You should give it a try. A content in Civ4 is so much richer it may easily compensate a bit aged graphics. In Civ4 there are myriads of possible openings and ways to play the game and lots of interesting choices to make. Civ5 is just a simple war game where most of the buildings, wonders, policies, diplomacy options etc. are simply useless.
@MkLh: Sori, mutta nelosessa ei ole totta. Okei, nelosessa tuo on totta jollekin aloittelijalle, mutta oikeasti, ei ne axeman rush ja culture-spammit ole mitään lukemattomia avauksia ja valintoja.
Nelosen vahvat puolet ovat, että siinä saa mikromanageroida, säädellä prosentteja ja tehdä minimaalisia valintoja loputtomiin. Jotkut tykkää, jotkut ei. Kannattaa katsoa toinen linkki sigissäni.
In English, to avoid complications:
This is kind of a reply to many topics, but it doesn't matter:
Come on people. If you like something it does't mean everyone has to like it. A lot of CFC:ers are just shouting "Oh, the game is doomed because I don't like it". Well, apparently at least 30 000 (a month ago, has probably grown) people love the game and play it. Please, just let it be. Everyone does not play civ to micromanage an empire with small choices, I realise many people like that, but everyone doesn't. Check the bolded part in the shortly following quote.
The game isn't doomed if you don't like it. Especially if the people who like it are an immense majority. The game is doomed if almost no-one plays it.
Good quotes:
I remember when Civ I was the best thing since sliced bread, I played it more than any other in the series except Alpha Centauri; I loved 2 and particularly 4, and I was never keen on 3 - but I love 5.
I came into 5 with an extremely negative vibe, not really expecting to think much of it at all, especially after BtS was such a high point of the series. I was surprised that it won me over so quickly. The first aspect was the combat, which has never quite felt right in civ, but which I think they've finally pretty much nailed. But more than that, I sort of feel that civ kind of slipped into a rut where micromanagement was more important than macromanagement, where to win at Immortal it was all about managing your hammers so that you only had 6 hammers (epic speed) so that you could whip 2 pop instead of 1 at a time to rush that axeman and have maximum spillover production for the next one etc; and that it was all about sweating the small details at the expense of the big picture of running a whole empire - like you were playing the role of ten mayors taped together instead of an emperor. And sweating the details like that really makes it much clearer that you're playing the game's idiosyncratic mechanics rather than actually managing an empire. It was more about knowing the rules than anything else.
I guess part of it was that I just found that your Paradox games and Dwarf Fortresses etc could really scratch that micromanagement itch in a much more satisfying way than Civ could; and that Civ V really feels like it brings back the feeling of making real leadership decisions, each of which is important and meaningful; rather than thousands of tiny, inconsequential decisions that felt more like just gaming the system. I think that Civ V has a lot more complexity than it's given credit for, it's just that it's taken away the tedious micromanagement that masquerades as complexity, but which is really just a tedious weaselly way to eke out an advantage over a bonus-heavy AI by hundreds of iterations of petty stuff that doesn't matter, rather than by using better grand strategy. Civ V is more about working the big-picture level of empire management, and I think it is improved by it.
Civ is not, never has been, nor really ever can be a series fanatically devoted to serving historical realism because the whole of human history is too big to fit realistically into one set of game mechanics; that's where your Europa Universalis-es and Victorias and Hearts of Irons step in, one era at a time. Civ has always been steeped in its boardgame roots, and I really think this iteration is a breath of fresh air by being honest and embracing those roots, in a way that I think really works.
Especially take not in the bolded part.
I agree with all this. BTW, I seldom come here these days; I'm too busy playing Civ V or doing other worthwhile things. Many of the threads here read like a bunch of divorcees who can't stop talking about what was wrong with their ex. Some of the complaints against Civ V are plain ridiculous. "I want to punch that old man in the introductory movie in the face." "I don't like the guy who talks when I start a new game." "The 1 units/tile idea is a fiasco because I don't like it, so there!" "I've played Civ for many years, and I'm a long time poster in CFC, so my opinion of what a game should be like is worth that of 20,000 moronic newbies." "I keep the game running for thousands of hours while doing other things just to show that the statistics about how popular it is are a lie." And so on.
Even so, I *am* looking forward to the next patch. There are many issues that remain to be addressed, and they should add some new content. More value to the resource tiles, for starters. Activate the replay function. Make the AI respect Friendship agreements a bit more instead of sabotaging them towards mid- or endgame. Some random events might be fun. A steeper learning curve, with easier playability on low levels and a much higher one further up. Oh, and they must reintroduce the function where hammer overspoill goe sinto the next improvement built in a city.
In the end, it's about taste. I hate the fact that random people come here and start complaining about how the game is in a hopeless state and IV is a gem, and don't listen to other peoples oppinions.
In the end,
It is a matter of oppinion.
Whether you like it or not, it's so.
Some like to make thousands of tiny, inconsequential decisions, and some like making leadership decisions, each of which is important and meaningful.
And even though I love V and think it is better than IV, I play IV still too. Both games are excellent, no denying that. They are just different games.
