Johnn Johnston reviews CivRev

Recommended Videos

Johnn Johnston

New member
May 4, 2008
2,519
0
0
So. Well, this is the first review I've written here, so I'll try to make it a half-decent one.

Civilisation Revolution, or 'CivRev' as I'll be calling it from now on because I don't have the effort to type it all out again, is a turn-based god sim game made by Sid Meier. It is the first Civilisation in the series to only be available on consoles. As a result, the game is very different from its predecessors.

Ok. I won't dance around it by saying 'simplified' or any other words like that: the game has been dumbed down. The first piece of evidence I noticed of this wasn't one that needed me to pull out my Sherlock Holmes hat, but I did anyway because I enjoy wearing it. In CivRev, workers are noticeably absent. In the earlier games in the series, you were able to make a small workforce and tell them to build a road, or to irrigate this/that/the other, or to build a mine, among other things. Now roads can be built instantly, irrigation comes with a technology, and mines are built from your cities. Personally, I enjoyed having workers. It made you feel more like a God in a God game, instructing them to work in the back-breaking sun. Without them, the game feels emptier. You feel more like a governer, and you can no longer take out your frustration at the Mongols (I mean, come on. How are they so far ahead?) by leaving them next to a volcano and laughing as it erupts.

Another feature that has been dumbed down a bit is the techonology tree, an integral part of every Civ game. There are less techonologies and in the first game I played, I noticed that I had rocketed through the stone age and was promptly in the Medieval era in about the time it would take me on Civ III to teach my lowly citizens how to dress themselves in the morning. Adding on to the smaller tech tree is the lower number of great Wonders. Yes, they have some new ones, but where are the ones I knew and whored out in the previous games? This leads me on to another small peeve. The Manhattan Project wonder used to allow everyone to build nukes, assuming they had the correct resources. Now, you can only have one, and that belongs to whoever builds that wonder first. That means that it is very hard to have a strong military in the modern era, because by doing that you often neglect technology a bit, so in a multiplayer game, or at a high difficulty level, you will find that your armies have been reduced to a cloud of meaty smoke.

However, I feel the gameplay has been improved in some areas. It generally feels more relaxed and accepting, and (dare I say) just more fun. The graphics seem to be more cartoony, and your advisors will seem annoyed when another advisors barges in front of them to tell you of a new matter that requires your attention. I recall actually laughing when Napoleon was shoved to the ground by my scientific advisor.

Combat has been partially revamped as well. Whereas before you needed a string of improbable circumstances to get an army, now it is as simple as just having three of the same unit on the same square. This means that you can really have strength in numbers, rather than having to rely on attrition - which really only worked for a few battles as your units were worn down and killed. You are also able to see how the battle is going in more obvious detail, as the camera zooms down to the battlefield and you can see your troops getting killed (there are three troops per land unit, two per air unit and one per naval unit). There is also an option to retreat from a losing attack, and once your unit or army has won enough battles you can customise it, with bonuses ranging from an extra movement space each turn and having an attack bonus against cities.

There are also Great People. Once you complete a wonder, pass an economic milestone, research a technology or if your civilisation just rocks especially hard, one may turn up. You can settle them in a city for a permanent bonus to that city, or use their power for a one-time effect. Some types are more helpful than others, but they are all quite useful in the end.

I would reccommend this game to people that like God games. It isn't as intricate as others, but in the end, when you buy a game, you buy it so you can have some fun. And I find that this game is very fun indeed.
 

The Wooster

King Snap
Jul 15, 2008
15,305
0
0
Overall not a bad piece of writing. Some of it clunks though and it could do with a second draft.

Civilisation Revolution, or 'CivRev' as I'll be calling it from now on because I don't have the effort to type it all out again, is a turn-based god mode game (god sim I think. God mode implies you entered a code and killed barbarians with a shotgun) made by Sid Meier. It is the first Civilisation in the series to only be available on consoles, and as such the game is very much a different one from its predecessors ( This is worded really awkwardly.It sounds like you're just stating the obvious.
 

Johnn Johnston

New member
May 4, 2008
2,519
0
0
Ok, noted for future reviews. Thanks. Edited the 'god mode' bit, I meant to put 'god sim' but I must have had a sudden attack of the typos. Also edited the part about it being "very much a different game", that did sound clunking now you point it out.
 

mjhhiv

New member
Jun 22, 2008
758
0
0
To the reviewer: I'd suggest spell checking your reviews before publishing them - always type them in a word proccessor, that should help a great deal. Otherwise, much better than most first attempts.

To Decoy Doctorpus: The suggestions you made were more clunky than the review. "( This is worded really awkwardly.It sounds like you're just stating the obvious."
 

The Wooster

King Snap
Jul 15, 2008
15,305
0
0
mjhhiv said:
To the reviewer: I'd suggest spell checking your reviews before publishing them - always type them in a word proccessor, that should help a great deal. Otherwise, much better than most first attempts.

