Seems low for what seems like one of the best Anno games ever made. But I am talking out of my German bubble.
Thats because most of the press today has absolutely no clue about the strategy genre as a whole. This is a console world we live in now, coupled with the decline of strategy games over the last decade and a half. And we get this. Just quickly looked through a couple of reviews. Check how they start:
TechRaptor - "If – like me – you're new to the series,
Anno 1800 serves as a pretty good introduction. "
PC Invasion - "Given my familiarity with strategy games, including city-building and management sims.
Anno 1800 should be right up my alley. "
A site called pc invasion has no idea about this franchise and they just found out it exists with this game. They couldnt be arsed to even play a few of the previous games. Hilarious.
You need to know the strategy genre, its quirks, its beggining and its evolution, its issues and so on. Guys writing today are console players that give games like RDR2 11/10 and gush over how cinematic it is that are ripped away from that and forcefully handed a laptop in order to play this PC nonsense. Im sure a lot of them asked their editor if it has controller support.
In contrast, you can look at older reviews, back when PC gaming was mostly about PC games tailored for the platform, not multiplatform games made for controllers. So you had writers that could specialize solely on pc games and not play anything else. Check out an IGN review from 2002 for a pretty obscure RTS, Celtic Kings.
https://www.ign.com/articles/2002/08/27/celtic-kings-rage-of-war?page=1
You can feel the writers passion in the text. You can tell he knows the genre, he plays the genre, he understands the genre. Theres no such thing today. With strategy games in particular we can all ignore press reviews for the most part