PC Gamer gives Civ V 93%

[Auncien]

All of the reviews / previews are like... 'it's high quality, but not better than Civ Iv.' We shouldn't be hearing that especially given the high production value of this title.

And so many people are like... "is that it?... well maybe they'll add stuff in an expansion."

This title just does not seem to have the substance of even vanilla Civ IV. It seems very much like a Civilization Revolution for the PC.

 

[cr0ws]

If that's the case, then why has each new Civ installment outsold it's predecessors? Why are almost all the top-selling PC games of all time within the past few years, not ones from days long past?

I can really see you are into market statistics...Well, personally, giving it to you without beating around the bush. When I bought Civ 3 I was highly disappointed in it, I expected far more than it offered. And even disappointed at the dumbing down of the game in general,no more corruption and defense points for units lead to my healthy submarine to lose a fight with a trireme on it's first battle. I threw it in the corner for it to rot away and help me forget I wasted money on it. Didn't even show any interest in the expansions either since I had considered Activision's Call To Power at the time a far more realistic and enjoyable civ game.

Don't get me wrong, I really loved the introduction of culture and it's effects, how the air units were a lot faster to work with, loved the precision strikes too and also the idea that many units required specific resources to build and which gave the resources another function other than trade income and minor city bonus. Alas I didn't like how the new spy system worked and the diplomacy was very limiting too.

I expected far more from Civ 4 but had the same feeling again, some pros and lots of cons. I remember mainly liking about Civ 5 that it allowed more than 7 AI nations on same map and unit upgrades and leveling gave it a cool RPG feel to it. But due to it's simpleness very limiting strategically wise. And once again my fully healthy submarine lost to a Trireme on it's first battle!

It wasn't until I discovered the fan made Rise Of Mankind mod that made me blow the dust off Civ 4 and reinstall it again.

Oh and that's why the only reason I'm showing any interest in Civ 5 is they claim it'll be mod friendly.

 

[Lillefix]

And even disappointed at the dumbing down of the game in general,no more corruption and defense points for units lead to my healthy submarine to lose a fight with a trireme on it's first battle.

Why do you mean it was dumbed down? They added things like culture, ranged units, mobilisation and national wonders. And I'm pretty sure they didn't remove corruption. I remember my border cities got pretty useless after a while.

 

[Boris Godunov]

Newer Civ games outselling the older ones doesn't disprove the argument of the person you are quoting. Nor the fact that newer PC games sell more than older PC games have when they were released.

More people have computers now than they did back when Civ 1 and 2 was released and the industry was not as huge.

He needs to prove his argument, first. What you say here indicates the can't, so why even bother making it?

There is no way to substantiate a claim like what was made. Personal anecdotes (like the long-winded one just provided) don't do that. I have plenty of personal anecdotes I can draw on from people who thought Civ IV was the best game of the series so far, after all.

 

[andrewlt]

I don't see why people think that each sequel should just add more and more features without subtracting any. Imagine Starcraft 5 in the next century (Blizzard is slow) with 50 units per faction. That would be a total balance mess. Or Street Fighter 10 with 100 special and super moves for each character. Can you even move forward or backward at that point without accidentally activating a special move?

 

[cr0ws]

I don't see why people think that each sequel should just add more and more features without subtracting any. Imagine Starcraft 5 in the next century (Blizzard is slow) with 50 units per faction. That would be a total balance mess. Or Street Fighter 10 with 100 special and super moves for each character. Can you even move forward or backward at that point without accidentally activating a special move?

I love Starcraft! I still think it's one of the most balanced and well made RTS games out there.

 

[andrewlt]

I love Starcraft! I still think it's one of the most balanced and well made RTS games out there.

Professional Starcraft games are still way better than professional Starcraft2 games right now. It's still more balanced and the players are way more skilled. The UI is extremely outdated and carpal tunnel inducing, though.

I put Elemental on hold as it's still too buggy. Alt-tab is still a guaranteed crash for me. I'm actually playing some DS JRPGs to get my turn-based fix until Civ 5 is released. Dunno why I skipped SMT: Devil Survivor last year but it's been a blast so far.

 

[bjbrains]

All of the reviews / previews are like... 'it's high quality, but not better than Civ Iv.' We shouldn't be hearing that especially given the high production value of this title.

And so many people are like... "is that it?... well maybe they'll add stuff in an expansion."

This title just does not seem to have the substance of even vanilla Civ IV. It seems very much like a Civilization Revolution for the PC.

I don't buy this argument at all. You're just taking what you want out of the previews without actually looking at the content. There are plenty of new features in Civ 5 (social policies making culture important, strategic resource limitations, new combat system, city-states), on top of any number of reworkings/changes to previous systems. There is no 'dumbing down' going on here.

 

[Seven05]

If that's the case, then why has each new Civ installment outsold it's predecessors? Why are almost all the top-selling PC games of all time within the past few years, not ones from days long past?

