Will I regret installing steam and buying civ IV complete through it?

[Al B. Sure!]

Are you saying it's the perfect game?

No. I'm saying it's Starcraft II.

You expect Civ to get Game of the Year above Starcraft II?

[giblets]

Yes, since I've expressed a dislike of ONE game it must be my natural inclination to complain about every game that comes out.

[giblets]

No. I'm saying it's Starcraft II.

You expect Civ to get Game of the Year above Starcraft II?

There are a lot of magazines and such coming up with these lists so it's not so unreasonable that civ could reach the top of at least one if it's put together really well.

[Al B. Sure!]

Go through that list you helpfully linked and you will see that in 2010, no PC game beat out SC2 and ME2. They won PC game of the year everywhere.

So it IS unreasonable! No other PC release could do it!

[Wiglaf]

Again, why are they calling it Game of the Year if no one thought it was? Do they mean to imply they think it's game of the year, and god dammit, that's good enough?

[Wiglaf]

You're all whiners. Civ 5 is a solid game. If you never played any other Civ game to get used to certain things and Civ 5 was your first, you would absolutely love it. You're ****ing lying to yourself if you think otherwise. There is nothing wrong with the game, only things wrong with it in relation to Civ 4 expectations.

Which is why reviewers love the game because they're looking at the game stand-alone and from the perspective of a general gamer, not a Civ nut comparing it to fully patched with all expansions and mods Civ 4.

And you *****es do know the Steam workshop makes getting mods easy... mods such as ones that return the game back to the old multiple units in one square system, right?

I think there are a few parts to this reply, all of them really stupid and make it clear you should stick to rapping and being chased by black people around the streets of philadelphia until you die from it. Reviewers liked the game because reviewers are stupid (they devoted their life to reviewing videogames) and have about a million incentives to buddy w/ developers. IGN's gods and kings review had the balls to praise the expansion for "adding declarations of friendship" even though they'd been in the game for over a year and a half through patches. At least they didn't stick completely to 2K's talking points

Steam workshop, more useless than Stephen hawking's kinect. 95% of the mods are things like new flags and civics like gay marriage. One removes AI bonuses on prince difficulty, which is hilariously stupid because A) the AI needs the bonuses and B) you can just go down a difficulty level and get the same result. There's I think one mod that adds a ton of units but doesn't fix 1UPT or add any depth, mainly because fixing or removing 1UPT requires recoding the entire ****ing AI and changing all the production bonuses. Not that I played the mods for Civ 4 (i have a life) but they were at least popular.

Your other bright idea seems to be that Civ 5 shouldn't have to meet the bar Civ 4 set because Civ 4 had years of development post-release, ignoring that firaxis completely forgot the lessons learned over Civ 4's 6+ year development only to make Civ 3 mistakes all over again... things like muddled and exploitable diplomacy, unbalanced Civ traits, units like horsemen that allow you to conquer the map by turn 50, ICS, incompetent AI? The only thing they improved from Civ 4 was espionage, and they did that by eliminating it.

I guess you are right that, in a universe without any strategy games or computer games of any kind, behind some kind of veil of ignorance, Civ 5 would be enjoyable. It does offer some strategic choices. But in the world we live in, with dozens of better games, you are a ****** for spending any time on this piece of crap.

[Al B. Sure!]

Well a 90 average critic score at Metacritic is normally 'game of the year' material.

[Wiglaf]

Evidently not, since paid reviewers give out high scores like that so often.

Has an AAA funded game ever not scored above a 75/80 or whatever the "favorable" cutoff is?

[Al B. Sure!]

AAA funded games tend to be good almost by rule.


We would have been able to test your hypothesis had EA's NBA Elite not been cancelled 2 weeks before release.

[Elok]

Starcraft II

You know I said Starcraft II, right?

I haven't played SCII, but I hear a lot of "it's just the first SC with a facelift and a few tweaks." I've never heard anyone say it's a revolutionary achievement.

[Al B. Sure!]

I haven't played SCII, but I hear a lot of "it's just the first SC with a facelift and a few tweaks." I've never heard anyone say it's a revolutionary achievement.

Scenario editor.

Until you've played 3rd person shooters, zombie survival RPG's, the old party game of mafia, tower defense, tug of war, phantom (like the regular game but with two secret phantoms who win by killing everyone else), a typing speed competition game, etc. etc. you haven't played SC2.

The editor provides limitless potential you can't get from any other game and an insanely large online community.

Still waiting on the freeze tag games I used to love in the original Starcraft.

[Al B. Sure!]

dp

[notyoueither]

If these reviewers are people who have never played any previous version of civ maybe they shouldn't be reviewing a strategy game. If you're claiming that people who have played previous versions of civ can imagine how they would like it if this was their first, well, I imagine that I would think civ5 is a pile of crap.

No. They should review what is in front of them. Not what they would have made, or what they expected.

[Wiglaf]

AAA funded games tend to be good almost by rule.

Is this a joke?

The number of Xbox 360 games with over an 82 metacritic "favorable" on metacritic is staggering:

http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/xbox360?view=condensed&sort=desc

[SlowwHand]

Same site

Civilization II
User: 8.9

Sid Meier's Civilization IV
User: 7.8

Sid Meier's Civilization V
User: 6.8

Civ III? I stopped looking after 7 pages.