Gamecatcher Reviews Civ3 PTW

Wise Ass · December 15, 2002, 19:16

Gamecatcher has published the December issue of their magazine containing a review of Civ3 PTW.

Wise Ass · December 17, 2002, 16:49

**Bump**

Comments?

FNBrown · December 17, 2002, 16:53

Another far-from-glowing review... Seems like PTW is a consensus misfire amongst the gaming press.

Velociryx · December 17, 2002, 17:35

That guy is obviously just an Anti-Firaxis Troll, probably paid to say bad stuff by someone who doesn't like the game. His comments (well, at least the negative ones) re: the expansion are utter nonsense and his criticisms of the game are totally and completely unfounded.

FNBrown · December 17, 2002, 18:12

No, no, no, Vel.... it's obvious that Infogrames just didn't spend enough money advertising PTW on Gamecatcher's website.

If they had bought a full spate of banner and pop-up advertisements, I'm sure the reviewer would have posted a glowing appraisal without even bothering to play the game.

Provost Harrison · December 17, 2002, 19:53

Gamecatcher is part of the CGN which does not involve itself in advertising or 'bribery', and you should retract that comment. Also it is quite a legitimate review as many of the accusations thrown at PtW are quite legitimate...

FNBrown · December 17, 2002, 20:08

PH - I'm one of the many hurling accusations of inadequacy at Infogrames latest steaming pile... my last post was meant to be sarcastic.

Wise Ass · December 17, 2002, 20:34

My points are completely valid and Civ3 is one of my favorite games

notyoueither · December 17, 2002, 20:36

I don't agree with everything you wrote, but I can see that you tried to be fair.

asleepathewheel · December 17, 2002, 21:32

Wise ass-

I thought this was a more reasonable review than some I've seen, either on the negative or positive side.

I see that the review was for 1.04 and that you will write another for 1.14.

Its annoying how many reviewers just play the game for 10 minutes then write the review, nice to see someone that's actually tried the game.

I do think you could have mentioned the SP changes more as well as easy mod use now, esp. the way, in the editor, you can specify which folders to use when creating a mod.

i personally think, besides the infogrames problem, that firaxis was a bit too ambitious with the new modes of MP, had they stuck with the tried and true civ2 methods, the reviews would be more favorable. What do you think about that thought?

FNBrown · December 17, 2002, 22:06

It was working with SMAC... dunno why they had to change it.

WarpStorm · December 17, 2002, 22:34

I think this was about the most fair review I've read. I disagree this some parts but at least the reviewer was trying to be fair instead of slamming it for the sake of slamming it.

I agree that I would like to see the traditional I-GO-U-GO brought back with some sort of replay or at least a detailed events log. This wouldn't suffer at all from network bandwidth and lag issues and would make M accessible to nearly everyone.

Wise Ass · December 18, 2002, 02:03

Quote:

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
Wise ass-

I thought this was a more reasonable review than some I've seen, either on the negative or positive side.

I see that the review was for 1.04 and that you will write another for 1.14.

Its annoying how many reviewers just play the game for 10 minutes then write the review, nice to see someone that's actually tried the game.

I do think you could have mentioned the SP changes more as well as easy mod use now, esp. the way, in the editor, you can specify which folders to use when creating a mod.

i personally think, besides the infogrames problem, that firaxis was a bit too ambitious with the new modes of MP, had they stuck with the tried and true civ2 methods, the reviews would be more favorable. What do you think about that thought?

hmmm... I appreciate the feedback from all of you. You are right I didn't give SP and it's new features as much attention as I maybe should have. I am somewhat torn on the issue but maybe in my update I will speak on it.

Again I appreciate the feedback.
~Wise

vondrack · December 18, 2002, 07:21

Just read through the review and I agree, it really is pretty fair. I might say some things in a different way, I might add some (SP related) good points, but overall it is a fair review, definitely.

Velociryx · December 18, 2002, 10:34

Ohhhh, you guys! Stop all this flirting with blasphemy and get back to the party line, will ya!? I'm starting to worry!

Seriously....good review. I'm just glad you brought it to our attention as a review, and didn't breathe a word of any of your negative points in the forums....that's grounds for lynching in these parts....

As to SP....personally, I'm glad you didn't give it much coverage! PTW was advertised as a MP expansion to the game....IMO, that makes the SP additions...not *unimportant* but certainly taking a backseat to the main advertised component.

-=Vel=-

Alex · December 18, 2002, 12:39

A fair review, by someone who actually played the game. It's more than we can expect these days.

Personally, I'm satisfied with PTW. I did not try MP yet (I don't like MP, but that's just me), but the SP features they added are interesting and add something to the gameplay, IMO.

Dis · December 18, 2002, 23:55

I think the review is right on.

It's good enough to play, but many things are missing or working right.