM]

Yeah, it's likely to get me picking up Civ IV again this winter.

 

[Elite]

While this may not be the best Civ game, it's also not the worst(it could have more accuracy instead of showing the same tanks for all civs and calling the German 1 a "Panzer") same with 88mm gun.

It could have had more options for diplomacy, but the game did alright, it was almost perfectly executed for the console.

 

[Smirk]

Where does it say it was a streamlined console version? Last I check the price tag wasn't streamlined.

I've played all the Civs from the first and I don't mind many of the changes, but this is definitely a rent before you buy game as it could leave you absolutely flat. Usually I never concern myself with replayability because Civ always has lots of it, but on the console I played it safe with a rental first and I am glad I did. I can't control anything but difficulty and Civ, so that means just about every game plays like all the others. Zulu's might be fun to play, someday, if they don't always start next to Aztecs, English and Greek.

I agree about the combat, its tedious and difficult early on. Also the lack of control of upgrades seems ridiculous. My warrior just performed a daring attack on a city versus a fortified archer army, and he gets to choose from scout and medic instead of more obvious offense upgrades.

 

[Gary Childress]

So you didn't like a game. Trade it in, sell it, don't rent it again. Move along now.

Since the first place many will go before they purchase a game is a forum which discusses a game, I think it is a good idea for those who dislike a game to post the reasons for their dislike. There are other places where people praise the game. Let the readers decide whether they want to throw $60 into a game or not based upon what they read about the game. Why quash dissent?

 

[Padma]

We won't quash dissent, here. I love the game, but I've played it enough to know it has some shortcomings.

As long as the discussion here remains civilized, you are free to point out those flaws.

 

[Grimmjow]

I think the comment on the first page made complete sense and should have stopped this thread a long time ago.

CivRevo is just a simplified version of civilization. of course its not like the computer game it would be stupid to beleive that it could reach the level of the pc game. I mean most of the things we do on the pc version wouldn't be done on the regular game.

 

[da dick]

which I found childish and silly compared to the realistic graphics and design I am used to with the computer versions.

i don't get it. didn't the PC version dress up the 1st emperor(sp?) of china as a manchurian?!? and then they somehow managed to mix up the 'manchurian' with kublai khan. sounds pretty silly and unrealistic to me, as a chinese immigrant.

 

[Ontolog]

I am a first time Civ player, CivRev being my introduction to the series. Since I haven't played prior installments of the series I guess I am not as disappointed as many of you seem to be. For me the game is really interesting, however it does also have some annoying parts. I would also like to try the PC or Mac version to get a sense of what it is you guys feel you are missing in CivRev.

To the guy complaining about racial stereotypes... get a grip.