PC Gamer Gives Galactic Civilizations III an 87/100!

You guys could have gotten close to a 95-100 if you would have taken another month for finishing, and made ship battles/planet invasion interactive instead of boring as dick

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting meteuremu,

reply 1

You guys could have gotten close to a 95-100 if you would have taken another month for finishing, and made ship battles/planet invasion interactive instead of boring as dick

That would not take a month, and it was also never planned. So the rating must therefore be pretty accurate.

There need to be a little room to rate all those future improvements as well... Or else the job would be done. And that would mean... no Snathi DLC!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Great game but I still think, despite reviews, unpolished. Synthetic planet events. Sensor issues. The Iridum have a useless economy due to tech tree problems. Some glitches in Altarian tech tree. The UP peace resolution not working. It's a great game but trying to play on higher difficulties is a nightmare, not because of strategic concerns but because those bugs present enough of an issue. For example I had to abandon my first non-beta game as the Iridium as I could only progress to the next economic building by scrapping the tier 1 building. I'd already reached tier 3 and realised too late why my economy was struggling...

I'm planning to pick it up again in a few months when a lot of these issues have hopefully been ironed out. And I've stopped trying to fit in The Witcher 3 and Destiny HOW with full-time work etc but hey... sssshhhh... I'm trying to pretend it's all due to bugs... ssshhh

Successfully updated karma reason!

00zim00

Join Date 09/2014

+29

Bugs and balance are always expected in any game, and you cant fault a game just because it dosnt have a feature you think it should have. Now no game is without its faults granted, and you cant be blamed for wanting to wait for a few patches especially with all the other games out there. But realistically compared to most other games who have a bigger team and budget they did a fantastic job. This isn't directed at anyone btw, just a generic statement

Im enjoying all the bug searching, i strangely feel good when i find a bug no one else has found and then see it get fixed. Makes me feel part of the community more

Tho i admit i see a lot of frustration from people when a patch comes out and there bug isn't fixed, have seen bad reviews from people basically complaining they didnt fix the one insignificant bug they found. Nothing is instant, it will happen. I think more Dev feedback about what bugs they are aware of and when ruffly they plan to have them fixed would make alot of people happier and willing to wait.

+2

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting 00zim00,

reply 4

Im enjoying all the bug searching, i strangely feel good when i find a bug no one else has found and then see it get fixed. Makes me feel part of the community more

That's a good approach to participating! +1 for that

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting meteuremu,

reply 1

You guys could have gotten close to a 95-100 if you would have taken another month for finishing,

1 more month at the insane rate they were going since beta 6, or 3 more months regular pace to fine tune the AI and fix all CTDs&freezes that appeared later on, yeah, it would have been nice. But what's done is done

and made ship battles/planet invasion interactive instead of boring as dick

Total War: Galaxy ? Nah. It's not their style, it never was, I doubt it ever will be, but we never know

If you look at the Total War series, it's always a trade-off when you make that kind of game compared to pure strategy like Paradox or Stardock's games. There is less stuff to do in the general map while you push for the interactive battle, wich I personally tend to skip toward the end of the game, when I am steamrolling the AI.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well deserved and more...if the game had all the bugs squished it'd have been very well deserving a 90.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yes, but what you define as a bug might not be what they define as a bug, let's not forget.

The least impressive review I've read - The Escapist - is interesting: It's reviewed without the campaign.

Frankly, I find it stupid that a game can be released - or a film or album - and an official review of that release can get away with "this review copy of such-and-such didn't have yada-yada". It's like reviewing an album with three songs missing, a film without the last third....

Given that, it's hard to take any reviews - whether positive or negative - too seriously, because they're starting from different point.

I wonder how well GalCiv3 would be being received if Stardock had put out a press release on Release Date: Here it is, folks. Galactic Civilizations III!!! Finished. Done. No updates. No DLCs. No Expansions. Any complaints? We'll include some of 'em in GalCiv4." In other words, there's an acceptance that while a reviewer would like to see a certain thing, they're giving Stardock leeway for including that in the future.

Successfully updated karma reason!

00zim00

Join Date 09/2014

+29

Also u have to remember as well, a lot of the Ai issues were found by us and not star dock. When you have thousands of people playing compared to 20 people in the office you going to find a lot more things. They had beta but realistically a majority of the people who had beta were not actually playing it, and the ones who did were not all adding bug reports. The only way they could fully test it completely is for it to be released and the community to give feedback. Things like balance for example are only going to be found once a wider audience is playing it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Maiden666

Join Date 12/2008

+62

Quoting mrblondini,

reply 8

In other words, there's an acceptance that while a reviewer would like to see a certain thing, they're giving Stardock leeway for including that in the future.

although there is no guarantee that this stuff will see a fix, some for sure, but all - that's unrealistic. So I guess reviewers should focus more on the current status quo of the game.

Quoting 00zim00,

reply 9

Also u have to remember as well, a lot of the Ai issues were found by us and not star dock

which means that SD has more time to focus on the fix itself. perhaps I'm wrong but the way you make it sound is as if betatesting makes theirjob harder....

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting mrblondini,

reply 8

I wonder how well GalCiv3 would be being received if Stardock had put out a press release on Release Date: Here it is, folks. Galactic Civilizations III!!! Finished. Done. No updates. No DLCs. No Expansions. Any complaints? We'll include some of 'em in GalCiv4." In other words, there's an acceptance that while a reviewer would like to see a certain thing, they're giving Stardock leeway for including that in the future.

Yes, Stardock gets a certain leeway, and that is told in some review, not because they invited the reviewers to an all expense paid trip in some tropical paradise, but because they have a good track record at supporting their game, via official patches and expansion/dlc.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting ,

quoting post

PC Gamer has published their review for Galactic Civilizations III and gave it an 87 out of 100!

"GalCiv 3 is easily the best recent 4X of this scale.”

Read the full review at PC Gamer.

http://www.pcgamer.com/galactic-civilizations-3-review/

Quoting meteuremu,

reply 1

You guys could have gotten close to a 95-100 if you would have taken another month for finishing, and made ship battles/planet invasion interactive instead of boring as dick

yeah, but that's what expansions are for

Successfully updated karma reason!