Good Bye Civ4
- Thread starter WaKKO151
- Start date
Well it looks like two of us got it
I don't have the heart to delete civ 4 yet but I really doubt I'll play it once 5 is out. I never played the first once Civ 2 was released nor did I play Civ 2 once Civ 3 came out or Civ 3 after Civ 4 was released. Where most games simply add some new graphics and change some sounds, maybe even toss in a new scenario/mission or two the Civ games evolve. If Civ 5 is even half as flexible as 4 when it comes to mods there is no reason at all for me to go back to 4.
Zhahz
PC Gamer
IMO Civ IV is the best of the series so far and I didn't play any III or earlier once I got it. I'm still playing Civ IV now and have never really stopped since it's still highly enjoyable, even without a lot of mods (I don't use any unless I'm playing FfH).
I expect Civ 5 to be similar for me - I doubt I'll touch Civ IV once 5 is out. As much as I love IV the key changes and new features of 5 I think will make me feel the same way about IV that I currently feel about III. The forward motion of the new version will make the older version feel inferior.
I expect Civ 5 to be similar for me - I doubt I'll touch Civ IV once 5 is out. As much as I love IV the key changes and new features of 5 I think will make me feel the same way about IV that I currently feel about III. The forward motion of the new version will make the older version feel inferior.
Centurio
Warlord
Venereus
This Is Streamlined!
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2010
- Messages
- 1,026
I actually had a such hard time getting used to Civ IV after playing Civ III, that I tried to keep playing it for a while, but the improvements from Civ IV had made their impression on me, and I couldn't go back. So I had no chance but to learn the new game and grew to love it. Now, the changes in Civ V are so huge that I just don't think I will see Civ IV again. That thing about all the hype ruining Civ IV happens to me too.
WaKKO151
Chieftain
FOr those who don't know this is a Roman tradition when a king dies. Its actually something alot of people do including british.
The king is dead. Long live the king.
old king................new king
I won't say i am not going to play civ 4 after civ 5 or vice versa.
I have always looked at Civ series as a large chess game. The best chess game out there. So going back to one piece per tile makes sense to me and I am intrestead to see how the gmae feels and how the mods will be for civ5.
If we don't like something you can bet there will be a mod for that.
IdleEnergy
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2010
- Messages
- 80
I would agree that we could expect a regression toward the mean... if they hadn't adopted an entirely different paradigm. Besides, regressing to the Civilization series-mean really isn't a bad thing.
Hustapha Thool
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2003
- Messages
- 234
I played Civ III a couple of times after CIV IV came out in a group challenge. Civ III had become stale and going back to it really magnified all the things I thought were flaws. I never went back again. I am hoping the same will be for CIV IV, CIV V. I am really hoping I will see that much of an improvement.
I have played a few of the more popular mods and enjoyed them, a lot of great work and ideas there, but in the long run they all became unbalanced.
So long CIV IV.
I've never seen a turtle... But I understand what you mean.
I have played a few of the more popular mods and enjoyed them, a lot of great work and ideas there, but in the long run they all became unbalanced.
So long CIV IV.
I've never seen a turtle... But I understand what you mean.
Psyringe
Scout
Actually, purely statistically spoken, that makes a regression toward the mean more likely.
Look at it this way. Let's say that Firaxis can reliably produce games that, on average, reach a rating of 90% on my personal enjoyment meter. There's also a bit of variance from game to game, lots of little decisions which cause the game to reach plus or minus 10%. For Civ4, the vast majority of these design decision were taken in exactly the direction where my personal preferences lie. So let's say Cv4 ended up getting +7% from these modifiers, ending up with a rating of 97%.
Civ5 will probably also end up somewhere around 90%, because Firaxis has a competent team of game designers. But the chances that it's not just a good game, but also caters exactly to my preferences with all these little decisions, is pretty small. Each element of gameplay that gets removed has a high chance of being a game element that I liked, since I liked most things in Civ4. Each element that gets added instead has a chance of catering to my preference, but also a chance to not do that, it will fall somewhere in the +10/-10 range. Hence, the chance of ending up with an equally high rating is lower the more changes are done to gameplay.
That doesn't mean that Firaxis shouldn't have changed the gameplay. They had to, for various reasons. However, for purely statistical reasons, this means that Civ5 is unlikely to be as enjoyable for me as Civ4. Not because it's not a good game, but simply because Civ4 set such a high mark by matching my personal taste so well.
Ronojoy1917
Warlord
I've just recently started Civ III, after playing IV for about a year. And really it's not so bad as most of you folks make it sound. Especially combat seems to be maybe even superior to IV.
Off topic but considering the comparisons made between civ III and IV I thought I might as well talk about it here.
Off topic but considering the comparisons made between civ III and IV I thought I might as well talk about it here.
generalwar
Philosopher
Same for me. I played few games to try on prince and they were very funny, but I don't have any will to play it any more. I can't understand how is someone still playing civ 1. it was released 3 years before I was even born!!! That's game from stone age. When I saw it for first time, I couldn't beliave that people were actually playing it. But, after 20 years, in 2030., someone wwill say the same for civ 5, right
?. But, everyone got right to play whatever he likes
.
Psyringe
Scout
I can't understand how is someone still playing civ 1. it was released 3 years before I was even born
You do realize that lots of people still enjoy to play games like chess, which in its current form is more than 600 years old (and based on a similar, 1400 year old game), don't you?
There is absolutely no reason why old games shouldn't be enjoyable. I often play or re-play games like Master of Orion 1, Ultima IV, Infocom adventures - heck, sometimes I fire up one of my emulators and play C64 games like Impossible Mission, or Atari VCS games like River Raid. Well-designed gameplay doesn't get old, even though the graphics look outdated by now.
That said. I do agree that Civ1 hasn't aged well. While it was great fun to play when it was released, today I can't help noticing its many shortcomings - non-existent AI, blatant cheats, uselessness of diplomacy on high levels, extremely exploitable gameplay (ICS strategies, of comquering the entire world with a handful of tanks), etc. The following games of the franchise retained the good things of Civ1 and fixed many of the bad things, so for me, Civ1 has been superseded by its successors, and I don't play it anymore.
kiwitt
Road to War Modder
I agree. As a modder, I have made Civ 4 to be the way I like to play it. 1,000's of hours of work. It won't be dropped anytime soon.
KMRblue1027
The Crown!
I still play every Civ but Civ 1 because I never owned it. IMO unmodded Civ 4 was the worst of all of the Civs while both 2 and 3 without mods were absolutely amazing games. I don't understand why you would ever give up such great games especially Civ 2. In multiplayer Civ 2 is one of the best games of all time because it isn't super demanding on my old computer that really can't run Civ4 properly and the gameplay is fantastic.
Similar threads
