Most reviews...or all reviews?MarkoG whats your honest score?
Well I posted my own review on the message board of my other favorite PC game series Might and Magic..where we are eagarly awaiting M and M9. Having Played 6 7 and 8 over the past 5 years.
I use the English translation of HulluKarhu..Finlands Crazy Bear.
I gave it 7.5 before patch 8.5 after patch.
To give that a calibration :
I gave HOMM3 =8.5, MM8= 8, MM7= 7.5 , and MM6= 8.5..but that was in 1996 so not a fair calibration in those old graphics days.
Back in the days of my MM6 8.5 I gave Civ 2 9.5.
I think that 8.5 is a fair reveiw I might improve on that after a few more hours play, I am not disappointed yet, my wife says that I have played it for 18 hours since I patched the game. I have not been counting or sleeping much. One thing for sure it is addictive.
Back to work it is Monday already.
Real CIV fans are fans of any good game. Most have been playing PC games since Pet = Commodore and not cat.
If I posted crap I would be savaged and rediculed.
As many have done to the Gamespot review which is way over the top. It was done to quickly to be of any real value, but I also think that players who rated the game at less than 5 are just bitter. They would probably of given same score without playing it or it shows deep disappointment when they do not get all that was hoped for.
Whether it is in CIV 3, MM9 or whatever game we buy.
Many of us I am sure will try to hide the disappointment when the finished items is not all that we hoped for.
Was perfection expected from Sid? Probably..dream on!
Did Sid realy have any role in the production other than to make sure that his name was on the box and spelled correctly? I doubt it.
Could be some of the reviewers were like us..not wanting to tell the whole truth, even if they were a bit disappointed.
I do believe that this forum gives a very fair cross section and MarkoG seems to "moderate"well, as would be expected from a Greek...sorry Macedonian.
I would be interestd if he thinks that CIV 3 is 8.5 or 9+.
Before I give a game 9+ it would need to be played a lot longer than the few hours that I have done so with CIV3.
I have but a few minor gripes so far.
eg.
OK the AI gangs up on me, and I think that the trading aspect is "much ado to acheive not much" because the AI never has what i want and/or does not want what I have.
But I ignore it and it seems to be nothing that spoils the game.
Perhaps it could be better explained by someone.
I assume the tips and strategy info has to be re-written now after the patch.
Well I posted my own review on the message board of my other favorite PC game series Might and Magic..where we are eagarly awaiting M and M9. Having Played 6 7 and 8 over the past 5 years.
I use the English translation of HulluKarhu..Finlands Crazy Bear.
I gave it 7.5 before patch 8.5 after patch.
To give that a calibration :
I gave HOMM3 =8.5, MM8= 8, MM7= 7.5 , and MM6= 8.5..but that was in 1996 so not a fair calibration in those old graphics days.
Back in the days of my MM6 8.5 I gave Civ 2 9.5.
I think that 8.5 is a fair reveiw I might improve on that after a few more hours play, I am not disappointed yet, my wife says that I have played it for 18 hours since I patched the game. I have not been counting or sleeping much. One thing for sure it is addictive.
Back to work it is Monday already.
Real CIV fans are fans of any good game. Most have been playing PC games since Pet = Commodore and not cat.
If I posted crap I would be savaged and rediculed.
As many have done to the Gamespot review which is way over the top. It was done to quickly to be of any real value, but I also think that players who rated the game at less than 5 are just bitter. They would probably of given same score without playing it or it shows deep disappointment when they do not get all that was hoped for.
Whether it is in CIV 3, MM9 or whatever game we buy.
Many of us I am sure will try to hide the disappointment when the finished items is not all that we hoped for.
Was perfection expected from Sid? Probably..dream on!
Did Sid realy have any role in the production other than to make sure that his name was on the box and spelled correctly? I doubt it.
Could be some of the reviewers were like us..not wanting to tell the whole truth, even if they were a bit disappointed.
I do believe that this forum gives a very fair cross section and MarkoG seems to "moderate"well, as would be expected from a Greek...sorry Macedonian.
I would be interestd if he thinks that CIV 3 is 8.5 or 9+.
Before I give a game 9+ it would need to be played a lot longer than the few hours that I have done so with CIV3.
I have but a few minor gripes so far.
eg.
OK the AI gangs up on me, and I think that the trading aspect is "much ado to acheive not much" because the AI never has what i want and/or does not want what I have.
But I ignore it and it seems to be nothing that spoils the game.
Perhaps it could be better explained by someone.
I assume the tips and strategy info has to be re-written now after the patch.
Comment