Reviewing the Drunk Gamer

Libertarian · November 10, 2001, 13:42

You might have read drunkgamers review of Civ3. Here's my review of their review.

-----

What a disappointment.

I like for a review to give me the facts. If the reviewer wants to opine about the facts and say that he doesn't like the game, no problem. But when he doesn't give it to you straight, his entire review, in my opinion, is rendered worthless. Buzzy Boy didn't like the game. Fine. It would just be nice if he had told us why.

The first four paragraphs of the review are a waste of bandwidth, the words of a writer who likes to read his own work. Buzzy tells us what a genre is. Hey, we've got dictionary.com if we need that. Why not just get to the point?

Finally, he does. After wasting a scroll, we discover this:

Quote:

And that's where Civ 3 falls short. It adds nothing new. It's essentially the same game I played in 1993 but with better graphics.

I have no reason to question the gentleman's veracity. I'm sure he must have played the game. Could he have been drunk perhaps? How on earth did he miss the new element of culture? Does he even mention culture? Searching for the term, you'll finally find it — once — in this baffling statement:

Quote:

This [unique units] is the best way to insert real life culture into the game.

Excuse me? It is to laugh. Ha.

Does he think those borders expand because he has a Hippolite? Good grief. Even the most ignorant students of history and sociology understand the concept of culture better than this. Buzzy doesn't shoot straight about the cultural aspect of the game.

I began to suspect that he, like so many others, approached the game with Civ1&2 tactics and strategy, and found that he couldn't win. Shame, really. He missed out on all the joys that I and many others experienced. City after city defecting from the English to me. Conquering London with a crushing military campaign. Sending Elizabeth and her refugees to hide near the South Pole, under the Aztecs. Working out arrangements beforehand with the other world leaders to make certain I wouldn't be starting a world war.

Buzzy mentions diplomacy. It's one of the things he says he likes:

Quote:

You can actually bargain with the AI rulers more than in previous games. However, on harder levels they simply ask for ridiculous things during negotiations.

What is this guy, some sort of slacker who never conducted a business negotiation? You have to negotiate from a position of strength to get what you want. I wonder, too, whether he considers one tech an equal trade for another, no matter how much more valuable one is to a particular civilization than to another. What did he do, try to trade Alphabet to the Zulus and get Engineering in return?

Speaking of techs, it was when I hit upon the following lame observation, that I saw where Buzzy is coming from, as he lamented that they "concentrated on stuff I hate":

Quote:

It would be nice to devote your scientists to peaceful or war-like techs. Instead, you need philosophy to develop stealth bombers.

Moronic. Sub-moronic. Yes, Buzzy, you do need philosophy to develop stealth bombers. C'mere. Let me be the first to explain this to you. SCIENCE IS A BRANCH OF PHILOSOPHY, you ignoramus.

And that's where Buzzy is coming from. Ignorance. Ignorance of the game. Ignorance of history. Ignorance of culture. Just plain ignorance.

The truth? Buzzy doesn't like it because it doesn't have multiplayer. He did the classic thing ignorant people do. He set up a straw man and then went to bashing at it like a piñata.

Buzzy didn't review Civ3. He reviewed his own daydream. And wasted everybody's time in the process.

player1 · November 10, 2001, 14:09

Almost all of this review is just stupid.

Except that game didn't steal back some good things from other civ type games (which doesn't make game bad, of course).

TCO · November 10, 2001, 15:06

I liked it. It was funny. Have a beer and chill.

Wrong_shui · November 10, 2001, 15:11

Gonna do this to every bad review?

If u r i have the feeling your gonna be doing it alot.

Stefu · November 10, 2001, 15:21

Got to ask this - you Libertarian from SDMB?

MustPost · November 10, 2001, 15:22

he made a few good points, but overall it sounded like he was drunk when he wrote the review.

I agree that the tech tree does seem a little inbread.
Everything is just to entanged so you can't specielize in one area and ignore other parts.

Quote:

I am catching lots of **** for this game. To show up all my nay-sayers here at work, I bought four copies of Civ2 from Amazon so we could all play multiplayer on the LAN. Sure enough, I get the copies in the mail and it's the version of Civ 2 with no multiplayer. More money down the drain. Between being called a homo on FARK and this gaming experience, it's been a bad week.

come on who would buy four copies of civ2 not relizing it isn't a version with mp. probobly drunk when he made the order

TCO · November 10, 2001, 15:28

Dude,

The Amzon site had "multiplayer" advertised until a couple weeks before ship time. Its totally possible that this guy put in the orders before MP was pulled form the ad. And Firaxis/Infogrames made no efforts to let people know who pre-ordered about the change. in fact they did the opposite. Refusing to tell people what they were doing with MP even after the change had been made internally.

