42% is mixed reviews?

[Azure]

Was considering buying the game until I saw the actual reviews. Now I definitely won't buy after seeing Steam try to protect the game. How many of you got a 42% on you school finals and told your parents, "I got mixed results"?

Steam, Let them have the Negative status they deserve. Maybe it will motivate them to fix their problems. Why even have (Negative) and (Mostly Negative) when you constantly do whatever is possible to protect deserving games from that rating?

[Vlad von Carstein]

It's like how when a professional reviewer gives something a 7/10 and it actually means its bad but 7/10 is the lowest they can give while technically still being positive so they don't lose access to free stuff.

[Audie_Murphy]

Originally posted by Silverlight:

Originally posted by bshock:

It was review bombed within minutes after releasing.

Sad to see. I like the game.
Still. There's a long road ahead. In 2-3 years this version will surpass 6 in players and the reviews will stabilize as patches release.

Well every game released is review bombed, even the best of the best yet. I told my friend months ago this would happen with Civ 7 release and i was right. That's how pathetic it has become. So now, i no longer pay ANY attention to "STEAM USER" reviews. Why? Because they are OTHERS opinions and every game i bought i loved and happily played for hours on end. There's games i have hundreds of hours in that other "entitled" scumbags b*****d about like their weak opinions even matter. Bottomline, it's a sad world we live in full of miserable people that only see the negative in life (even games lol) and not the positive. I feel sorry for the ones who don't make their own decisions and actually based their decision on buying games based on OTHERS opinions. I learned that the hard way so never again.

[Ninjamestari]

They want 70 euros for what is essentially Humankind 2. No ty.

[Medicus]

Originally posted by Azure:

Was considering buying the game until I saw the actual reviews. Now I definitely won't buy after seeing Steam try to protect the game. How many of you got a 42% on you school finals and told your parents, "I got mixed results"?

Steam, Let them have the Negative status they deserve. Maybe it will motivate them to fix their problems. Why even have (Negative) and (Mostly Negative) when you constantly do whatever is possible to protect deserving games from that rating?

For me everything under 75% is unplayable. They can call 43% whatever they like I wont buy it.

[GarrGarr]

review bombing? Those are people's votes. And they are having their individual say...and collectively it isn't good.

The only thing I see is a studio that's creatively bankrupt using the last bits of goodwill to yoink dollars out of the impulsive console and mobile crowd before they go under.

[AgentX320]

the game is getting positive review bombed
while almost all negative reviews have long text description on why it's negative the positive one are just small text or even no text at all

[Many-Named]

Originally posted by Tank Man:

Originally posted by Azure:

Was considering buying the game until I saw the actual reviews. Now I definitely won't buy after seeing Steam try to protect the game. How many of you got a 42% on you school finals and told your parents, "I got mixed results"?

Steam, Let them have the Negative status they deserve. Maybe it will motivate them to fix their problems. Why even have (Negative) and (Mostly Negative) when you constantly do whatever is possible to protect deserving games from that rating?

For me everything under 75% is unplayable. They can call 43% whatever they like I wont buy it.

Hard disagree there, I loved plenty of stinkers (on steam). Ark ascended for example, 60% still amazing to play (solo and unmodded!).

You're probably missing out but to each his own.

[SpacePoon]

Originally posted by bshock:

It was review bombed within minutes after releasing.

It's not a review bomb when a mid game receives mid reviews.

[Sleepy]

I skipped this one because most of the changes sounded dumb, and 6 was pretty bad.

Civ3 with the army optimization from Civ4 would be the best Civ.

[Xaphnir]

Steam trying to protect the game?

That's just the way Steam reviews work. 42% is and always has been mixed.

[Banafrit™]

Originally posted by ByTheNumbers:

Originally posted by Central:

it got a lot of bad reviews minutes after its initial launch, that should tell you enough to take it with a grain of salt.
i remember about 11 hours ago it was still at 33%, so now that real reviews are coming in from people who actually play the game it seems to be climbing a lot.
and quite a lot of fans of the series believe you cannot judge the game untill you put quite a lot of hours in it, so they wont review for a while.

Sounds like cope to me.

Literally every Civ game has been the same cycle.

Mixed/negative feedback at launch. Then by 1-2 expansions in or whenever all DLC is gone, majority flips. This isn't new at all.

Your response, is unironically, cope as well.

[Xaphnir]

Originally posted by Banafrit™:

Originally posted by ByTheNumbers:

Sounds like cope to me.

Literally every Civ game has been the same cycle.

Mixed/negative feedback at launch. Then by 1-2 expansions in or whenever all DLC is gone, majority flips. This isn't new at all.

Your response, is unironically, cope as well.

Before 5 this wasn't really the pattern, but yeah, 5 and 6 were like this, too. It's the reason I had no interest in buying this at launch. I was expecting this.

[Larkis]

Originally posted by Tank Man:

Originally posted by Azure:

Was considering buying the game until I saw the actual reviews. Now I definitely won't buy after seeing Steam try to protect the game. How many of you got a 42% on you school finals and told your parents, "I got mixed results"?

Steam, Let them have the Negative status they deserve. Maybe it will motivate them to fix their problems. Why even have (Negative) and (Mostly Negative) when you constantly do whatever is possible to protect deserving games from that rating?

For me everything under 75% is unplayable. They can call 43% whatever they like I wont buy it.

You will be glad to here that metacritics is about 80%

[Gut]

Originally posted by Banafrit™:

Originally posted by ByTheNumbers:

Sounds like cope to me.

Literally every Civ game has been the same cycle.

Mixed/negative feedback at launch. Then by 1-2 expansions in or whenever all DLC is gone, majority flips. This isn't new at all.

Your response, is unironically, cope as well.

You are wrong, it has never been that bad, it is an all time down for the franchise. It is easily checkable on steam.

[Honey Badger]

Originally posted by Frank White:

Originally posted by Frank White:

-no governors
-no districts adjustments
-no builders
-no loyalty
-game ends 1950
-no different map choices 3 basics
-denuvo
-outrages price
-missing probably 50+ leaders
-mountains don't exist on terrain
-terrible UI
-need to pay for wonders which makes PvP pay to win
-one era cut into dlc which is diabolical
-people telling performance late game is abysmal
They went giga greed and deserve to be review bombed ,people payed 120+ bucks and got same terrible UI that you look through whole game,even though it was told 6 months before to defs and they said ye ye we fix it and didn't do anything,but didn't forgot pay 200bucks play 15 days earlier button

Haven't be able to play due to crashes, and did not know all this. I was on the fence about getting a refund. This might be the nail in the coffen.