Why is Civ5 so unappealing?

[CivFanaticMan]

Why is this game so unappealing to a large part of the civ fan community. Looking beyond the fact that the game was sold as an unfinished product and all the bugs; what did Fraxis do wrong. They obviously went wrong somewhere in the design of this game; most of the older civ community is outraged. I don't have the game yet but I have read enough on the forums to know some of the issues. Planning on buying the game (or getting it of 'shareware' if it really sucks). Before I am sold I want to know what it feels like to play civ5, and what the devs did that makes this game lack.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

I love a quote from Roma Surrectum II mod:

"Keep it simple, stupid!"

I think that it was the motto of Civ V makers.

 

[Bill Bisco]

You should really do a search or look down some more threads in this forum, there are many good explanations why.

You should not buy the game. You should play the demo and then if you enjoyed playing the demo 10 times or so then you can buy Civ5, else you could risk losing a lot of money.

 

[playshogi]

Because it's #5. It would be great if it were 1 or 2, but the idea of civ is 20 years old and worn out.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Because it's #5. It would be great if it were 1 or 2, but the idea of civ is 20 years old and worn out.

Then why Civ IV BTS is so great?

 

[Arsenic Steel]

Because it's #5. It would be great if it were 1 or 2, but the idea of civ is 20 years old and worn out.

Unless the people that enjoyed civ 20 years ago died or somehow moved on from game then the basic ideas in civ are not worn out.

Either that or the current dev team agree with you.

 

[LordTC]

When I heard the idea of Civ with Tactics, I was thinking I'd be playing a total war type game with the ability to found my own cities on a random map, instead of a fixed world map with preconstructed provinces, prechosen locations, and pre-selected unit generation and that such a game would last from ancient times to the modern era instead of just one era. Instead I get cannons and longbows firing across the English channel to make the kind of bombardment not seen in the real world until WW2, and a melee combat system that confuses the AI causing them to make terrible decisions.

 

[Panda_Power]

Why is this game so unappealing to a large part of the civ fan community?

It just seems like that because the people who don't like it are more vocal than the people who do like it. It's actually very much the opposite!

 

[Buccaneer]

For me, the main thing is the ease of winning without trying very hard. Never could do that at the higher difficulty levels in Civ4. I play single-player strategy games to be challenged in making the best short-term and long-term decisions.

 

[Venereus]

It just seems like that because the people who don't like it are more vocal than the people who do like it. It's actually very much the opposite!

It is still unappealing for a large portion of the fans.

 

[CivFanaticMan]

It just seems like that because the people who don't like it are more vocal than the people who do like it. It's actually very much the opposite!

you have a very good point.

 

[ClarenceSeedorf]

It is still unappealing for a large portion of the fans.

And I think these "fans" have by now made their point clear.

Really, enough with the whine threads.

 

[stormerne]

And I think these "fans" have by now made their point clear.

Really, enough with the whine threads.

I think we need to have compassion for these whiners. After all, they didn't all buy the game in September like we did. Some are only just coming to the game now, two months on, and they can't understand why we keep complaining about yet another silly whinger. They think they're making a new discovery and have something new to say - like we did two months ago. So I suggest we cut the new guys some slack. The ones who've been whining for two months, however, are only telling us more each day about themselves, not the game.

 

[charon2112]

There are literally hundreds of threads detailing what everyone dislikes about Civ V. Why create a new one? And for the record, whether you like or dislike civ V has nothing to do with your experience level, or time spent playing. There are people new to Civ that love Civ V, and there are people new to Civ that hate Civ V...there are Civ veterans that love Civ V, and there are Civ veterans that hate Civ V. To say that most of the older Civ players are outraged is completely inaccurate.

Why is this game so unappealing to a large part of the civ fan community. Looking beyond the fact that the game was sold as an unfinished product and all the bugs; what did Fraxis do wrong. They obviously went wrong somewhere in the design of this game; most of the older civ community is outraged. I don't have the game yet but I have read enough on the forums to know some of the issues. Planning on buying the game (or getting it of 'shareware' if it really sucks). Before I am sold I want to know what it feels like to play civ5, and what the devs did that makes this game lack.

 

[Warspite2]

Why is this game so unappealing to a large part of the civ fan community. Looking beyond the fact that the game was sold as an unfinished product and all the bugs; what did Fraxis do wrong. They obviously went wrong somewhere in the design of this game; most of the older civ community is outraged. I don't have the game yet but I have read enough on the forums to know some of the issues. Planning on buying the game (or getting it of 'shareware' if it really sucks). Before I am sold I want to know what it feels like to play civ5, and what the devs did that makes this game lack.

