You know, I came to this site looking for an answer. I finally got that answer, but, it was a fairly unusual wait for such a simple question. And I wasn't alone.
While waiting, I read, posted, responded, and waited some more. A gradual picture, and an opinion was developed about the game, and the people who made it.
On this, I maybe alone, but I'll share it anyways.
There's no need to mash wits on what was known, or wasn't know prior to release. There's no need to list the current or ongoing bugs and issues. We know them, they know them. And even they, and some of us tried to dismiss questions and issues for as long as possible.
Try instead to consider the following, whether your a fan, supporter, hater, or complainer. Civ Rev was a quick money grab.
They needed cash, and to stick to the release date. Bring on the patch and play mechanic that worked on pc's prior.
The game was released first in the UK due to currency rates, and someone needed that cash. Plus a smaller market to beta test.
Pre-release reviews were done solely on xbox versions of the game, to hide certain visual issues on the ps3 version and also online features. The leader board order being the most obvious, not connectivity. Unfortunately only once enough ps3 users logged in, connectivity became an issue.
CivRev was pushed out the door for money, and staffing reasons. Both are/were needed for Civ Colonies.
The downloadable content which did not instantly appear, but was free, is DLC beta testing. Hence the delay for actual money spending content. They are still waiting for feedback and your testing. Speaking of testing, perhaps Microsoft, not blind to the PS3's online plight is being more stringent with their given 1.2 patch.
The reason CivRev actually sold out copies initially is because few were made. This gives time to reprint a packaging error and maybe others.
Even though the game is on next gen hardware, the game universally appears to use the same AI engine as the DS. The Ai's were far more complicated, interacting, and logical on the previous Pc Civ4, which required even lower specs then that of the current console hardware. Pick up and play a DS version. Weren't consoles supposed to be a bit on the higher end? BTW, that Ai was kinda a keystone of Civ (IMO). This was a money decision, not streamlining for game play.
This forum forum serves secondary goals. Indeed, it does give players a place to get info, converse, support, advise, share, ect. It also serves as bug collecting, and assists in containing issues to this site, rather than others. I've marveled at how, if the ps3 players really had such online issues, why no media has ever mentioned it.
Many threads, and posts have been locked or deleted. Many for quite understandable reasons. But in the vacuum between now and a fully functional game for all, what kind of reaction was/is expected? Maybe, if a hard critique had been applied during testing, some of issues would have been avoided. Of course if the above money grab theory is true, I guess not.
It's only 60 bucks. If that makes and breaks you, you best sort out priorities. If all programs now come with bugs, and this is acceptable... Programmers as a whole, not just here, also needs to sort out priorities.
Your here because you really enjoyed the game, or hated it, but still likely play it. If you didn't still have it, you probably would have moved on. But while we toil waiting for fixes, this kinda stuff is bound to keep cropping up.
I also believe Cleo is having an affair with Monty, but that's for another day.