all that hate

[Threepwood]

after reading all that hate from people made me skeptic that people just dont like change, but oh my god were they right, i just dont get why they would scrap every single thing from previous civ games, they might aswell call this something else cause its nothing like previous civ games, its horrid to get in to, everything is a huge overwhelming mess and the ui oh dear lord is it bad, i get that games have to evolve but oh dear lord this is a huge swing and a miss for me, i cant begin to comprehend how disapointed i am, what on gods green earth were they thinking creating this mess. the first 30 min i have already pointed out 10 things that are just crap, and you get 0 info on why how where and when, im just blown away, seriously if you are a skeptic dont buy the game. now my question to people, do you seriously count this as a genuine civ game or more a beyond earth standalone? and how do you see this game evolve and be a hit?

[[STO]Slacker]

I'm having an opposite experience as you - I like the way information is provided now. Much easier to understand than before in my opinion. And I like a few other improvements as well. Seems like a solidi update to me. We'll see how it evolves of course.

[Mr. Robot]

Originally posted by STOSlacker:

I'm having an opposite experience as you - I like the way information is provided now. Much easier to understand than before in my opinion. And I like a few other improvements as well. Seems like a solidi update to me. We'll see how it evolves of course.

same for me. From my experience every civ launch is the same... People do not like the changes but will respect and like it some time later...

[Torquemadada]

Originally posted by Mr. Robot:

Originally posted by STOSlacker:

I'm having an opposite experience as you - I like the way information is provided now. Much easier to understand than before in my opinion. And I like a few other improvements as well. Seems like a solidi update to me. We'll see how it evolves of course.

same for me. From my experience every civ launch is the same... People do not like the changes but will respect and like it some time later...

Ok you're just an Ubisoft believer. Nobody cares about changes or not, it's just gameplay that counts and how a game is designed and original.
For the first time, I'm bored in a Civ game. There is nothing to do except producing army and click on menus.

[Hekteur]

negative reviews list of complains:
- Denuvo <-- most people complaining about it don't even understand why they are complaining about it and making stuff up just to jstify spitting on the game.
- Unfinished state <-- The... game... is in early access (or call it early release)... the actual release is still next week.
- Many features are intentionally pushed back to expansions and DLC <-- well, I don't know where you people have been the past 20 years or so, but this has been Civilization business model since waaaayyyy back in Civilization 3.
- This is not a civ game <-- Well... I mean, you do start with a settler, like every Civ ever. You build a city, decides production, then tech research, eventually civic. You explore, find new civs and independant states (aka city states/barbarians) and decides how much of a war mongerer you'll be for the whole duration of the game, in addition to deciding what kind of victory you're going for. What's not civilization about this exactly? Maybe you guys can double check because I believe you must have booted the wrong game and mistaken it for Civilization.

That being said, I'm a strong believer of "personal preferences are personal". I don't see any problem if someone really dislikes it. Thing is, if you go through those negative reviews, you'll see that most of them have spent very little time in the game. Most are below one and a half hour. Probably because they ask for a refund and didn't want to go beyond the 2 hours policy, but still if you narrow it down, there are still TONS of negative review with less than an hours and way too many with as little as 10 minutes. they essentially booted, watched the intro, started a game, played 2 turns and quit. I'm very sorry, but I call BS on everyone who reviewed the game so fast. This is a huge game and it can take a LOT of time to really see it all and really know what you're talking about. I personally like it much for now, but I'll wait until I've completed at least a few games, working with different victory conditions and different leader/civ combo, before writing my own review.

[Spacemutiny]

Originally posted by Hekteur:

negative reviews list of complains:
- Denuvo <-- most people complaining about it don't even understand why they are complaining about it and making stuff up just to jstify spitting on the game.
- Unfinished state <-- The... game... is in early access (or call it early release)... the actual release is still next week.
- Many features are intentionally pushed back to expansions and DLC <-- well, I don't know where you people have been the past 20 years or so, but this has been Civilization business model since waaaayyyy back in Civilization 3.
- This is not a civ game <-- Well... I mean, you do start with a settler, like every Civ ever. You build a city, decides production, then tech research, eventually civic. You explore, find new civs and independant states (aka city states/barbarians) and decides how much of a war mongerer you'll be for the whole duration of the game, in addition to deciding what kind of victory you're going for. What's not civilization about this exactly? Maybe you guys can double check because I believe you must have booted the wrong game and mistaken it for Civilization.

