You mean all those people who spent money on a game in the expectation they could spend a *lot* of time playing it? People post on the forums because they want it to work and don't want it glossed over and left in the state it is now. I don't think it will ever be as good as CIV4 until they make some interesting changes to core of mechanics but I think there's a fair game waiting for us once it's put up to release standard.
So apparently, there's nothing wrong with Civ V
- Thread starter Auncien
- Start date
You mean all those people who spent money on a game in the expectation they could spend a *lot* of time playing it? People post on the forums because they want it to work and don't want it glossed over and left in the state it is now. I don't think it will ever be as good as CIV4 until they make some interesting changes to core of mechanics but I think there's a fair game waiting for us once it's put up to release standard.
More complex? Since they have removed features and reduced the number of possible ways to interact with the game that assessment is so far off its not even funny.
The switch to hexes was long overdue and it works well, 1UPT not so much as it causes unnecessary frustration especially when it comes to non combat units.
Strategic resource limits is an awesome idea and allows for easy balancing should it be required.
And that is the extent of additions/improvements that Civ5 brings to the table, every other aspect is less than it was.
AI having issues id the understatement of the year. It cannot cope with combat, it fails at understanding maintenance and it fails to understand happiness, but hey don't worry Firaxis solved that by allowing AI to run deficits in the thousands and expand with no limits whatsoever .. since all personalities are essentially the same (ie. they'll all attack you at one point) randomizing it is like saying a yellow M&M is better than a blue.
What is missing is interactivity. All tile improvements are hard-coded, you cannot make a tradingpost on a horse resource or a farm on cotton and workshops have been removed. Only "good" thing is the ability to farm hills but that more or less replaces windmills so not really an addition.
What is missing is interactivity. All tile improvements are hard-coded, you cannot make a tradingpost on a horse resource or a farm on cotton and workshops have been removed. Only "good" thing is the ability to farm hills but that more or less replaces windmills so not really an addition.
Religion in Civ4 was flawed, but have you seen what the wizards here have done with it in RFC:Europe? It would fit the Civ5 "mechanics" almost perfectly .. Firaxis removed it because religion causes strife in the real world so its safer to ignore it, also avoids the nasty balancing which they obviously don't like much.
Espionage would have added so much to Civ5 if done right, purchase degradable points like you do CS influence and use it for intelligence and maybe "steal" a high-value tile/unit .. again, it was removed because Firaxis are bloody lazy or have no people capable of independent thought.
Corporations are more or less what CS replace so those are actually still in game, just in a new form .. spend cash for benefit. Still stupidly overpowered even in this new form.
The ONLY good thing about this whole debacle is the immensely useful and relatively easy to use modding tools. They will allow all the great ideas that floundered on the inaccessibility of Civ4 modding to come to fruition and make the works of the "hard core" modders all the better/sweeter.
Because I paid $100 for it (special edition) and can't sell it, and I keep checking to see if there are any fixes for my main complaints. I like the hexes and combat, but that's about it. Everything else is a step backwards. I could care less about the loss of civics and religion. It's the quality of the game that I care about.
Sorry but the people who complain about CIV 5, complained about CIV 4, after done some digging into the forums!
IMHO I find CIV 5 better than CIV 4. It's more complex than CIV 4 and people who complain about "dumbing" down haven't touch the surface. Civics are more complex (Social Policies now) and building a big empire is a feat on it's own which was dead easy on CIV4.
Also in CIV 4 when you had an Iron mine, you mass produce Swordsmen, and here we go. Now you barely can make 3 if you plan to get the mandatory 2-3 catapults on a 6 iron mine (if lucky). So you have to fill up the gaps with lesser troops. And taking enemy cities to obtain more iron, cripples your empire beyond repair.
The AI has issues, but I hope that it will be fixed. (Try to turn on random personalities, they seem way smarter on Immortal and Deity).
So what's missing? Religion? Spies? Corporations? The last two came with BTS. Religion, come on was so overpowered that everyone was winning games because of it.
Was never bothered about it and the game was more challenging but many dropped their games when they lost the race.
Even on multi, how many multiplayer games were ruined because someone lost the early religions and stop passing the turn around? Not talking about single games which rate would be higher.
Seeing CIV 5 also on 3D on Saturday, seems I need to budget myself and buy a 3d monitor, replacing my 5850 with an Nvidia cardIt looks AWESOME.
The game IS dumbed down. The fact that I've been able to breeze through all of my games on normal difficulty and never really feel threatened just emphasizes that. And if I bothered to take the time to exploit the game's many balance issues, the game would be even easier. Multiplayer might be fun, but it's broken. Like I said, I like the hexes and combat and 1UPT, but that's about it. I like that resources limit the production of units. Oh yeah, I like the leaderheads too. I don't care about the loss of religions, civics, or spies. But the rest of the game is a mess. Even if you didn't like Civ4, it was much more polished on release. Civ5 is such a mess that I don't see how they're going to make it live up to its potential through patching alone unless they're humble enough to admit bad design decisions. For now, I think I'm done with it until at least multiplayer is fixed.
Nutteria
Tzar
You do realise there are very very VERY few people that will go on the forums to show indifrance to the game .Most have an axe to grind with a small minority that posts possitive oppinions.
Its the rule of internet foruming.
Its the rule of internet foruming.
blizzrd
Micromanager
I was going to disagree with you and state my reasons.
But then I read this post from you in another thread:
Seeing as you know nothing about comparison between Civ4 and Civ5, any post you make on this subject is a complete waste of time and bandwidth.
Civ5 is not a challenge to experienced players of the series. I played my first full game on Prince level. Standard map, England. My first warrior upgraded via goody huts all the way to a Mech Inf. I only built one unit the entire game, a Trireme which I later upgraded to a Destroyer. I was gifted my only other military unit from a city state, a Pikeman that I (much later) upgraded to a Mech Inf.
