odd ratings..

[onedudesmind]

Clicked on a bunch of the profiles of people who rated this game over the past week, was wondering how the rating % wasn't moving, its been stuck at 51% all week. When i click on some profiles i get "This user has not yet set up their Steam Community profile.
If you know this person, encourage them to set up their profile and join in the gaming!" is this common? I have never seen this when clicking on a profile before. there are quite a few one word positive reviews where that comes up if you try to look at the profile, i haven't found a negative review profile that has this message.

[qsnoopyjr]

You don't really have to look at just the reviews, you look at player count. 33k for a new game, 1 week since released? 33k is a low. Civ6 has better population.

[Mountain Man]

I looked at a number of negative reviews, and the profiles were either private, or suspiciously blank, like the only game in their inventory was Civ VII.

Basically, Steam reviews are a dumpster fire and rarely reflect my opinion of a game.

[Evrach]

The vast majority of players that does not parricipate to the forums and social aspects of steam just make their account private, that’s all. Positive or negative.

[Mountain Man]

Originally posted by qsnoopyjr:

You don't really have to look at just the reviews, you look at player count. 33k for a new game, 1 week since released? 33k is a low. Civ6 has better population.

Publishers don't care about player numbers unless it's an online or live service game. For single player games like Civilization, they care about sales, and Civ VII is selling at least as well as its predecessors.

[MHarmless]

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

Publishers don't care about player numbers unless it's an online or live service game. For single player games like Civilization, they care about sales, and Civ VII is selling at least as well as its predecessors.

Long have I dreamed of a Glorious Future where Consumers would pay $70 to $130 dollars for a Software Product and then choose to Luxuriously Bask in their new acquisition rather than deriving enjoyment from such Base Desires as actually playing the game! For indeed, it is the wise man who Delays Gratification, drawing out the Simple Pleasures of Ownership.

Truly, my Sibling of Indeterminate Gender, we live in Enlightened Times! Glory to the Accountant Kings!


I am not being forced or compelled in any way to say this by my hosts at 2K Games.

[Haydencp]

I like the game, but this is not £60 game, it's a joke.


Feel like early access game.

Bad civs, bad ui, bad progression, bad music, feel like they chopped up a full game and to giveing it to us peice meal. It just greed.

[Fleetwood]

Originally posted by mharmless:

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

Publishers don't care about player numbers unless it's an online or live service game. For single player games like Civilization, they care about sales, and Civ VII is selling at least as well as its predecessors.

Long have I dreamed of a Glorious Future where Consumers would pay $70 to $130 dollars for a Software Product and then choose to Luxuriously Bask in their new acquisition rather than deriving enjoyment from such Base Desires as actually playing the game! For indeed, it is the wise man who Delays Gratification, drawing out the Simple Pleasures of Ownership.

Truly, my Sibling of Indeterminate Gender, we live in Enlightened Times! Glory to the Accountant Kings!


I am not being forced or compelled in any way to say this by my hosts at 2K Games.

To the Fair Forum of Civ VII

Noble Lords and Ladies, lend your ears!

Methinks our friend, the one they call Mountain Man,
Doth wear a mask of interest, fair and keen,
Yet in this guise, a truth doth lie unspoken—
His heart, though feigning passion, is but broken.

In yonder realm of Civilizations grand,
Where empires rise and fall at mortal's hand,
He doth not toil in battles fierce and dire,
But rather, in discourse, doth he aspire.

Forsooth, he spendeth more upon the scroll,
In Forum’s light, where whispers gently roll,
Than in the game itself, where actions reign,
A valiant leader, yet a player vain.

What say ye, friends? Is he not but a wraith,
A shadow lurking, devoid of true faith?
He prattles sweetly ’bout the wonders vast,
Yet in his heart, the die of love is cast.

Oft hath he claimed the glory of the fight,
Yet in the battlefield, he shuns the light.
With pen in hand, he paints a visage fair,
But lo! In gaming hours, he doth not share.

Thus, let us ponder on this curious case,
Of Mountain Man, who wears a fickle face,
A lover of the idea, not the game,
A true pretender, yet he knows no shame.

So raise a cup, dear friends, to truths unseen,
And let us merry mock the hollow sheen.
For in the world of Civs, where passion dwells,
'Tis better to play than weave mere tales.

Exit left, g'night, New Booty, wherever you are (you're on the forum).

[Esau]

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

I looked at a number of negative reviews, and the profiles were either private, or suspiciously blank, like the only game in their inventory was Civ VII.

Basically, Steam reviews are a dumpster fire and rarely reflect my opinion of a game.

You've uncovered the secret: Everyone actually loves this game but one single person made 16,000 bot accounts and paid for the game several thousand times and also left long, detailed reviews on why they were dissatisfied. Or something, I don't know, anything to avoid acknowledging that this game's been extremely poorly received.

[KD.AltQQ]

Originally posted by Haydencp:

I like the game, but this is not £60 game, it's a joke.


Feel like early access game.

Bad civs, bad ui, bad progression, bad music, feel like they chopped up a full game and to giveing it to us peice meal. It just greed.

Agreed this game as right now is overpriced.
That said, the music has been absolutely epic.
The UI, unfortunately, is also equally terrible.
Civs feel OK--better designed than humankind in terms of civ-specific policies and units and overall feel. A lot of things I felt they could've done more research into and consulted real life people actually from the "civ" (for example using the Thai word for "freedom/independence"--Itsaraphab, to describe an ability to immediately puppet a free city state into a vassal is just perplexing)

[Mountain Man]

Originally posted by Esau:

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

I looked at a number of negative reviews, and the profiles were either private, or suspiciously blank, like the only game in their inventory was Civ VII.