That being said, I'm a strong believer of "personal preferences are personal". I don't see any problem if someone really dislikes it. Thing is, if you go through those negative reviews, you'll see that most of them have spent very little time in the game. Most are below one and a half hour. Probably because they ask for a refund and didn't want to go beyond the 2 hours policy, but still if you narrow it down, there are still TONS of negative review with less than an hours and way too many with as little as 10 minutes. they essentially booted, watched the intro, started a game, played 2 turns and quit. I'm very sorry, but I call BS on everyone who reviewed the game so fast. This is a huge game and it can take a LOT of time to really see it all and really know what you're talking about. I personally like it much for now, but I'll wait until I've completed at least a few games, working with different victory conditions and different leader/civ combo, before writing my own review.

If a Civ game is not enticing people to play past 1.5 hours there is a problem with the game, not the reviewers.

[Gigantoad]

Originally posted by Hekteur:

negative reviews list of complains:
- Denuvo <-- most people complaining about it don't even understand why they are complaining about it and making stuff up just to jstify spitting on the game.
- Unfinished state <-- The... game... is in early access (or call it early release)... the actual release is still next week.
- Many features are intentionally pushed back to expansions and DLC <-- well, I don't know where you people have been the past 20 years or so, but this has been Civilization business model since waaaayyyy back in Civilization 3.
- This is not a civ game <-- Well... I mean, you do start with a settler, like every Civ ever. You build a city, decides production, then tech research, eventually civic. You explore, find new civs and independant states (aka city states/barbarians) and decides how much of a war mongerer you'll be for the whole duration of the game, in addition to deciding what kind of victory you're going for. What's not civilization about this exactly? Maybe you guys can double check because I believe you must have booted the wrong game and mistaken it for Civilization.

That being said, I'm a strong believer of "personal preferences are personal". I don't see any problem if someone really dislikes it. Thing is, if you go through those negative reviews, you'll see that most of them have spent very little time in the game. Most are below one and a half hour. Probably because they ask for a refund and didn't want to go beyond the 2 hours policy, but still if you narrow it down, there are still TONS of negative review with less than an hours and way too many with as little as 10 minutes. they essentially booted, watched the intro, started a game, played 2 turns and quit. I'm very sorry, but I call BS on everyone who reviewed the game so fast. This is a huge game and it can take a LOT of time to really see it all and really know what you're talking about. I personally like it much for now, but I'll wait until I've completed at least a few games, working with different victory conditions and different leader/civ combo, before writing my own review.

Just to correct you here. It is not in Early Access, it's in Advanced Access. This is NOT an alpha or beta version you're playing. It's purely a marketing ploy to get people to pay more to pay sooner. The game next week will not be fundamentally different than what we have now.

[skunkno1]

OK just chiming in to say Beyond Earth was awesome if you had the Rising Tide DLC.

[Hoopy Frood Jay©]

Originally posted by STOSlacker:

I'm having an opposite experience as you - I like the way information is provided now. Much easier to understand than before in my opinion. And I like a few other improvements as well. Seems like a solidi update to me. We'll see how it evolves of course.

I like the game too, but I often can't find the information I'm looking for :/

[Vlad von Carstein]

Originally posted by Hekteur:

That being said, I'm a strong believer of "personal preferences are personal". I don't see any problem if someone really dislikes it. Thing is, if you go through those negative reviews, you'll see that most of them have spent very little time in the game. Most are below one and a half hour. Probably because they ask for a refund and didn't want to go beyond the 2 hours policy, but still if you narrow it down, there are still TONS of negative review with less than an hours and way too many with as little as 10 minutes. they essentially booted, watched the intro, started a game, played 2 turns and quit. I'm very sorry, but I call BS on everyone who reviewed the game so fast.

So negative reviews have a legitimate reason to be under 2 hours from the refund policy(willing to bet a large portion would play for longer to get a better idea given the opportunity), but positive reviews have no such reason, and you are more focused on the negative reviews than the positives reviews, when the positive reviews are less legitimate, how interesting.

[Honey Badger]

$130 for a game that feel like its still in devolopment and crashes non stop. So well deserved hate.

[Hekteur]

Originally posted by Spacemutiny:

If a Civ game is not enticing people to play past 1.5 hours there is a problem with the game, not the reviewers.

First of all, take your time to make sure you read all of someone's comment before answering. I do mention the amount of even waaay shorter game time reviewed. Why did you pick the longest stretch?

