pc.ign.com review up: 9.3! *nt* - Page 2

Pembleton · October 30, 2001, 00:55

Quote:

Originally posted by HawaiiFive-O

Gee thanks. Now I have the Hawaii Five-O theme running through my head every time I see your name.

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 00:56

Yes, the CtP people proudly said the same thing. I saved $100 and COUNTLESS hours *NOT* seeing that game for myself, thank you very much (well, I got it [wrongly] as a gift and promptly erased it even then).

If the LE comes out here in Korea for $35 (I've heard that rumor), I won't be wasting too much money to try it out. Otherwise, I'm already seeing enough to pretty much make this a bargain bin purchase.

Shiva · October 30, 2001, 00:56

Quote:

Originally posted by yin26
So, yes. I have a bias. I have a bias against early reviews of a game that should be reviewed after extensive gameplay while people start jumpin up and down like kids in a candy store: "See! He said MP's not important. That PROVES it!"

As I said before, this is the way it works anymore with reviews of games Yin. The mags will be about the same i'll bet. Years ago they did extensive reviews but that was a long long time ago.

As for a bias you seem to have it in for civ3. You say "I have a bias against early reviews of a game that should be reviewed after extensive gameplay" and it sounds like you just want this game to have an extensive review, not all.

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 00:58

Yes. I'm just having flashbacks to the SMAC review. I won't trust anybody's review (even mine, if I had the game) for a few weeks at least. It's just the nature of the beast.

Carry on, all.

FrostyBoy · October 30, 2001, 00:58

I'll fix those head graphics, put elvis back in too.

anything that annoys me, can screw my gameplay, that's why I couldn't play ctp

good review too

GoofyBoy · October 30, 2001, 01:03

If find the patience and tolerence people here have of yin26 (who seems to be more interested in justifing his purchasing decision, rather than any seriously discussion about the game) to be quite impressive.

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 01:05

LOL! Considering I'm saying the review is worthless BECAUSE it doesn't discuss gameplay makes you either A) A poor reader or B) Just another troll. Get in line.

Imran Siddiqui · October 30, 2001, 01:15

You do realize some people like SMAC

.

And a GamesDomain Review strategy article not to long ago, stated that even after a year, SMAC was an amazing game. And he wasn't that impressed when it first came out

.

Shiva · October 30, 2001, 01:16

Quote:

Originally posted by yin26
LOL! Considering I'm saying the review is worthless BECAUSE it doesn't discuss gameplay makes you either A) A poor reader or B) Just another troll. Get in line.

No Yin, sorry just because someone points out your wrong doesnt make them a troll. Your like the little boy who cried wolf with that. Any time you cant come up with an arguement you cry "troll".

You said:

Quote:

Originally posted by yin26
" I have a bias against early reviews of a game that should be reviewed after extensive gameplay while people start jumpin up and down like kids in a candy store: "See! He said MP's not important. That PROVES it!"

"early reviews of a game". Not games. You just have an axe to grind with Civ3. It shows in what you write. You even go so far as to basicly tell everyone what the reviewer really ment when we have his words and score. Your just too blind to see how badly biased your are.

Like I said in the last thread where we talked about reviews, i'll be shocked if ones below 89%. Get over it because Civ3 will be a big seller no matter what ever kind of PR it got here about MP.

Have a good night

GoofyBoy · October 30, 2001, 01:23

Quote:

Yes, the CtP people proudly said the same thing. I saved $100 and COUNTLESS hours *NOT* seeing that game for myself, thank you very much (well, I got it [wrongly] as a gift and promptly erased it even then).

If the LE comes out here in Korea for $35 (I've heard that rumor), I won't be wasting too much money to try it out. Otherwise, I'm already seeing enough to pretty much make this a bargain bin purchase.

You don't seem to be talking about the quality of the review here.

What I'm saying is

1. Every thread that you post more than 4 times deteriates into why you won't buy it unless you get it cheap/includes multiplayer.
2. Say that it isn't a good review, state your reasons, then move on. No amount of posting will change the review.
3. People here really do seem tolerant of you. You say negative things about the game (for apparently your own reasons) on a forum dedicated to the game.