Basically, Steam reviews are a dumpster fire and rarely reflect my opinion of a game.

You've uncovered the secret: Everyone actually loves this game but one single person made 16,000 bot accounts and paid for the game several thousand times and also left long, detailed reviews on why they were dissatisfied. Or something, I don't know, anything to avoid acknowledging that this game's been extremely poorly received.

Allow me to bring you up to speed: I was presenting a counterpoint to the original poster's observation. Does that help?

[Grubbs008]

Originally posted by qsnoopyjr:

You don't really have to look at just the reviews, you look at player count. 33k for a new game, 1 week since released? 33k is a low. Civ6 has better population.

I mean, it's the 7th game in the series, and it's at 50%. That's pretty bad.

Still better player numbers then Avowed though, lol.

['Bacardi]

Originally posted by onedudesmind:

Clicked on a bunch of the profiles of people who rated this game over the past week, was wondering how the rating % wasn't moving, its been stuck at 51% all week. When i click on some profiles i get "This user has not yet set up their Steam Community profile.
If you know this person, encourage them to set up their profile and join in the gaming!" is this common? I have never seen this when clicking on a profile before. there are quite a few one word positive reviews where that comes up if you try to look at the profile, i haven't found a negative review profile that has this message.

Typical "hold" reviews when game is in release state. It takes 3 weeks

[Spiderbyte]

Originally posted by qsnoopyjr:

You don't really have to look at just the reviews, you look at player count. 33k for a new game, 1 week since released? 33k is a low. Civ6 has better population.

I am not playing Civ6 even though I spent 3300 hours on it. Have not even thought of playing it. Deity mode + bugs is nuts but it's still better than doing Civ 6 for the 1,000th time.

They need to polish this game and release modding asap.

[kasnavada]

Originally posted by qsnoopyjr:

You don't really have to look at just the reviews, you look at player count. 33k for a new game, 1 week since released? 33k is a low. Civ6 has better population.

That argument means that civ6 is dead and no one plays it. Also civ7's peak yesterday was from 25k and 50k... which is about the same as civ6 players.

Civ5 had more players than civ6 for the better part of the first 3 years of civ6's life. Significantly more, like civ6 had around 60% of civ5 players for that duration on average. Tallking about 2017-2018-2019. Actually if you go further, it's a trend for a significant of sequels... a balanced, fixed, less buggy, DLC-full game tends to have more players than a newly released sequel with its entire life to be told.

Civ6 did start at about 70-75 steam reviews, vs civ5 which actually started in the 50s too. And, as we all know, civ5 is dead and no one plays it. It definitely doesn't have 25k average concurrent players this year. And it definitely killled the civ franchise back in the 2010s.

That said, player count doesn't really matter. Sales do. As far as people can tell it's around a million for the first week. I dunno what the objectives for 2k was, but I can hardly put it as a failure.

But all of that is actually very much known. What are you really farming here ? Clown Steam awards ?

[Flash]

Gotta love the baseless claims that have no thorough analysis or facts but just spout nonsense of how Civ 7 is doing the same as Civ 6 or Civ 5 in sales etc.
Do some research and go through the forum threads

@OP
Its become a trend for creepy people going through profiles, stalking people's threads in not just one game but through their entire list just to troll, harass etc. There are a number of reasons why people have private accounts. But here's a few questions to u:

1. Who pays people to put negative reviews? Is there some big time competitor to Civ series? Or is it easier to say there are paid reviewers to put the Civ series in a positive light so as to not downright break sales? You may not be able to completely downplay the game due to the number of negative reviews but by showing a 50% balance you can cast doubt into the minds of buyers so they buy the game doubting if reviews are good/bad

2. As I said before, even I've had users stalk my profile and then give negative comments in OTHER games than the one's they've argued and had ♥♥♥♥ thrown on their face for their baseless dumb comments defending their ideals for no reason but to mindlessly debate. The world isnt that safe as one would assume.. many would rather have private profiles (alongside those fake accounts XD). Ultimately its their choice

3. Why does a user's profile have any bearing on their review? IF they can talk actual semantics from the game, they can have -10 hours in their gameplay for all I care. Only brain dead people would make these utter nonsense claims like 'he has zero hours so his review is fake'.. Read whats written genius instead of speculation

4. I see this 'Metacritic' etc. has a lot of positive reviews. What do they care lol. Its business to them. You pay them, they will post what they can nitpick and put in a positive light. Their review gets the game more exposure and money and that gets them money.. thats all. What do players get? Hate reviews come from paying money and not getting bang for their buck

5. I think we can easily use our brain to figure out whats an extremist 'I HATE THIS GAME ITS NOT CIV 5!' dumb thread is in comparison to a 'CIV 5 had this it would have worked well here but i dont know why they didnt add so and so...' etc. meaningful thread. OF WHICH THERE ARE MANY... So u tell me... do the numerous threads sound fake? Or does 'CIV 7 is the greatest game I played it had no issues' sound fake? Zero facts, zero comparisons.. just pure i played it it was great. In almost all these threads you will get these white knight defenders defending the game but with no analysis or facts thrown out to back it up.

Hope this helps. 50-50 balance? Nowadays all games will get that since money can get u there. Helps keep the game from becoming an utter flop and u as a dev get your return on investment at the least.