CGW reviews Galactic Civilizations II

Editor's Choice!

from GalCiv2 Forums

The June 2006 edition of Computer Gaming World has arrived and in it is the review of Galactic Civilizations II.

If you don't get Computer Gaming World, it's definitely worth it to pick it up on the newstand. This issue has a big article on Spore which is a game that everyone (ourselves included) are very intersted in. It also have the Oblivion review in it. 

The GalCiv II and Oblivion reviews help demo CGW's new review format.  4 pages of review gives the reviewer a lot of space to talk about the game in a great deal of detail. 

For instance, the CGW review talks about Christopher Nahr's Galactopedia and gives a link for it.  It talks about the Starforce incident, it goes into some of the features he likes and ones he misses but also discusses the reasoning that went into what features to include or not include.

The reviewer (Bruce Geryk) also talks about Master of Orion and other games in the genre and how the features in those games helped add to the genre (or detract depending on the game).  He also hammers home that he wishes the game had multiplayer.   Maybe next time. ;) !FROGCARE!

20,460 views 31 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I just got my magazine today and I just finished reading the Review From Bruce. Congrats on the Editors Choice Award! Its a very good read, I can't believe that GC2 out sold all software, not just PC games software at Walmart?!?!?!?! WOW

Too bad that Bruce lost another game to Tom though, but BFME2 has a win for Tom written all over it!
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Only the best from the best for the best eh Frogboy
DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Wow!

Outsold all software.....
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
They deserve the credit and the Kudos All hail Stardock and Brad.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Have you ever heard of Evil Canivil< I know I spelled this wrong sorry.
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I read the CGW review, and was very dissapointed in its overall tone. Seemed as if he was mocking the game a bit. He touched on some good points, but I swear he was mocking it at points.
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
And what is wrong with some mocking? Gal Civ II has a good deal of humor it in so why not a review of it? After all, mocks need to be used too.
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Actually one of the higher quality reviews in the magazine...
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
"He also hammers home that he wishes the game had multiplayer."

Gee I'm getting sick of seeing this. Plain and simple: I don't care it hasn't got multiplayer. The games fab without it.

Congradulations anyway.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
and other people still want multiplayer nevertheless they think they the game is great ^^
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
All PC Mags should have at least one reviewer who is an SP-specialist.
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Back in the day, I would have been the CGW reviewer for this game. I hope he loves it as I do.

And, no, avoid multi-player. Perfect the game for solitaire play.

Alan Emrich, former Strategy Games Editor of CGW magazine
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The June 2006 edition of Computer Gaming World has arrived and in it is the review of Galactic Civilizations II.

If you don't get Computer Gaming World, it's definitely worth it to pick it up on the newstand.


It's definitely worth reading the June 2006 edition if it has the results of the GAL_CIV_2 multiplayer POLL !!
This is the only POLL where we never heard the results.

It's been about 3 weeks... can we please know the results of the poll !

.
Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It's definitely worth reading the June 2006 edition if it has the results of the GAL_CIV_2 multiplayer POLL !!
This is the only POLL where we never heard the results.

It's been about 3 weeks... can we please know the results of the poll !

1/3 said they would pay US$20 for a multiplayer expansion, 2/3 said no!
Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
1/3 said they would pay US$20 for a multiplayer expansion, 2/3 said no!


What I'm looking for are the results... which means the decision Stardock has made regarding the multiplayer poll.

Myself and others plan on buying the game if multiplayer becomes available... and thus we're stuck waiting for the multiplayer poll results.
Reply #17 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
1/3 said they would pay US$20 for a multiplayer expansion, 2/3 said no!


IIRC, it said 1/3 would pay $20 for a multiplayer ONLY expansion.
Reply #18 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
IIRC, it said 1/3 would pay $20 for a multiplayer ONLY expansion.


very true... which means many more would pay for an expansion if multiplayer was just one of many features within an expansion. Features such as larger maps, campaign editor, new races, new techs and more.

Unfortunately we can only wait... before we know for sure what Stardock has decided.
Reply #19 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
There are also users who would be miffed at having to buy a pack including MP because of other SP features which are included.
Reply #20 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
IIRC, it said 1/3 would pay $20 for a multiplayer ONLY expansion.


I know that I said no, because $15 is my magic number for the value of any expansion. I can't justify that extra $5 in my head for some reason. Maybe when I am less broke.
Reply #21 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I know that I said no, because $15 is my magic number for the value of any expansion. I can't justify that extra $5 in my head for some reason. Maybe when I am less broke.


I've been playing games for awhile... I can't remember seeing any expansion in the stores for less than $29.99.

In any case at the very least Stardock should make multiplayer available via download for a price... even this would make everyone happy.
Reply #22 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Am I confused or was there a typo in the CGW review?

On the first page there is a table that compares features between GC2 and MOO2. Under "Custom Ship Building" it lists MOO2 as "Incredibly rich" and GC2 as "Pretty sparse and straightforward".

I am probably one of the few here who haven't played MOO2, but I think the ship building in GC2 is a bit more than sparse... did they put these comments in the wrong columns?
Reply #23 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Back in the day, I would have been the CGW reviewer for this game. I hope he loves it as I do.

And, no, avoid multi-player. Perfect the game for solitaire play.

Alan Emrich, former Strategy Games Editor of CGW magazine


And as someone that subscribed to CGW from Sept 1987 until very recently, I can tell you that Alan Emrich was and is the man!

Alan, I would love to see you work with the Stardock guys on a future title!

Best of luck and good to see you around!
Reply #24 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I wish reviewers and a handful of players too will give this multiplayer crap a rest. First off, who has time to play a game like this multiplayer?? Come on people, its not a game for multiplayer, forget it we don't need it. How many people actually play games like this multiplayer?? Go ahead, do a poll and you will see probably 10% that do, if that much. Why oh why do all the trouble and work to put multiplayer in a game like this just to please a tiny percent of people that complain... oh... no multiplayer. I personally think SD should never waste their time on trying to ever put multiplayer in GalCiv2. It wins hand over fist being single player and I think thats how it should stay. Leave multiplayer for RTS or FPS games, where it should be, not TBS. I can't quit my job and life just to have all the time in the world to sit and take turn after turn after turn of a TBS multiplayer game when all my opponent will do is fall asleep anyway. Multiplayer and GalCiv2 = One complete waste of time.
Reply #25 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
How many people actually play games like this multiplayer??


I played Heroes of Might and Magic 2 almost exclusively multiplayer. Games could take weeks to finish, but they were still fun. You just played when both of you had the time to play, then save the game, and come back and play more later.