I think 75-79. Mainly due to lack of polish, otherwise 80-89.

86

That's what I think as well. The three different components of this game (4X, RPG, and tactical battles) aren't integrated well enough imo to give it the bump into the low 80's score. Beyond that, the game just lacks certain elements that could get it a +/- 90 score. Things like siege battles, more compelling factions, gameplay that doesn't bog down to everyone is at war with everyone, more interesting economic aspects, and heroes and cities that have character (right now they are all pretty much interchangeable imho, heroes and sov's can be divided up in two categories, melee and magic, cities feel even more generic).

Pretty much the above. The fundamentals are good now. I hope this game will go the same route as the GalCiv games, where by the second expansion the whole game is awesome.

I wouldn´t understand a rating between 75 - 79 and i would whole heartly disaggree. Such a rating would be ok, if all other games would be reviewed as critical as you are with FE, but thats not the case.

Everything below 80 would be a shame

80-85 range, depending on the things we couldn't see yet, like the campaign, and they bug hunting/polishing till release.

77 just because of all the bug reports and lack of ai challenge I've been reading.

Well as is with latest update I would not score it as high as CIV V.  The game is better than it every was but still has some issue (weak AI, no sea units, primitive TC)  I'm not currently noting bugs at this point. so I'll give it a 70 at this point.  With current bugs I'd give a a 68.

Now this is just the Vanilla game. I'm afraid that it aint going to get much better than this before launch. However with modding and expansions this game will go from an Ok game to a fantastic game.  Basic game engine now seem solid so I think this game has the potential to be great.

Now CIV V upon realease should not have been a 90 more like an 80 due to issues it had which God and Kings have mostly addressed. Now it is a 90 IMHO.

CIV V is a pile of garbage why even bring it up in an Elemental thread? Off Topic Off Topic Off Topic throw him to the wolves. Ban Stick alert...troll alert Danger Danger Danger Will Robinson!

78

CiV is definitely 90 with G&K

Ehm, FE will be somewhere in the low 80's but I can imagine high 80's too.

That's awfully low in my opinion. And here I thought I was one of the most negative guys here in this forum.

I would be quite surprised if the game got less than 75.

This isn't a thread about what you, Bellack, would give the game. Everyone has heard, ad naseuem, your opinions. If you think Civilization V should have gotten an 80 then that's your opinion. But it didn't. It got a 90. 

This is a thread for guessing what you think the score on Metacritic will be. 

What I think it should get: 87

What I think it will get: 81

I would be really surprised to see any review less than 4 stars.

I'm not sure on what basis it's not, at least, a 4 star game. I'd really want to know how a reviewer could justify less than 4 stars. 

Sometimes this forum sounds too much like the zealots at Civfanatics. It's a real turn off.

Agreed. It should score higher, but I'm afraid it may not be approachable enough, appeal to a large enough of an audience, and lacking in wow/bling/usability. But, they've still got the campaign to release, which could add some of that, plus updated documentation.

Last I heard, Toby was having a blast writing all of that documentation. Right, Toby?