You know, you have a heck of a nerve considering all the posts I have read from you on here regarding Civ V. You mean you don't even have it??? Then you mention getting it off shareware, as if pirating? Someone tell me, what exactly is wrong with this picture below that he posted in another thread? Seriously now I can't help but wonder how many others are here doing this same thing that don't even own it. If you don't even own the game you really should not even be commenting like this...

I think people get bored of Civ5 so easily because:

1. The end goal for a player was designed to be to win no matter what through predictable circumstances and linear gameplay, instead of going through an epic journey that would take you through an unknown future, where the outcome would be as unpredictable and mysterious as your own future life.

2. Winning is easy, even on deity.

3. War is the only interesting part in the game and the AI still won't give you a challenge.

 

[Sonereal]

Why is this game so unappealing to a large part of the civ fan community.

Because CiV was different from CivIV to a huge degree?

Looking beyond the fact that the game was sold as an unfinished product and all the bugs; what did Fraxis do wrong.

Why ask when you already answered it yourself? The large problem is that the game has major problems with it still.

They obviously went wrong somewhere in the design of this game; most of the older civ community is outraged.

In all honestly, who cares about them? The older generation will always be the Old Guard of things and half of them are old enough that nostalgia becomes a factor.

I don't have the game yet but I have read enough on the forums to know some of the issues. Planning on buying the game (or getting it of 'shareware' if it really sucks). Before I am sold I want to know what it feels like to play civ5, and what the devs did that makes this game lack.

"They changed it. So now it sucks."

 

[Lightzy]

CIV5 is disappointing because its design shows lack of intelligence and forethought.
No 2 game subsystems interconnect properly with a 3rd, and all you have is a broken cruddy mess that cannot be balanced.

In a word, inelegant.

 

[Helmling]

Then why Civ IV BTS is so great?

It isn't. People are looking at that with some bizarre rose colored glasses. I'll readily admit that Civ IV was better than V, but it had some pretty deep flaws too.

It's a hard formula to get right and it's impossible to please everyone.

 

[whb]

There are literally hundreds of threads detailing what everyone dislikes about Civ V. Why create a new one? And for the record, whether you like or dislike civ V has nothing to do with your experience level, or time spent playing. There are people new to Civ that love Civ V, and there are people new to Civ that hate Civ V...there are Civ veterans that love Civ V, and there are Civ veterans that hate Civ V. To say that most of the older Civ players are outraged is completely inaccurate.

For Civ V, there are hundreds of threads detailing what everyone dislikes about Civ V. For Civ 4 there were not. For Civ 3 there were a few people with grumbles and quibbles (IIRC, mostly over conquered cities culture-flipping back), but nothing on this scale. This one has had a markedly different reception than I've seen either here or at Apolyton for the previous ones. Some of it is comparative -- Civ3 had the problem of following Alpha Centauri; Civ5 has the problem of following Civ4. And it is a marked contrast to the trade press reviews.

 

[Zydor]

Why is this game so unappealing to a large part of the civ fan community.....

There is no "one size fits all" answer. Everyone play(ed)s Civ for their own reasons. I believe much of the fuss is due to the increasing practice these days of taking offence just because someone does not like what another individual likes - bit like saying an individual is a dastardly heathen because they dont like strawberries and I do rofl, but such feelings merely stoke the flames.

What ignited the Bonfire itself, was the fundamental change they have made to the game. A massive amount was stripped out, and the balance of play and options changed drastically from the Traditional Civilisation Franchise foundations. Its far far more than ritualistic moaning over Version tweeks/changes, its at the very Core of the game. Its too contrite and knee jerk to say "people always moan between versions" and expect that simplistic statement to be a catch all excuse. The changes wrought for this Version are way beyond such simplistic thinking.

If an individual is a long standing player, and shelled out the cash pre release (a common 20 year practice in the franchise and its fans), and then discovers the very core nature of the game has been drastically altered with no prior disclosure, anger surfaces.

The game at its core in terms of design is shifting to mass market format to widen sales/marketing opportunities, not uncommon with long standing games, all usually do at some point - usual batch of exceptions - but most do, either that or they wither away.

The game as it stands now, is going to alienate a substantial proportion of Traditional fans - me included. However its also going to gain (eventually if they get the mass market format right) a lot more new fans. To say someone is nutty because they like one format or another is somewhat silly, we all have our tastes. What would be helpful however to cool it down is an overall acknowledgement that we do all have our tastes, and not take it personally if someone likes it differently.

Which way will it end up going .... well they started down this road, and I cant see them changing any time soon, so I guess I am on the search now for another Strategy game that I like, somewhat sad after 15+ years playing this one, but thats games these days I guess. Life moves on

Regards
Zy