OMG!!! Computer Gaming World review

[Father Beast]

I just got my copy of CGW yesterday, and immediately turned to the PTW review upon realizing it was there.

I was SHOCKED, I tell you, SHOCKED by what I saw.

rating: 1 star
Verdict: The central purpose of the game - multiplayer support - doesn't work, and the rest is largely junk.
Top blurb: Broken , sloppy, frustrating, overdue and expensive, but who are we to complain? By Thomas L. McDonald
some quotes:
"The worst implementation of multiplayer gaming in recent memory"
"[turnless mode] assumes a set amount of time per turn, an absurd prospect in Civ... It's totally unusable."
"Lag in a 2D strategy game with seemingly meager bandwidth is an indication that all is not well at Casa Firaxis."
"but hey, that hotseat mode sure works great."


That sort of almost continuous criticism is something more expected in a review of something like eXtreme Paintbrawl, not a Civ game for goodness' sake.

I love all things Civ, but this review made me heartsick, because I can't make myself believe that he was totally off track.

I was thinking of typing in the whole review, but wasn't sure if I'd get in trouble for copyright issues. I'm sure just a bit of quoting for "review of review" purposes can't be out of line, though. if it's OK to repeat the whole thing, let me know in this thread and I'll be back.

I just hope the PC Gamer review isn't quite so bad...

[alva]

If he played PTW out of the box, then he quite right about MP, I guess.

Do they even mention SP?

let's see if I still have my future telling capabilities
* alva says hello to Coracle *

[JimMac]

if it's OK to repeat the whole thing, let me know in this thread and I'll be back.

DanQ posted a news item about this review on 15th December, and gave the on-line link;

http://www.gamers.com/game/1144751

I am sure that there is a thread somewhere on Apolyton debating it.

On a related point, I wish I could still buy CGW in the UK. (As far as I know they no longer publish here- anyone know different?) It used to be my favourite for the quality of their reviews. I now make do with PCZone, mostly for the humour though.

Jim

[Enriquillo]

Just tried my first MP game against a friend, it was very disappointing.a

After 3 hours of playing, most of it very laggy, the game exits without warning

We both have great connections, and never have any lag during Age of Kings games online.

Ofcourse we have the latest patch installed, so that's not the problem.
Now all would have been ok if there had been a restore option, but guess what... it's not there, ouch!

So it seems to me the reviews are mostly right. This game stinks in MP and is only playable against the comp for now. Sad but true...

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by JimMac


DanQ posted a news item about this review on 15th December, and gave the on-line link;

http://www.gamers.com/game/1144751

I am sure that there is a thread somewhere on Apolyton debating it.

Jim

Yup, that's the article. wouldn''t this forum be the place for that?

[Dimension]

Well, the reviews are 100% correct. PTW is horrible as expansions go in all respects mentioned. The single-player additions are nice, but the simple fact is that the name of the expansion is PLAY THE WORLD, and its primary purpose is adding multiplayer support, in which it does a miserable job. The truly obnoxious thing is that people are paying $30 for what should've been included in the original game.

I thought Blizzard was as bad as it got when it came to making wonderful games then refusing to support them. After all, right now Diablo II is still awaiting a patch that was promised over a year ago. But at least Diablo II shipped with working multiplayer support.

The reason I still have to congratulate Firaxis is because SOMEONE there is listening. They added editor features, they improved AI slightly, they added menu automation options, and they added stack movement. These are all things that the hardcore fans wanted. This is because they were listening to THIS FORUM.

So, they screwed up with the expansion. Things seem to be better after a few patches, though. Still, it should've been a $10 add-on, not a $30 expansion called PLAY THE WORLD.

I hate the recent practice of software companies releasing games that don't work. Everything seems unfinished these days. It's certainly not just Firaxis. Hell, Microsoft released a 100-gig service pack to Windows XP just a couple months after it came out. There is a complete lack of testing going on. It seems like companies have just fired their quality assurance departments and now rely on free beta testers and the complaints of customers after the purchase of a supposedly finished product.

I don't think this is the fault of Firaxis, though. Who wants to release a buggy unfinished product that costs too much? They were probably just rushed by Infogrames (who would also be the ones setting the price). Perhaps it all would've been a patch if it weren't for Infogrames. I'll bet there was some exec saying, "What are you guys doing adding features to a game that came out a year ago? Just fix the bugs." It's hard for a company to justify paying developers to work on something if they're not going to get a direct profit.

[notyoueither]

Just finished a 30 hour game against 2 other humans and 4 AIs.

Yes, we had crashes and had to reload, but we could reload as long as we could recognize a save file (unlike some apparantly brain dead individuals).

We ended with me and the number one player tossing nukes back and forth while the number 2 built the SS.

Can it be played? Hell, yes!

Was it fun? Hell, yes!

[notyoueither]

ps. Thomas L. McDonald can kiss my *ss! I'm having fun. wth is he doing?

[Dis]

well considering the point of the exp. was multiplayer, and it didn't work, I can't blame them for giving it one star.

But did they mention single player in the review? I still think that bears mentioning.

[Dis]

It is sad to see how far civ has fallen. I agree with you. We all had such high hopes...

[notyoueither]

Why am I having fun in MP over the Internet?

[Dis]

you are one of the lucky ones. Not all of us are so lucky.

Note, I can play MP, but even on a cable modem it is laggy.

[notyoueither]

Lag could still be reduced, I agree. However, these reviews are not related to lag. They are related to RTS idiots thinking that Civ should fit their bill. It don't. They should get over it.

[Switch]

Well, I think quality assurance went out the door with capitalism in video games approaching its peak. One of the main problems is that there is no official quality assurance board that can approve games, much like the CSA in Canada, or 60 Minutes . Anything can be released, and there is nothing besides the rating board that can stop a buggy release.

As much as I hate to say it, but the car analogy really does have some merit. The main reason cars don't suddenly burst into flame while going down the 401 is because of quality assurance. They aren't ALLOWED to release a noticeably buggy car. Video games, on the other hand

[notyoueither]

Tell that to Ford amd Firestone...

Now give me a freakin' break. Ho, ho, ho. Christmas is over. Now earn your trolls.