Secondly: this is a HUGE game. Saying you dislike it after 1.5 hour is like watching the intro credits to a series and then straight up calling it crap because the story is bad, acting is bad, no character development, etc... You are CERTAINLY judging the game way too fast.

Thirdly: of all the negative reviews, it is quite obvious that most people who hated it were expecting "another civilization 6". Like I already said, that one is still available for everyone to play. Buying a new Civilization game expecting it to be like the previous one and then yelling at the outrageously bad game sold for an outrageous price is both childish and stupid. Nobody is preventing anyone from enjoying Civilization 6. Just don't go into delusions thinking 7 will be like 6.

Finally, Steam reviews have been well known for quite a while for being spammed by review bombers who got nothing more to do than to buy games, bash them and then asking for a refund. I don't know if you're aware, but why do you think Valve implemented all those ways to filter "crap reviews" from objective ones and why they are still actively working to add more ways to prevent/hinder review bombers? Don't try and act like this is not a thing. There's a difference between legitimately and just going on a venting rage because you can't accept that the world doesn't revolve around you and devs are making games for an audience rather than for the one (ok, few) person who wanted "Civ 6 but with better grafixx"

[Frank White]

Originally posted by Hekteur:

negative reviews list of complains:
- Denuvo <-- most people complaining about it don't even understand why they are complaining about it and making stuff up just to jstify spitting on the game.
- Unfinished state <-- The... game... is in early access (or call it early release)... the actual release is still next week.
- Many features are intentionally pushed back to expansions and DLC <-- well, I don't know where you people have been the past 20 years or so, but this has been Civilization business model since waaaayyyy back in Civilization 3.
- This is not a civ game <-- Well... I mean, you do start with a settler, like every Civ ever. You build a city, decides production, then tech research, eventually civic. You explore, find new civs and independant states (aka city states/barbarians) and decides how much of a war mongerer you'll be for the whole duration of the game, in addition to deciding what kind of victory you're going for. What's not civilization about this exactly? Maybe you guys can double check because I believe you must have booted the wrong game and mistaken it for Civilization.

That being said, I'm a strong believer of "personal preferences are personal". I don't see any problem if someone really dislikes it. Thing is, if you go through those negative reviews, you'll see that most of them have spent very little time in the game. Most are below one and a half hour. Probably because they ask for a refund and didn't want to go beyond the 2 hours policy, but still if you narrow it down, there are still TONS of negative review with less than an hours and way too many with as little as 10 minutes. they essentially booted, watched the intro, started a game, played 2 turns and quit. I'm very sorry, but I call BS on everyone who reviewed the game so fast. This is a huge game and it can take a LOT of time to really see it all and really know what you're talking about. I personally like it much for now, but I'll wait until I've completed at least a few games, working with different victory conditions and different leader/civ combo, before writing my own review.

Is the irony that you complain about 1 hours negative reviews when you put negative review on elden ring in 30min playtime and said because it's not male it's type A and it's not a female it's type B and it has generic combat, when game has one of the best combat systems ever created and it's probably one of top 5 games ever created..But you defending now 120bucks beta test with like 50 leaders missing and two dlc ,when other game was complete package for 60,Civ is 400+ bucks game

[Vlad von Carstein]

Originally posted by Frank White:

Originally posted by Hekteur:

but I call BS on everyone who reviewed the game so fast.

Is the irony that you complain about 1 hours negative reviews when you put negative review on elden ring in 30min playtime

Lol peak internet opinions

[Prexxus]

Except for the UI I'm enjoying it very much. Honestly just an option to scale the UI down to be smaller would be enough for me at the moment.

[Medicus]

Originally posted by Threepwood:

after reading all that hate from people made me skeptic that people just dont like change, but oh my god were they right, i just dont get why they would scrap every single thing from previous civ games, they might aswell call this something else cause its nothing like previous civ games, its horrid to get in to, everything is a huge overwhelming mess and the ui oh dear lord is it bad, i get that games have to evolve but oh dear lord this is a huge swing and a miss for me, i cant begin to comprehend how disapointed i am, what on gods green earth were they thinking creating this mess. the first 30 min i have already pointed out 10 things that are just crap, and you get 0 info on why how where and when, im just blown away, seriously if you are a skeptic dont buy the game. now my question to people, do you seriously count this as a genuine civ game or more a beyond earth standalone? and how do you see this game evolve and be a hit?

Do you have trouble using points?