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 01:25

Quote:

sorry just because someone points out your wrong

Oh, please. His 'argument' was a troll. End of story. Re-read the thing and come back. As for the ratings ... so what? The point is they rarely tell the whole story. Surely you've picked up on that line of reasoning somewhere in here. And as for selling lots of games: Did I ever say otherwise?

Shiva · October 30, 2001, 01:27

Quote:

Originally posted by yin26

Oh, please. His 'argument' was a troll.

Damn it Yin would you please use the persons name, I thought that was aimed at me

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 01:28

O.K. Now you are making an argument. And this is not a troll from you, so I will answer it:

1. Every thread that you post more than 4 times deteriates into why you won't buy it unless you get it cheap/includes multiplayer.

'Every' simply isn't true, first of all. And since this is a thread about a review, surely one's decision to buy or not buy the game will come up. Fair enough, eh?

2. Say that it isn't a good review, state your reasons, then move on. No amount of posting will change the review.

I could care less about the review in terms of chaning it. It's the reaction to the review and then the reaction to my reaction that keeps me posting, though I rate this exchange pretty dull as far as the pointless debates go.

3. People here really do seem tolerant of you. You say negative things about the game (for apparently your own reasons) on a forum dedicated to the game.

You new here? LOL!

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 01:29

Shiva: No. More than one battle with you in a quarter is too much for me! LOL

Shiva · October 30, 2001, 01:32

Quote:

Originally posted by yin26
Shiva: No. More than one battle with you in a quarter is too much for me! LOL

Lol peace

kittenOFchaos · October 30, 2001, 03:10

"The same things were said about SMAC, which at the time got Gamespots highest score ever, blah blah blah.
That game was fun just until you realized how pathetic certain AI and other gamplay elements are."

I HATE you for being so wrong...

Yin are you a pauper? You and so many apolytoners seem to make a big deal over spending a little money to try games and support the industry. £30 for a game is hardly anything...what job you doing that makes such trifling sums of money a big issue??? I'm a student and so don't have a massive budget but I don't stress over a small sum of money that when you hit gold e.g SMAC, civ2 or operation flashpoint ETC you get hundreds of hours of enjoyment.

The key to SMAC was to role-play...it involves an imagination! The same with B&W (though it was too labourious...teach my monster?? I'm god! I like the real GOD don't care if my people commit genocide or are put in gas chambers or bombed!.)

I think this review was probably fair...though the guy has some big issue with birds chirping

P.S that dude who put the link to the flame warriors

P.S.S Yin you've been hanging around those stereotypical korean gamers too long...last time I said that you called me racist (and claimed your americaness...you've been assimilated!)...I said NOTHING bad about Korean gamers, obviously it is a touchy subject

TCO · October 30, 2001, 03:13

What's really funny is when Yin tries to make self-serving economic arguments. Let's see, Sid has buttloads of experience with releasing different parts of a game in expansion packs...and has consistnely made money doing so. Yin ignores all the data that says Civ will sell just fine as an SP and that says the best way to extract money from fans is to release MP later. He ignores the data because he KNOWS that this time round the trend will change.

Yin is a sharp guy...but you have to use "the Yin" for positive purposes. He gets a lot of energy from being a "fan activist". Sort of like a neighborhood activist. A Jesse Jackson or an Al Sharpton. You just have to channel the Yin into appropriate things like the suggestions list (which was I WILL FULLY ADMIT an incredibley well produced document--love those links inside it.) And I think he wants attention/acknowledgement from the designers...and given their reticence to give that...he becomes unhappy.

END psychoanalysis.

BTW: I'm not planning on buying Civ3 until a few weeks go by...not that I'm a pessimist...I'm just not really into civ games...I'm more into flame wars and pop psychology and community stuff. (At least I admit it!!

)

Simpleton · October 30, 2001, 03:13

Quote:

Originally posted by yin26
C'mon. The guy played for, what, a few days at most and you think he has the gameplay and AI down? The diplomacy AI was already found lacking and, I'm sure, in the weeks to come we will have a true sense of the gameplay.

Trust the early reviews if you want, of course, but let people play a few weeks first.

