Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad
The problem with Civ4 is that it isn't exactly an RTS.
E@W deserved to win, but to be fully honest, the competition was less then stellar. BFMEII? Age of Empire III? You get the idea.
It does not say "RTS". Just "strategy". And Fire Emblem is much more of a RPG-strategy hybrid than a real RTS. Civ 4 should have been in that one.
Anyways, it has been an extremely poor year for RTSs; turn-based games (such as Civ 4) should be the contenders. They are basically holding a vote to know which game is the best amongst the worst.