With no other unit builds, I conquered the entire map and won a Domination victory just after 1850AD. That was not a challenge.
Moreover, I have no great desire to try harder difficulty levels after seeing most of the boring-as-watching-paint-dry tech tree. Each level just unlocks more buildings that do exactly the same thing as previous buildings, but with a slightly increased maintenance cost.
VirtualMark
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
- Messages
- 54
Glad you noticed that, i saw his other post too. God knows why he is on here trying to defend something when he doesn't even understand what we are complaining about.
jjkrause84
King
I don't think it's that. I am certainly very disappointed but I also think Civ5 is REALLY fun and I find myself in the 'it'll only get better, so hold on....' crowd. Now, sure I miss the control and depth of Civ4...but maybe it'll be brought back? As has been mentioned umpteen times the XPs added A LOT to Civ4. While I don't think we should be judging vanilla to vanilla (mainly because there is no justifiable reason to utterly ignore concepts already in existence and largely accepted...even if not everyone liked them) I fully expect Civ5 to outshine Civ4 in more or less every way within a couple years.
So, do I like it or no? Do I skew the numbers? My gut feelign is that most of the people who are disappointed are still playing and having fun....just perhaps not as much fun as they hoped.
jjkrause84
King
This is a HUGE problem. I very often feel like my decisions make no real impact and I get very litle sense of 'growth' techonologically over time. I love that the barracks and armoury are EXACTLY THE SAME THING...+15 xp. Remember how important banks and universities were in Civ2 - 4? OK, banks are still crucial but not normal bee-line worthy and you can kick butt in science without building more than one or two universities.
Bizarre.
I can understand your disappointment with such an easy first game. However I'd ask you to keep in mind that that situation (the warrior with hut-upgrades to mech inf) is relatively rare and is almost certainly going to be revealed as a bug/exploit so it will be patched out of the game.
I think using that unfortunate "bug" as your explanation for why the game is too easy is drawing conclusions a bit too early IMO. Yes, getting a bugged game at release is annoying, but it's the reality these days.
Nutteria
Tzar
"There is no such thing as bug free software!" - Bill Gates
I completely agree. The game just kind of meanders without really making me feel like I'm becoming more technologically advanced. Worst still, the tech tree doesn't have requirements like in Civ4. So you could completely skip musketmen and riflemen and go straight to infantry. And then you realize you need musketmen and riflemen to upgrade your units. And the game really needs some era specific music. I think the game has only one song, and it's horrible. It sounds kind of chilling at times, like something out of There Will Be Blood.
Doctor Phibes
Prince
Indeed, there's no need to bother with Gunpowder at all, which removes the whole bottom half of the tech tree from thereon in, once you've got Replaceable Parts for the infantry - just in case. If you've secured that position, then beelining for Globalization and the UN is straightforward - you can scoop up most of the remaining Wonders if you care about those too on the way (well, Christo Redentor is a bit of a must have). If there's any kind of AI threat, then churning out a few infantry should do it while the obsolete units that you can't upgrade hold the line - the AI's not exactly Speedy Gonzales when it comes to pursuing an offensive.
This really is the most simple-minded tech tree I've ever seen, and I've been into Civ2/3/4 plus CTP1/2 in plenty of depth. It's more like City of Wonder on Facebook than any of those.
I'll probably be turning 'Diplomatic Victory' (well, Bribery Victory, really) off later, which changes things a little. But right now, it's a convenient backdoor out of the game.
The various gameplay items hardly bother me at all. My biggest complaint about civ5 is the constant crashes.
I have a 1 1/2 year old, an 8 month pregnant wife and a very demanding job. When I find time to play, the last thing I want to see is "Sid Meier's ... has stopped responding!"
After getting the wife and baby to sleep, seeing a crash is just depressing. Precious time wasted.
Features and tuning can come over time. crashes are inexcusable.
That said, after 2-3 restarts (start new map, usually the entire savegame is bunk), I can get a game going. I think i've finished 3 games since release!
I have a 1 1/2 year old, an 8 month pregnant wife and a very demanding job. When I find time to play, the last thing I want to see is "Sid Meier's ... has stopped responding!"
After getting the wife and baby to sleep, seeing a crash is just depressing. Precious time wasted.
Features and tuning can come over time. crashes are inexcusable.
That said, after 2-3 restarts (start new map, usually the entire savegame is bunk), I can get a game going. I think i've finished 3 games since release!
Just a guess, but are you selecting DX10/11? Even if you should be able to run DX10/11, chosing DX9 will stop your crashes. Or at least lower them a lot.
Baleur
Prince
SammyKhalifa
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,308
Hmm. Then don't play for domination. Have you tried one of the other victory conditions? Maybe you have, I don't know, but I do know that it's pretty universally understood that the game (even by people who love it) has some issues with war at the moment. I've been trying to limit myself by not exploiting that hole going conquest (or "diplomatic"). The game isn't perfect yet, but that doesn't mean there isn't fun to be had.
I also wonder, though, that if for all the praise it gets, if CivIV wouldn't be getting this EXACT SAME RECEPTION if it were the one that just came out. It's not like IV didn't have holes, exploits, weaknesses, problems (you can't tell me that you were SUPPOSED to be able to take over any city on Earth with a giant pile of catapults). We just happily overlook those, though. We might even be so used to them that we don't even recognize them as problems any more. People don't judge it as harshly because they're more familiar with it.
Cilpot
Pretentious Schmuck
With the exception of some very loud whiners in this sub-forum, the reception of the game has been mostly exceptional. What's the problem?
Note that calling the AI " fairly average" is really just a euphemism for calling it disappointing.
