We may have
weighed in on the portable title, but what about the rest of the reviewers out there? Now that the title has been available for a little while now, many of the critics have put out their verdict. And, just as we enjoyed the game, the majority of them also found it to be a good time.
- Game Informer (85/100) gives it a good score: "Some few sacrifices have been made, notably the absence of the in-game Civilopedia, and the control is nowhere near as smooth as it is on a gamepad. However, you won't find a deeper or more replayable portable strategy experience anywhere. Civilization Revolution is a very worthwhile investment for any strategically minded DS owner."
- Gamespy (80/100) says it's barebones, but good: "While it won't be winning any beauty contests with its barebones 2D graphics, the play's the thing and the combination of solid controls and lots of content in the form of the technologies, units and variegated civilizations make Civ Rev an enjoyable and entertaining romp through the traditionally staid and somber realm of nation management."
- Nintendo Power (75/100) said the game lacks any competition: "If you're a fan of the genre, there are few better ways to get your fix on the go." [Aug 2008, p.89]
- GameZone (75/100) says the DS version loses a bit compared to the consoles, but is still a good choice for on-the-go action: "Civilization Revolution is a solid entry to the series, bringing the experience to a whole new audience. While the DS version loses a little bit in the translation, it's still worth a look from hardcore series fans looking for a portable version of their fix."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-09-2008 @ 4:34PM
Daniel said...
So, has anyone besides a reviewer played this yet? Worth buying?
Reply
7-09-2008 @ 4:45PM
moo said...
have not played, but there are a lot of user comments/reviews on the PS360 versions of the game. general sense seems to be "i loved the demo and played it 7-8 times, will be buying for sure, even though i never liked the PC series" and "i'm a PC Civ nut, and Civ Rev is just different, but works for shorter play bursts".
7-10-2008 @ 3:34PM
J.K. said...
I own it and I'm test driving it now on easy mode to see how it handles vs CIv1 and 2 which I'm used to (had no interest in 3 and 4 which were wonky stuff Cid had no hand in.) So far I think the game deserves something in the 8 range.
The one galling thing that's pissing me off in some of these reviews is calling it bare bones. The game is NOT. Cid himself said the game is the same as the console duo except that the Civlopedia is missing and obviously no 3D world and console level audio package. The actually content, control, gains, abilities, management, map(in 2D detailed like CIV2 basically) and the rest are there.
Don't let some whiny nitwit try and say this is a stripped game, Firaxis made sure it wasn't and I'm happy with it so far. Once I wipe out the Zulu today (killed the other 3) I'm going up a difficulty notch on a restart on random map.
Reply
7-14-2008 @ 3:42PM
moo said...
you owe it to yourself to play Civ4. as a diehard Civ1 fan, i found that Civ4 introduced a great many intuitive features that i can't see myself living without -- combat odds, overlays of terrain resources when you activate settlers, and the concept of culture (which you've probably now seen in Civ Rev).
i think the "bare bones" is in comparison to a full-fledged Civ (rather than the comparison to the console version), though the Civ-clopedia is missing, as are a lot of animations for completion of buildings/wonders/sciences.