To Decoy Doctorpus: The suggestions you made were more clunky than the review. "( This is worded really awkwardly.It sounds like you're just stating the obvious."
Um nothing clunky about that but even if it was I'm telling what was wrong with a sentence I'm not writing a review of my own.
 

mjhhiv

New member
Jun 22, 2008
758
0
0
Decoy Doctorpus said:
mjhhiv said:
To the reviewer: I'd suggest spell checking your reviews before publishing them - always type them in a word proccessor, that should help a great deal. Otherwise, much better than most first attempts.

To Decoy Doctorpus: The suggestions you made were more clunky than the review. "( This is worded really awkwardly.It sounds like you're just stating the obvious."
Um nothing clunky about that but even if it was I'm telling what was wrong with a sentence I'm not writing a review of my own.
Yeah, yeah. I just thought it was ironic how poor your sentence was, being that you were giving him advice. It was good advice, though.
 

The Wooster

King Snap
Jul 15, 2008
15,305
0
0
mjhhiv said:
Decoy Doctorpus said:
mjhhiv said:
To the reviewer: I'd suggest spell checking your reviews before publishing them - always type them in a word proccessor, that should help a great deal. Otherwise, much better than most first attempts.

To Decoy Doctorpus: The suggestions you made were more clunky than the review. "( This is worded really awkwardly.It sounds like you're just stating the obvious."
Um nothing clunky about that but even if it was I'm telling what was wrong with a sentence I'm not writing a review of my own.
Yeah, yeah. I just thought it was ironic how poor your sentence was, being that you were giving him advice. It was good advice, though.

'This is worded awkwardly' is viable when it's being used in the same context as what's being worded. It's not flowing English but it isn't 'poor'.
 

mjhhiv

New member
Jun 22, 2008
758
0
0
You're missing the point. I was referring to your grammar (no space between sentences, you're missing a parenthese), but it isn't that big of deal, forget I said anything.
 

The Wooster

King Snap
Jul 15, 2008
15,305
0
0
mjhhiv said:
You're missing the point. I was referring to your grammar (no space between sentences, you're missing a parenthese), but it isn't that big of deal, forget I said anything.
Oh that's just mistakes and shitty English. Clunk is more of a problem with idea flow from one sentence to the next. Sorry. Didn't mean to drag the topic down.
 

mjhhiv

New member
Jun 22, 2008
758
0
0
Decoy Doctorpus said:
mjhhiv said:
You're missing the point. I was referring to your grammar (no space between sentences, you're missing a parenthese), but it isn't that big of deal, forget I said anything.
Oh that's just mistakes and shitty English. Clunk is more of a problem with idea flow from one sentence to the next. Sorry. Didn't mean to drag the topic down.
OK, guess I shouldn't have said clunky. Back on topic: like I said, the review was very good for a first attempt. I'll be interested in reading your next one.
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
Good review, well I liked it. So well worth the buy for a 360 God game? Plus I've heard that there's no Save button. Is there? Because it seems a bit stupid to leave one out.
 

Johnn Johnston

New member
May 4, 2008
2,519
0
0
There isn't one specific button used for saving, but you can save in the 'Start' menu. I'd say it's worth the cash.
 

Geo Da Sponge

New member
May 14, 2008
2,611
0
0
I'd have to say that playing CivRev is incredibly fun, despite a huge number of bugs. I really hope they patch it up soon, but that doesn't seem likely. However, it is still incredibly addictive in an 'arcadey' sort of way, and to gain every single visual award the game will give you, you have to beat the game in every single way (4 ways) with every single leader (16) on the highest difficulty. That's a lot of gameplay.
 

Johnn Johnston

New member
May 4, 2008
2,519
0
0
Geo Da Sponge said:
I'd have to say that playing CivRev is incredibly fun, despite a huge number of bugs. I really hope they patch it up soon, but that doesn't seem likely. However, it is still incredibly addictive in an 'arcadey' sort of way, and to gain every single visual award the game will give you, you have to beat the game in every single way (4 ways) with every single leader (16) on the highest difficulty. That's a lot of gameplay.
I found that getting the technology victory was especially difficult, considering gameplay ends at 2100 and my spaceships normally were set to arrive at 2101.
 

Geo Da Sponge

New member
May 14, 2008
2,611
0
0
Johnn Johnston said:
Geo Da Sponge said:
I'd have to say that playing CivRev is incredibly fun, despite a huge number of bugs. I really hope they patch it up soon, but that doesn't seem likely. However, it is still incredibly addictive in an 'arcadey' sort of way, and to gain every single visual award the game will give you, you have to beat the game in every single way (4 ways) with every single leader (16) on the highest difficulty. That's a lot of gameplay.
I found that getting the technology victory was especially difficult, considering gameplay ends at 2100 and my spaceships normally were set to arrive at 2101.
Really? I've completed the game at least twice on every difficulty, including a domination victory and a technology victory on Deity, and I never even found out the game ends at 2100. Maybe I just pwn.

More likely it's just becuase I used the Japanese for my technology victory on deity and they always do well (something to do with getting food from sea squares from turn one).