Wow, worse than Civ 4 (9.4) - a game I hated with a passion.  This is good news, it means I spent my money wisely on Elemental.

Yeah, I don't know about the rest of you, but my favorite games are usually in the 7-8 score range.  9.0 or above usually means that the game focused on too much polish and not enough "game" (which consequently, most reviewers think more highly of).

So a troll jumps in with a review of another game, and this is what it generates...awesome.

By this logic, doesn't that mean Civ V is better than Civ IV?  Since you feel elemental is better and it got a lower score?

He never said anything about Elemental being better than either. From that comment, all you can tell is that Civ V isn't as good as Civ IV, which he hated. Personally I don't get what the comparison between the two is, they are different games, almost like night and day. You might like one better than the other, or maybe you like both. Big deal.

I'll probably end up getting Civ V, but honestly I have very low expectations for it, having played Civ II and the 3000 incarnations of it to death and back. Civ III and Civ IV and all the expansions pretty much rotted on my HDD until some decent mods came along that made it different. I expect the same will be true for Civ V, I'll get 1-2 games in, then set it aside for a year until a good mod come along. So to address the comment about the end of Elemental... "no." Then again, I don't judge games on how IGN scores it in the first place.

Perhaps he was and perhaps he was not, I don't pretend to know what his psyche holds. Still, I follow his logic just fine. He hated Civ IV, sees Civ V scoring lower and thought, oh, good thing I bought Elemental instead. The only one I'm worried about is why you guys are attacking him.

These things usually come down to economics and denial. People who can't afford to buy the latest hot thing and want it desperately and know that lots of other people can afford it, attack it instead to make themselves feel better. It never works!