Frogboy Frogboy

Good reviews, bad reviews..

▼

Good reviews, bad reviews..

from GalCiv2 Forums

On the good news side...

G4's Xplay gave GalCiv II a 5 out of 5. That almost never happens.

On the bad side, PC Zone UK gave the game a 60%.  It's a paper magazine so I have no idea what the review says.  But anything under a 4 star review I think at this point means that they must have run into some problem.  Anyway have access to a PC Zone UK and can give the gist of why they disliked it?

21,093 views 54 replies
Reply #51 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm not so sure that the CVG reviewer actually said that GC2 is a rip-off of Civ4, more that there were quite a few similarities, and that you could "draw a line" from the features of one to the other. He does say that both games draw from the same source material. I don't think anyone could argue with that. Taking this into consideration, it's not an easy argument to suggest that GC2 is terribly original. At the very least, it's a sequel to GC1.

The strength and the weakness of GC2 is in the level of refinement in the gameplay. The same goes for Civ4. The CVG reviewer was trying to say that, I think, but got too wrapped up in trying to sound clever (I found the "silky wormhole" bit disturbing and homophobic). The weakness is that this type of game more or less does the same basic thing over and over again: conquer or be killed. If this isn't appealing to a user, then the game isn't all that much fun. After a while, I know I get tired of making the same choices in these games, so then it's time to move on to Flight Simulator, or Out Of The Park Baseball, or The Sims, where the game mechanics are different. I'd say that's all part of human nature.

I am confident that Stardock is keen to analyze why users would not like their game, and would strive to make adjustments and improvements to please as many of us as possible. I think that some low marks are a healthy sign, but the trouble is, if the low marks come from a dubious source, then there isn't much value to the marks in the first place. The same would apply for rediculously high marks coming from someone who knwos nothing about gaming.. The data is not robust, as the statisticians would say.

Some how, I think Stardock will soldier on, as long as we keep sending money to them.
Reply #52 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
. Any points it might lose because the stacked unit list is kludgy should be more than made up by that innovation.


I'm sorry; you don't get points for having a "innovative" thing here and then screwing something up that the entire genre has done right since the days of Civ 1.

Get your foundation right; then we can talk about some innovations you might have.

And, BTW, I don't consider the tactical map an "innovation"; I consider not using 2D icons beyond a certain range to be an unfortunate but probably necessary concession to people who feel the need to see 3D even where it does no real good.

These people who think 4.5 out of 5 or 5 out of 5 is being "generous" begs the question. Okay, what's a 5 out of 5 game?


The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time.

Different genre, different platform to be sure. But you weren't exactly specific, were you?

OK, Half-Life. Probably HL2, but I haven't played it.

There comes a point in development where you have to decide *yeah it's not perfect but we need to stamp it done so we can move on*.


That's the funny part: they didn't move on. So there was really no point in them releasing the game in the 1.0 state.

What some seasoned veterans of this series need to consider is that the first time player / buyer will see the game differently, and not be as forgiving of any shortcomings. They will not understand the dedication, support and enthusiasm that goes to make Stardock one of the better game developers and supporters of their software.


This bears repeating. A lot. Often.

I was ready to throw my controller through the monitor the first time the multiship selection bug caused me to move a fleet out of position (I was trying to mass-upgrade the fleet). Even now, after several hours of playtime, that bug still catches me and I want to strangle someone every time it does. Civ1 had this problem solved, but these guys apparently can't.

A newbie would have uninstalled the game after such an encounter and given up on GC2, if not the entire genre.

GC2 didn't have a good first impression for me. The fact that I stuck with it says more about my dedication to strategy games and independent games than any particular greatness of StarDock.

Honestly quibbling over a 4.5 or 5 is mostly personal preference and pointless. The 60% the mag gave it is just ludicrous and proved the reviewer did not give the game time.


60 being ludicrous, perhaps. But 5/5 or 100% is, to my mind, equally ludicrous; such reviews are being overly lenient rather than being overly/incorrectly critical. I'd give GC 1.0 a 10/100 (not only did it not work, I still believe it burned out my dual-core Athlon 64. I had to replace it less than 6 months after I bought it), and 1.0X an 80/100.

This game is not (perhaps yet) worthy to stand alongside the true greats of the industry; as such, a 5/5, or 100/100 score is entirely inappropriate.

I find it amusing that they complain about the Gal Civ II interface when, for me, their website is completely chopped off about half way across the screen, making it completely impossible to access some of the content


I'm guessing you're using a real web browser, instead of Internet Explorer, which is probably what they expect you to use.
Siege of Centauri
Reply #53 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
By move on I meant that at some point you've got to declare things as *done*. Believe me this is something that plagues a lot of programmers and most if not all artists. Nothing is ever quite the way you want it so you just continue to tweak and change and add and modify until you realize you missed your release date by years.

The stacked ship movement bug while annoying could be something that is buried in layers of code. Its painfully obvious and easy to reproduce but depending on what is causing the problem it could take a very long time to correct. Such is the nature of software programming. There are times where a bug is a simple typo like putting > when you meant to type <. Other times the bug can be caused by a completely unrelated section of code over writting memory in such a way that it scrambles something else. That in turn the affects the thing you are trying to fix. So while its easy for us to sit back and say *every freakin game of this type has solved this problem* it may not be a simple matter for them to track down. And obviously it wasn't enough of a big deal to their Q&A to hold up the works. Is that wrong? I have no idea.

The innovation with the strategic view in my mind is the fact that you can scroll from 3D to 2D without having to change screens. Honestly I cannot think of another game that has done that. I've played games that try to overlay a 2D tactical map over the top of the 3D world but that just starts to get confusing at times and blocks the view of what you are trying to do at worst.

I guess as usual it just boils down to ones own experience. From my perspective there have been zero issues with the game other then I had to cancel my preorder and buy it direct online from Stardock because of the initial shortages. Beyond that its been smooth sailing for me. Guess I should just consider myself lucky .
Reply #54 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think that review did make some points which I hope will be addressed. Stack management COULD be better for example. Some of what he said was crap and he obviously had no clue why so many people find it so fun.

He missed the forest for the trees. Perhaps some peoples' suggestion here was right and the reviewer played it for 10 minutes or so for each of a few races and called it quits.

I think the game is a lot of fun even though some of the things the reivewer didn't like I don't like either. And yea, when you think about it, despite being called 3-D, gamewise it's still 2-D. Nothing wrong with that -- 3-D would be a nightmare for a strategy game with more then a handful of stars, but he does have a point sort of. I suppose it's prettier in pseudo 3-D anyway.

He completely missed the tech race, the way the baby steps tech tree kept things from becoming so lopsided, and the great AI (if you're not doing one of the cheezy tactics people have discovered).

If he couldn't figure out what mini-balls 2 does he didn't try very hard. Um duh. I just researched mass drivers on the same branch which is an offshoot of the space weapons branch. ummm maybe it could be a WEAPON. Duh. Besides, doesn't it SAY what benefits you get? If the reviewer can't read what is plainly written on the screen it isn't the fault of the game.

The first time you play a strategy game you're often a bit lost. It looks to me like he only played it once.