Yin, I'm not joining the "gang-up" on you (which seems to be a common sport that even I have indulged in at times) but I must take issue with your comment here.
I don't think you can totally disregard this favorable review because you believe he has only played it for a few days. I think all reviewers only play a game for a short while before they turn in the review so then you'd have to pan ALL reviews not just ones you disagree with.
I do have a question. Would you be so willing to disregard this review had this person trashed Civ3 or are you only doing it so save face??? I thought you said you wanted the game to be a success but you don't seem to happy that it seems to be quite good?

PS: You are a brave person to raise the ire of so many....

Imran Siddiqui · October 30, 2001, 03:17

Simpleton, he seems to accept the AVault reviewer saying there are problems with Civ

.... so take that as you will.

Simpleton · October 30, 2001, 03:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Simpleton, he seems to accept the AVault reviewer saying there are problems with Civ

.... so take that as you will.

Yes, it seems as if Yin is being very selective (if it's something good about Civ3 he ignors it and if it's bad he quotes it".

I would prefer it if Yin bought Civ3 and tested it out for himself maybe he'd be surprised.

Simpleton · October 30, 2001, 03:44

With all due respects to IGN I am personally waiting for the review from Gamespot before I let out my sigh of relief. In my opinion, they have the best most reliable reviews on the net. They correctly called CTP2 for the lemon it was while many here at Apolyton cried foul (including myself).
When they give it the stamp of approval (hopefully) I begin sleeping better at night again.

Imran Siddiqui · October 30, 2001, 03:45

Yeah, I'm waiting for Gamespot as well. That and IGN are my two favs.

The Wargamer is good, if they can get a review before 2 months (not a chance

).

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 03:50

Quote:

Yin you've been hanging around those stereotypical korean gamers too long...last time I said that you called me racist

It was a racist comment then, and it still is. First, what the hell makes you an expert on the 'stereotypical' Korean gamer? I live here for Christ's sake and haven't a clue what you are talking about. Get over that troll.

Quote:

Yin ignores all the data that says Civ will sell just fine as an SP and that says the best way to extract money from fans is to release MP later.

Listen...don't put words in my mouth. "Sound financial models" and "long-term solid reputation" aren't always the same thing. Sure, Civ3 will sell great. But after all the jacking around with MP, scenarios and whatnot, you tell me what's the better solution. Of course, Infogrames doesn't have to publish another Firaxis game ever. Firaxis, however, will have to deal with a number of issues it short-changed people on in the PR department. THAT'S my angle. Please don't skew it.

Quote:

And I think he wants attention/acknowledgement from the designers...and given their reticence to give that...he becomes unhappy.

That is so off it's insulting, though I don't think you particularly mean it to be. Familiar with the pop-psychological term 'Projection'? Perhaps YOU would want some kind of personal recognition (and how do you know I haven't already gotten it in e-mails, eh?). When I talk about recognition, I'm talking about recognition of THE FANS who stick things through and give great ideas. Again, please remember that.

Quote:

Would you be so willing to disregard this review had this person trashed Civ3 or are you only doing it so save face??? I thought you said you wanted the game to be a success but you don't seem to happy that it seems to be quite good?

I do want the game to succeed. As I said in another thread, the burden of proof on the positive side is much much harder in my opinion: "Great gameplay!" Well, it will take a great deal of explaining and time with the game to make that convincing to me. "My archer shot down a cruise missile," however, is in one simple moment VERY condemning of the underlying programming.

Sorry if you disagree.

Imran Siddiqui · October 30, 2001, 03:55

Quote:

That is so off it's insulting, though I don't think you particularly mean it to be.

Damn straight he did

.

Offering some of your 'medicine' back to you

TCO · October 30, 2001, 03:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Simpleton

Yes, it seems as if Yin is being very selective (if it's something good about Civ3 he ignors it and if it's bad he quotes it".

I would prefer it if Yin bought Civ3 and tested it out for himself maybe he'd be surprised.

Yin is way more into agitation than playing games and giving info about them. We saw this with CTP. He spent hours and hours talking about it...agitating, etc. Then after swearing up and down to play the game and to write a review...he didn't have time for THAT!

