Yahoo Games Scored GalCiv2 4/5

and cant help but draw numerous comparisons to Civ4 and Moo2

http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1991695103&tab=reviews&page=1&eid=439196
from GalCiv2 Forums
"....games like Master of Orion, Imperium Galactica, and Stars! attest. Galactic Civilization -- Galciv to its fans -- is the de facto heir to the legacy of these classics, and now a sequel has joined its stable."

"....more polish, more gameplay options, and more scenarios."

"....with possibly more gameplay than the entire Xbox 360 launch line-up combined."

"....Ultimately, Galciv II is a thoroughly welcome development of an established game style, and is well worth your money."

:CONGRAT:

18,149 views 14 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top
Yahoo Games sucks.
Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top
Apparently not enough to give GalCiv2 a bad score, though. Every good review is extra press for the game and for Stardock, regardless.
Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top
How can the game have a RP rating. I thought a game had to have a rating before it goes out to retail
Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top
Actually this is the worst review yet, they do give half stars too it seems, so they gave it a 80 out of 100 which is lower then most other reviews who rate it at 90 or higher...
Reply #5 from Stardock Forums Top
You cannot associate a 4/5 stars with an 80%

The rankings just dont stack up % for % A 4/5 is aprox equal to 85-88% in most cases. After all we see lots of 3/5 star games, but how many 50-60% ratings do you see? Typically 3/5 star games get 70-79% ratings. 3½/5 fall into the 80-85% range, and so on.

I dont make the system, I just observe it
Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top
Actually this is the worst review yet, they do give half stars too it seems, so they gave it a 80 out of 100 which is lower then most other reviews who rate it at 90 or higher...


Uggh. The rating system that most sites use is idiotic. That 70%, out of a scale from 0-100, should be considered mediocre is insane. Since Yahoo! is working off a smaller scale, they'd have less room to rank games against one another if they followed this trend, hence they gave a 4/5 to a good game, would give 3/5 to a fun but average game, and would give 1 and 2 as their bad grades. That's typical of sites that work with the star system. I hate all the ratings, but you get the idea here.
Reply #7 from Stardock Forums Top

I was a little disappointed in this review.  Not so much the text but the scoring.

They rated GalCiv II's graphics as less than Darwinia's.  I like Darwinia, thought it was a very good game but graphics wasn't...it's strongest point.  They also rated Darwinia's music a full star ahead of GalCiv II's.

 

Reply #8 from Stardock Forums Top
on game rankings, it treated yahoo's 4 star as 80%

Now the avg rating has gone below 90%
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

They rated GalCiv II's graphics as less than Darwinia's.  I like Darwinia, thought it was a very good game but graphics wasn't...it's strongest point. They also rated Darwinia's music a full star ahead of GalCiv II's.
End of quote


I played Darwinia too, and I don't understand that comparison either. The only thing cool about the Darwinia graphics, was that the game context allowed ultra-minimalist, abstract 3D creatures and terrain, and it still worked.

The graphics in GalCiv are a big step up from that. Maybe the reviewer played the game without ever zooming in on the galaxy map, and never fooled around with the ship designer? The high point of graphics in this game (IMO) is what you can do with custom ship designs.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I don't care much about anything Yahoo has to say. Here are the guys I listen to; WWW Link.

Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
....This thread is two years old.
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
....This thread is two years old.
End of quote


Maybe they`re Bored!! :D

Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I didn't do it :)