| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (21)

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 2:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think you summed it up best when you said "this is not a PC Civ game". It really does deserve to be judged on its own merits - and as a strategy gameplay experience, I've yet to find better on the 360. And as you say, for every gameplay simplification, there's a really obvious reason WHY they've done that for the console audience.

The controls are excellent and intuitive, unlike most of the other PC-to-360 strategy conversions. The AI is challenging on the higher difficulty levels, without too many of the aforementioned catapault-beats-tank incidents. And I'm still playing it, two months after its release in the UK. Not many games can claim that - not even GTA!
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 2:11PM Softserve said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Good review. I really liked the demo... Might pick this one up soon.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 4:44PM SeanR said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The first time I played the demo, I was distracted and really had no idea what I was doing, but I tried again yesterday and like it... Kinda wish it went longer but then again, what would would the point in buying it right lol
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 2:19PM SanFranJunglist said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Great review! Might have to check this out now!
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 2:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Had this since launch and absolutely love it. Not too long, not too short (it slows down as you go further into the future) and endless possibilities. My only gripe is that you can't continue after a win/loss.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 2:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree with the review. I've never played a Civ PC game (Not a PC gamer) so I have no idea what's missing in Civ Revolution. (Therefore it all seems to fit perfectly). Even with the PC Civs to compare it against, I believe Civ Revolution stands on its own as a very solid and very enjoyable strategy game for the 360. I've put countless hours into this game since I bought it a couple of weeks ago and I still have an urge to play.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 2:43PM Ribs said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Welcome David!
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 3:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Lol, I was like "who is David Craddock???". Guess he's the new guy/intern. Anywho, very nicely done, win conditions sound super cool, I may rent this one.
Reply

Posted: Aug 5th 2008 1:22PM Xav de Matos said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
David is actually one of the Leads at BigDownload.com, he just dropped in to throw some knowledge at us.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 2:59PM mirage said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Funny you post this review today, I just picked this up last night! ;)
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 3:05PM Jonman said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
And the cheevos are attainable too! This may well be the first game I can get to 100%.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 3:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I wanted to get this game BUT I'm on my second Xbox in less then a year and just got the Red Ring of death again (or the general hardware failure as the customer service rep tried to get me to say). Here is the thing, yeah the Xbox has a problem and fails but every freaking time I have to replace it their customer service messes something up and the whole thing turns into a huge mess. NOT TO MENTION I CANNOT understand the customer service people.

This time they couldn't "validate" my home address EVEN THOUGH the house was built in 1989. I mean I guess all the other packages I get from all over just happen to arrive there. Oh and it took them over a week to call me back and tell me that they couldn't validate it. Um what? Really. The richest company in the world can't figure this out? Crazy, my junior level programmers can...

I was on the fence before about ditching XBOX but this is too much. Next generation I'm either waiting for 2 years or going with someone else.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 4:58PM MagikOvenMit said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
A new person? Writing a review? I feel so... Different...
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 4:06PM b4dkarm4 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Its ok, the game isnt without its teeny tiny problems though.

I mean cmon, archers bringing down your bomber flight group? Youve GOT to be fucking kidding me. Ive had instances where a single galleon has destroyed one of my battleships. Srsly? A wooden ship with antiquated colonial era cannons brought down a tungsten and steel alloy BATTLESHIP with missiles, radar and other state of the art weapon systems? Uhh ..... no.

I also dislike how on harder difficulties the other factions go to war with you more than they go to war with each other making the difficulty curve downright stupid.

Making an alliance with another faction is pretty useless since if you get attacked, your alliance troops can be ONE square away from the attackers and yet they will do NOTHING to assist you.

They just try and con you of your tech and do nothing to earn it. In all honestey, its in your best interest to accept any peaceful treaty offered to you, and just deny any requests you get for tech trades, as they are rarely in your favor.

Oh, you want me to give you advanced space flight for religion? piss off. Atomic theory for horseriding? Dont think so. Railroads for pottery? Dude what?

Also, kind of sucks that you cant go past the year 2100, some games just break down into a war of attrittion where youre fighting every faction (without having used nukes yet), everyone hostile to you (almost everyone) is demanding tech or 90% of your gold reserves to make them stop fighting you for a measly 3 to 5 turns or the ones not yet hostile to you are constantly asking you to trade your high, end game tech for their weak and now useless early game tech.

