@Jallakebab Rome 2 was intentionally designed to provide reviewers who only spend a short amount of time on them with the best possible experience. Those who played it for even a little longer would've noticed the horrible problems that plagued it. no-one did. It scored fantastically.
Now we have an honest game, that doesn't get the time it needs, and a shallow uninformed review is the result.....
@Godlikan @good_evil of course you compare apples and peaches, the questions; "what fruit is the healthiest?" "what fruit is the sweetest" or even "what is your favorite fruit" come to mind....
The point is, all of them are video games, and in large part, their quality is not subjective (their entertainment value is) and in the end we spend the same time and money on them, regardless of genre. So your dam right we are going to compare apples and peaches.
@mariocerame I complained because the review seemed shallow, I never critiqued the score, because I don't own the game yet. The review was simply painfully shallow, and with a 4x game, that's not good enough. It leads to very distorted scores, like what happened with Rome 2
@jenovaschilld Its an offline game. And the issues he experienced are from the servers on the developer side, part of the prerelease builds. That sever is located in the Netherlands, so its not at all local. so yes, lag could easily be an issue.
I think that in an ideal world, we would not have to worry about this. However, there is so much that can go wrong with Facebook deciding both the direction and application of this technology, that I AM WORRIED
TheGreatPhoenix's comments