To be fair there are a LOT more people playing video games now than in the past (even very recently in the past) so as the market continues to grow it's safe to assume that sales will continue to grow. The real test is to see if the increased sales matched up with the increased market size.

Anyway, I have to agree wwith Crows on Civ 3, although I really enjoyed the first two (and the fourth) I did not enjoy Civ 3 much at all. The addition of new features isn't always a good thing and I think Civ 3 was a victim of that, for me anyway. The borders in Civ 3 were probably the most annoying aspect of that game, from the tedium of telling the AI to get out every turn to the annoying habit of them settling in that one lone tile in the middle of your empire that wasn't covered by your borders. The combination of ranged attacks and stacks was disasterous and the 'Army' mechanic felt clumsy at best.

At least there were a lot more gamers in the world when Civ 3 was released compared to when Civ 2 was released. Remember, when Civ 2 was released having a computer at home still wasn't very common, multiplayer games were played on a BBS (text based) and FPS games were still mostly 2D and not really a genre of their own. By the time Civ 3 rolled around many people had at least one computer at home, periods were being pronounced as 'dot' and even the elderly knew what the Internet was. I don't think the market size has changed as dramatically since the release of Civ 4 so it'll be interesting to see how Civ 5 sales compare.

 

[Calouste]

I don't buy this argument at all. You're just taking what you want out of the previews without actually looking at the content. There are plenty of new features in Civ 5 (social policies making culture important, strategic resource limitations, new combat system, city-states), on top of any number of reworkings/changes to previous systems. There is no 'dumbing down' going on here.

A number of posters on this forum were completely convinced that any further civ release was going to be "dumbed down" the moment CivRev was announced, and there is nothing you can say that will change their mind. There is another section of posters, partially overlapping with the one mentioned above, that sees any removal of micromanagement and not having numbers with 6 places behind the decimal point as dumbing down.

 

[King Jason]

That's the point, they will add everything they left out of vanilla 5 into expansions. Obviously they must leave something out, or there would be nothing to add in later for more money.

More content requires more development time. I would've rather had civ4 in 2005 than the "full" civ4 in 2007.

I'd rather take civ5 next month, than civ5 "complete" 6 months, a year, two years from now.

 

[Auncien]

I don't buy this argument at all. You're just taking what you want out of the previews without actually looking at the content. There are plenty of new features in Civ 5 (social policies making culture important, strategic resource limitations, new combat system, city-states), on top of any number of reworkings/changes to previous systems. There is no 'dumbing down' going on here.

I almost bought Civilization: Revolution. I'm not making that mistake again.

Preview play and early reviews are done for one purpose: to sell product.

I suspect the game will be simplistic and boring, but I really, really hope I'm wrong. We'll see in 20 days and change. Don't worry... if I am mistaken I'll go fanboi real quick.

 

[Falcan]

Long live CivRev! Bring on the multiplayer fun (best part of CivRev).

 

[12agnar0k]

I will be finally getting that magazine tomorrow when it hits the shops, I will post any interesting bits in the other thread .

 

[bjbrains]

I almost bought Civilization: Revolution. I'm not making that mistake again.

Preview play and early reviews are done for one purpose: to sell product.

I suspect the game will be simplistic and boring, but I really, really hope I'm wrong. We'll see in 20 days and change. Don't worry... if I am mistaken I'll go fanboi real quick.

So in other words... You actively mistrust everything being said about the game? You don't believe the previews, reviews, and even videos?

 

[civ_king]

So in other words... You actively mistrust everything being said about the game? You don't believe the previews, reviews, and even videos?

clearly you drank the Flavor Aid

 

[12agnar0k]

The video's (and cake) are a lie!

 

[Boris Godunov]

I almost bought Civilization: Revolution. I'm not making that mistake again.

You won't make the mistake of...almost buying something, but then changing your mind and not buying it? Does that mean you WILL buy Civ 5 now? Or does that mean you consider it a mistake to consider buying anything prior to it's release?

 

[Zhahz]

I had a chance to read this today and IMO it's the worst written piece on Civ 5 to date. It wasn't much of a review and it's highly opinionated from the persepective of someone who seems to be fairly clueless.

The VE3D piece linked last night is a better read and actually contains some useful information.

 

[Auncien]

So in other words... You actively mistrust everything being said about the game? You don't believe the previews, reviews, and even videos?

Everything that is going on right now is about building hype to sell a product. You think 2k Greg is here because they thought we needed a friend? You think they're letting people play early to give 'the fans' a sneak peak out of the goodness of their hearts? It's not about friendship. It's not about 'the fans.' It's not about 'the gameplay.' It's about manipulating your emotions so that you'll hand them money. That's it. It's about what people will pay for. Everything else is just incidental. If people can have fun with it, great. If not, it's marketing and PR's job to move it anyway.

No. I never trust previews. I rarely trust reviews. I don't befried "community managers." I trust what I experience. It's the only rational course of action in a capitalist society.