These small yet incredibly stupid game decisions made by the devs keep the game from being "stellar" and just put it around "average"

Its a good game, fun little timewaster, just has a lot of questionable design decisions that will have you going "oh come the fuck on" more than once.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 5:17PM AoE said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
While most of your complaints are harsh... I can't really say I disagree, I'm just not bothered that much by them I suppose.

But the bit about technologically advanced units being taken down by older, weaker units? I hate to break it to you dude, but CivRev is not actually a complex war simulation... While unit x may be called a battleship, and unit y may be called a galleon or what have you the fact is they're both the same; combat units with strength and hit point numbers, and sometimes modifiers to those base stats. This is the way it's been done in civ since back in the day... combat is HEAVILY abstracted and always has been in the series.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 5:59PM b4dkarm4 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I suppose I can let my imagination run wild and agree, ok yes. your archers just used special arrows to destroy my tank battalion .... 0_o or something ....

But alliances are totally useless. They serve you no use othen than to keep some of the AI from attacking your cities outright and harassing you nonstop.

With some of the harder difficulties alliances with other factions is downright stupid.
They will NOT help you if youre under constant siege. They constantly pester you requesting you give them your advanced tech for tech thats now basically useless to you and they are smart enough to deny giving you their advanced tech for anything short of a kings ransom.

So basically, alliances in this game are about as useless as a rubber ducky squeak toy in a devil may cry game. Oh youre fighting the legions of hell? why dont you squeak them to death? Why would capcom put something so gimped and utterly useless in a game like that? Exactly.

Like I said, not a MAJOR gripe, I still play the game occasionally, but cmon, the constant "please trade me ion cannon superwapon technology for my awesome salsa recepie" gets a bit old after the hundreth or so time.

No doubt, your salsa is probably very awesome, but damned if im giving you the plans to this death star for some ground up peppers and tomatoes.

Alliances could have been a bit more FUNCTIONAL, as it is, is feels lazy and badly implemented. Im about to whoop diety and ive yet to give in to any extortion requests from the AI and have had maybe 1 in 100 tech trade requests that actually benefit me.

Basically, you can beat the game each and every time and never ever ever ever EVER have to use an alliance. That imo is a wasted game mechanic in my book.

But its whatever, like I said, not a killer issue, I still play the game time to time, just has potential to be so much better and deeper gameplay.

*shrug*
Reply

Posted: Aug 5th 2008 11:32AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
welcome aboard David!
Reply

Posted: Aug 5th 2008 1:23PM Xav de Matos said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
David is actually one of the Leads at BigDownload.com, he just dropped in to throw some knowledge at us.
Reply

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 6:04PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Absolutely amazing game. However, Why can't I toggle battle animations? Seriously after playing the game for hours on in I know what the battle animation looks like, ugh, just give me the result instantly.

That's the one thing I miss from the PC version. However,The micro managing is something I do not miss in the slightest.
Reply

Posted: Aug 5th 2008 3:26PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Any news on when the July (it's August, y'know) DLC is going to be available.

2K, Sid, anyone?
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2008 1:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have been looking for a different type of game other than your usual top titles for ages now and seem to find myself playing the likes of Catan on the arcade, as this type of game is challenging your mind and wits against apponents ranther than either button mashing or being the best and fastest sharp shooter in the west.
So when i played the demo of Civ Rev I was hooked and really wanted to get the full version. At first I played on the Cheifton level and found this very easy and dominated the map and found I had the choice to pick any type of win. So then I decided to play on King and this is know why im thinking of trading in. Although i love this game, everytime i play on the King level I try to win with a cultural or financial win and find my self always being beaten in every senario by the AI always getting to alpha century first. they all seem to play to win in that way and I can win with tech really easy but this doesnt really make for a balanced feel to the game if every one is racing for the same type of victory (the easiest one) is anyone else getting this or am i just playing it wrong?
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

WRUP: All the Reckoning

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 11:45PM

Xbox Live Indie Gems: Nyan Cat Adventure

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 10:15PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW