pc.ign.com review up: 9.3! *nt*

[yin26]

C'mon. The guy played for, what, a few days at most and you think he has the gameplay and AI down? The diplomacy AI was already found lacking and, I'm sure, in the weeks to come we will have a true sense of the gameplay.

Trust the early reviews if you want, of course, but let people play a few weeks first.

[yin26]

Sure, if he slants away from presentation, graphics and sound. Unfortunately, I don't. Put THAT in your notepad and smoke it.

[Kautilya]

Hmm. I would have hoped for more information about the AI...

Anyway I agree with db13 that only the first criticism is important. Though I hope that the sound problems he mentions aren't too annoying.

Also we shouldn't put too much emphasis on averaging the scores. PC.ign specifically says that the final score isn't an average.

This makes sense because you will put different weights on each area for different genres. The scores indicate that while the sound and graphics are decent but nothing great, the gameplay is excellent. Being a strategy game you naturally put much more emphasis on the latter so long as the graphics/sound aren't completely awful. So the final score makes sense.

It's early days yet, but this review seems to suggest that Civ3 will indeed become the classic that we all hoped for.

[Pembleton]

You guys are really brave starting an argument with Yin. Because he is a combination of the following three flame warrior types, especially the first one, you just can't win.

Flamer 1

Flamer 2

Flamer 3

[Grunthex]

Originally posted by yin26

Trust the early reviews if you want, of course, but let people play a few weeks first.

Interesting concept... Try it some time.

[Matte979]

Read the end thats whats important. This is a person that have played civ2, yes there are some gripes but no major in my eyes..

This is a good review..not bad..I think you are a bit biased... You would like it to have a few problems or you would have done all
complaining for nothing.. I say lets play instead..

This is the end of that review....Which says it all.

To make a long story short, Civilization III is a worthy heir for the franchise and a definite must have for any strategy gamer who doesn't want us to make fun of them.

/Mathias

[Shiva]

Originally posted by yin26
Sure, if he slants away from presentation, graphics and sound. Unfortunately, I don't. Put THAT in your notepad and smoke it.

I dont think most people expect the sound or graphics to be great. It would be nice if they were stellar but gameplay counts much more and I think thats what he was looking at when he gave it the final rating.

Now the question is will they re-review it in a few weeks or is this the only review they will do? I know all the mags will be a one shot deal and if they're like this then Civ3 will sell very very well.

[korn469]

9.3? SMAC got a 9.5

where I talk all about how the original Civilization and its eventual sequel, Civilization II, have occupied more of my gaming hours than any other game.

Civ 3

Presentation 9.0
Graphics 7.5
Sounds 7.5
Gameplay 9.5
Lasting Appeal 9.5
9.3

SMAC

Presentation 10.0
Graphics 7.0
Sounds 7.0
Gameplay 9.0
Lasting Appeal 8.0
9.5

Black and White

Presentation 9.5
Graphics 10.0
Sounds 10.0
Gameplay 9.5
Lasting Appeal 10.0
9.7

Extreme PaintBrawl

Presentation 1.0
Graphics 2.0
Sounds 6.0
Gameplay 1.0
Lasting Appeal 0.0 (yes that is zero!)
0.7

overall i give the review a 4.7, it didn't bring anything new to the table and it didn't offer any real information to make a purchase decision except for

a definite must have for any strategy gamer who doesn't want us to make fun of them.

[yin26]

Bah. The same things were said about SMAC, which at the time got Gamespots highest score ever, blah blah blah. That game was fun just until you realized how pathetic certain AI and other gamplay elements are.

By the same token, I would also take any slams on gameplay and AI at this early point with some caution.

[yin26]

Korn: Thanks for the perspective. B&W has a 'lasting appeal' of 10!!!???

[dennis580]

IGN REVIEW SAYS MULTIPLAYER IS NOT IMPORTANT

Heres the best quote which proves Mulitplayer is not important.

Since it is one of the most addictive single player games around, it's hard to find too much fault with the lack of multiplayer.

[HawaiiFive-O]

Yes, ol' Yin is definitely the glass-is-half-empty type. I'd like to say his heart is in the right place, but I really can't- if he were truly interested in seeming unbiased, he'd list all the positive points the reviewer made, as well as the negative. But no, he beelined to the negative.

Let's just say I'm pessimistic about his pessimistic outlook, i.e. I'm optimistic that he's wrong.

But we shall see...

[yin26]

Oh, and if people would like some insight to my resident stalker (you know him ... his sputs garbage randomly in nearly any thread that has my posts in it), go here. It will help you not hate him but pity him, as I do.

[yin26]

proves Mulitplayer is not important

LOL! Oh, God. That one got me laughing so hard my stomach hurt!

if he were truly interested in seeming unbiased, he'd list all the positive points the reviewer made

Ummm, let's think about this: A bunch of people here are expecting the game to be some kind of re-invention of the wheel. I'm pointing out the negatives and what might well be inflated scores for a reason: We got burned on this in the past.

So, yes. I have a bias. I have a bias against early reviews of a game that should be reviewed after extensive gameplay while people start jumpin up and down like kids in a candy store: "See! He said MP's not important. That PROVES it!"

[HawaiiFive-O]

Peace, Yin. You are entitled to your opinions, as am I.

Though if you hold true to your decision not to buy the game until next year some time, and I purchase the game tomorrow, at least my opinions will be based on actual gameplay, and yours, tragically, will be based on hearsay and the gameplay experience of the few posters you trust.

Talk to you tomorrow.