Simpleton · October 30, 2001, 03:57

Quote:

Originally posted by yin26

"My archer shot down a cruise missile," however, is in one simple moment VERY condemning of the underlying programming.

This one bothered me too. However, I hope, hope, hope, hope that this is an isolated incident because this type of thing can be an indicator of a lack of polish, something Civers have come to expect from Sid.
I will say one other thing. I guess my only real problem with your comments are that you seem to have nothing good to say about the game. I mean nothing is all bad or all good and I think your opinions would carry more weight with me is if there was something you liked about the game. I mean even CTP 1 and 2 had good points. And if I can admit that you can definitely say something good about Civ3

TCO · October 30, 2001, 04:02

Yin...I kinda expected you to say that you want attention for the fans...it's all about creating an advocacy group....

And that's great if you got some e-mails...no need to be coy. My points stand.

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 04:07

Quote:

Offering some of your 'medicine' back to you

Well, Imran, the last time you tried that line, a number of people spoke up about how YOU were the rude and illogical one. Show me where I psychoanalyze somebody just to put words in their mouths. I *ask* people what they are saying or at least hear their retorts and, if I am wrong about what they are saying, stop putting words in their mouths.

Quote:

Yin is way more into agitation than playing games and giving info about them. We saw this with CTP. He spent hours and hours talking about it...agitating, etc. Then after swearing up and down to play the game and to write a review...he didn't have time for THAT!

That was true with CtP. I wanted to agitate back then because of the pattern in release horrid games and expecting the gamer to bend over. Now, that was nearly 3 years ago. Get new data. EVERYTHING I have *agitated* about Civ3 is done with genuine concern. I've more than proven my dedication to this game. Sorry if not rolling on the floor and dying when problems crop up makes you think I'm 'anti-Civ3' or other such nonsense.

If you are really concerned about what I think, then ask. Don't troll.

Quote:

I mean nothing is all bad or all good and I think your opinions would carry more weight with me is if there was something you liked about the game.

Yes, this is a valid point. But I honestly don't have enought to say on the good side yet. The map won't even scroll properly ... about the only good things I've seen are:

The AI seems to expand much better in the early game.
The civ attributes could prove to be fun.

Perhpas there are others, but nothing has yet to grab me making me say: "YES! I will buy Civ3 for THAT!"

Imran Siddiqui · October 30, 2001, 04:12

Quote:

Well, Imran, the last time you tried that line, a number of people spoke up about how YOU were the rude and illogical one. Show me where I psychoanalyze somebody just to put words in their mouths. I *ask* people what they are saying or at least hear their retorts and, if I am wrong about what they are saying, stop putting words in their mouths.

Insulting in a straight face is your calling card. Not my fault some people aren't smart enough to realize it.

GP is simply doing it back to you, and you got a little heated. Your medicine back to you.

Quote:

EVERYTHING I have *agitated* about Civ3 is done with genuine concern.

Doesn't seem like it lately at all

Quote:

I've more than proven my dedication to this game.

The List was a long time ago, and you haven't proven any dedication recently.

--

I guess you have to forgive me, since I didn't see really any 'crusades' on your part to fix the obvious flaws in Europa Universalis. You didn't seem to look at the flaws too much there.

yin26 · October 30, 2001, 04:23

Quote:

Not my fault some people aren't smart enough to realize it.

Well, there you have it. Imran insulting people again.

Quote:

you haven't proven any dedication recently.

You mean I haven't been brown-nosing?

Quote:

I guess you have to forgive me, since I didn't see really any 'crusades' on your part to fix the obvious flaws in Europa Universalis. You didn't seem to look at the flaws too much there.

Wow. That's lame. First, EU at least had the developers working hard to get player feedback in an OPEN and PUBLIC way. That goes a long way in my book. And HELL EARTH TO IMRAN: I wasn't involved with EU from the beginning like I was with Civ3...get it? Second, are you familiar with the: "The U.S. doesn't feed every starving child in the world, therefore its efforts to feed the starving children in Country X is hypocritical and should be stopped."

Sure. That's air-tight right there.