I just can't imagine the fact that the civ franchise sold only six million copies thusfar. Are you sure that is an up to date average? It's not something from the year 2000 is it? I personally have played all of the civ games since civ 2 and I am very pleased with them. I do not know how you people can just sit back and say that aoe3 is such a great game and civ4 sucks! Haven't you noticed all of the people on THIS FORUM who say that AOE3 was a BIG LET-DOWN? I personally am new to the Age franchise so I can't compare to the previous Age games but I think it is an overall good experiance. HOWEVER, HAVE YOU NOTICED THAT AOE3 ONLY GOT 3 OUT OF 5 STARS from COMPUTER GAMING WORLD, the computer gaming authority? That isn't exactly the best mark. The civ franchise, however, always gets editor's choice.
I agree, you can't compare games from different genres, but you have to realize that civ isn't just a game about WAR, WAR, WAR. It also includes things like religion, culture, the space raqce, technology, foiunding cities, and actually managing your empire instead of just constant action. I myself have found RTS games to get boring after a while, while with turn-based strategy, you can actually win the game differently each time (i.e., one time you might win by war, another time you might be the first to find alpha centauri, another time you might be elected president of the UN, etc., etc.).
I like both games, as in 49% AOE3,51% Civ IV.