|
My take
I bought CTP1 when it first came out and probably only played it three times. The first time I played it was about a year ago and that was for about 4 hours--> It was ok rated it about a 6--> mainly due to the interface. Never picked it up again until 2 weeks ago. I thought I would give it a chance again before I got CTP2. This time I was more tolerant...it was actually fun --> rerated it as a 7--> although the interface, wonders and some of the advances still seemed ill planned --> I like most of the TBS players are used to the standard set by CIV1 and 2.
As I see it, the biggest single issue for any player or reviewer is that any game like CIV1 or 2 will ultimately be compared to it. Anyone knows the CIVs are a tough act to follow. My feeling is if CTP had come out before the CIV's they would have gotten much better reviews. The CTP series, unfortunately, has the cards stacked against it because it's not CIV1 or CIV2. This situation is not something Activision can really do anything about they just have to grit their teeth and keep moving forward.
One last comment on the reviews--> I saw a comment from the reply IGN magazine sent to someone who complained about the review of CTP2 that said and I paraphrase -->they try write our reviews to appeal to a large audience, RTS, TBS gamers, etc. Well if your doing that how can you give any game a good review? If there saying that CTP2 would be rated 9 for TBS fans but for RTS it gets a 4 thus it gets an average of 6 means that AOK should get a 9 for RTS fans and a 4 for TBS fans for a 6 rating. Using that logic that is....
Perhaps if a magazine is going to use that argument they should break the rating down as such. If your a fan of the genre CTP2 gets a 9 if not then it gets a 4.
That's my rant for today.
Bye.
|