Imran Siddiqui · November 10, 2001, 15:57

GP, you drunk?

He said he bought 4 Civ2! CIV2!

Thank you...

Libertarian · November 10, 2001, 16:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Stefu
Got to ask this - you Libertarian from SDMB?

Yes, I am. Greetings!

Libertarian · November 10, 2001, 16:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Wrong_shui
Gonna do this to every bad review?

If u r i have the feeling your gonna be doing it alot.

o i dno. i c only1 bad revu. i c buncha gud 1s.

Libertarian · November 10, 2001, 16:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Wrong_shui
Gonna do this to every bad review?

If u r i have the feeling your gonna be doing it alot.

o i dno. i c only1 bad revu. i c buncha gud 1s.

DaddyCool · November 10, 2001, 16:28

im kool cuz i spell things wrong and lv out lttrs n my psts

Deathray · November 10, 2001, 16:38

m3h 2, 'n' 1m k007 cuz 1 u53 1337 ta7k cuz 1 cnt typ3 pr0p3rly.

By the way, you're right. The guy didn't have a clue what he was on about. Probably drunk. He clearly hasn't played the game enough yet, he sounds like he doesn't know how to play it very well. I've had some great deals off of the AI opponents. Especially when their cities convert to my civ and I sell them back ;-)

Stefu · November 10, 2001, 17:07

Quote:

Yes, I am. Greetings!

Indeed! I go by the name Kantalooppi, although I haven't posted much - mainly some one-line comments and one thread about bad cartoon dubbing.

Anyway, this site has got really fine Off-Topic forum, it does, and admins have specified it will always be free. Not that I'm trying to lure people to do anything or like that, except that I am.

Libertarian · November 10, 2001, 18:10

Wow, you're right! A very cool forum. And a much needed break from this inexplicable and brutal gang rape of Soren et al that is overshadowing everything in this forum. Blech. Guys who can't code a Hello World sure are throwing a lot of rocks in their glass houses.

Thanks for the tip, Stefu.

Simpleton · November 10, 2001, 18:19

I don't know what everyone's getting so worked up about this review. It's not like it was done by Gamespot or IGN, its from some nobody writing for a penny ante website. It's worthless.

Libertarian · November 10, 2001, 18:24

"Worthless" is the perfect assessment. Unfortunately, Apolyton deemed it significant enough to feature it on the front page. I felt compelled to bash it thoroughly, like an Iraqi army on a desert road.

Simpleton · November 10, 2001, 18:42

I can't believe that the reviewer said there is "nothing new" in the game. Culture and the new resource scheme are huge changes!!!! When some poor, pathetic AI player plops a city right down in between my culture boarders I just drool because then I 'attack' his city with my culture. I build libraries, temples, etc just to get my cultual boarders grow and swallow him/her up. I don't remember doing this in Civ1 or 2. As far a resources go, they are extremely important. I remember my first game playing I had terrible pollution but no rubber to build a Mass transit, so I was forced into a strategic war against my neighbour for a city near a rubber resource.

Very good and very different! That's Civ3.

That's his review!

MarkG · November 10, 2001, 18:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Libertarian
Unfortunately, Apolyton deemed it significant enough to feature it on the front page.

all news are "featured" on the front civ3 page for some time.....

TCO · November 10, 2001, 18:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
GP, you drunk?

He said he bought 4 Civ2! CIV2!

Thank you...

chill. It must be a typo.

Libertarian · November 10, 2001, 18:59

Quote:

all news are "featured" on the front civ3 page for some time.....

As an actual, practicing libertarian, I graciously defer to the site owners. Though I disagree that Buzzy's glurge was newsworthy, I'm satisfied that we've swatted that fly here. Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to do that, Mark.

TCO · November 10, 2001, 19:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Stefu

Indeed! I go by the name Kantalooppi, although I haven't posted much - mainly some one-line comments and one thread about bad cartoon dubbing.

Anyway, this site has got really fine Off-Topic forum, it does, and admins have specified it will always be free. Not that I'm trying to lure people to do anything or like that, except that I am.

Stephie, you little BB slut. Remeber your true home.

MarkG · November 10, 2001, 19:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Libertarian
As an actual, practicing libertarian, I graciously defer to the site owners. Though I disagree that Buzzy's glurge was newsworthy, I'm satisfied that we've swatted that fly here. Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to do that, Mark.

indeed our effort is to give you access to all kind of opinions even the more stupid ones