Civ 4 vs. Civ 5?

YungPtolemy666 said:

In your honest opinion which would you buy if you were only getting 1?

Click to expand...

CIV IV without a doubt.
I am an owner of both 4 and 5. I have over 200 hours on 4, and about 10 hours on 5. That is about how I would rate them too, 200/10 and 10/10

Civ4 and it's not even close. Civ5 is a mediocre game at best with some decent production values. 4 isn't the best game in the series and has some pretty glaring flaws but it is definitely one of the most friendly games for a modder, and has somewhat competent AI compared to the earlier games' issues.

OP got unlucky with attracting haters to this thread.

nimling said:

...and has somewhat competent AI compared to the earlier games' issues.

Click to expand...

You lose credibility making such assertions. The AI is exactly the same!

beetle said:

OP got unlucky with attracting haters to this thread.

You lose credibility making such assertions. The AI is exactly the same!

Click to expand...

Hmnn, I'm trying to see where your term "haters" applies in this context, and am unsuccessful. Perhaps your interpretation from rather volatile earlier threads is skewing your perception a bit?

As for the AI, no, they are not exactly the same. The code is definitely different.

Drakarska said:

Hmnn, I'm trying to see where your term "haters" applies in this context, and am unsuccessful. Perhaps your interpretation from rather volatile earlier threads is skewing your perception a bit?

As for the AI, no, they are not exactly the same. The code is definitely different.

Click to expand...

Maybe not the same, but except for the anemic ranged attack capability, I'd say very little was done to the Civ V AI to make it different from the Civ IV AI.

The Civ IV AI seemed more competent, because working with stacks is much easier than programming a competent 1UPT AI.

Remember one of the videos showcasing the initial release of Civ V? I can't remember who it was, but the spokesperson was bragging about how the AI got smarter as a game progressed. What a line of bull that was.

I would recommend civ4. It is not just it cost less but AI is much better, there are plenty of mods and some of them are complitely remakes like rise and fall, multiplayer does work and there is always something to do, you can always micro more.

5's religion system blows 4's out of the water.

You can't really RP in Civ4 until you get good at it due to the stacks of doom kicking over your sand castle and calling you a nerd.

They're both amazing games, but I personally think that Civ4 holds a special place in my heart. But it really depends on what you're into. The two games have different aspects to them. Some are more of a personal thing while others are more of an acquired taste.

beetle said:

@OP, I would recommend 5 over 4, but I think 5 spoils one for 4.

Click to expand...

I've often wondered about this and am not sure that I agree, but don't know for sure. Having experienced civ 4 and it's XPs before experiencing civ 5, it is difficult to assess what my reaction would be if the order of the experiences were reversed- Pandora's box effect. As I stated in a different thread, having both games at my disposal, I play exclusively civ5, which I guess means that I like civ5 better. However, I seem to recall more enthralling experiences and less frustrating experiences with civ4 than civ5, so I dunno.

Another HUGE consideration is that civ4 was STEAM-free. While it doesn't factor in that often, there have been a few times that STEAM created big problems for my playing (mostly because I accidentally picked "connect" instead of "play offline")

beetle said:

Could someone remind me why one might have felt the 3 to 4 transition was too rough? In my memory, it was quite incremental!

Click to expand...

From my experience, the very first iteration of civI, (I think I had it on a 286 machine, I'm old) until the last expansion pack of civ III were all the exact same game with a few more options added each time. Civ4, at least to me, was the first time that they changed instead of just adding. But again, milage may vary.

Thanks to this thread I now am back to square 1 with no idea which game to purchase.

YungPtolemy666 said:

Thanks to this thread I now am back to square 1 with no idea which game to purchase.

Click to expand...

I don’t think that should be the case because...

YungPtolemy666 said:

I'm more interested by the storytelling, how lush the world I'm creating feels. Which one would you say is more absorbing on a narrative level??

Click to expand...

...no one has argued that 4 is better than 5 as far as this aspect of the game goes.

Obviously, there are fans of both games, and you've heard from both sides. Since no one (but you) knows what you would like, all I can recommend is that you watch some YouTube videos (20-30 minutes should do it) of folks playing both games. Then buy whichever game strikes your fancy.

To minimize likelihood that different presenters and civs might unduly skew your views, here are two Rome videos by Quill18:

Civ IV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMfGzPIFIMU

Civ V: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzyoIDKBnH0

YungPtolemy666 said:

Thanks to this thread I now am back to square 1 with no idea which game to purchase.

Click to expand...

Why does it have to be one or the other? There can't be that much cost involved. Since no one can dispute that Civ IV is a great game, it seems like a no brainer to start there. Then, in six months go with Civ V, and play that until you get bored and want to go back to IV, or until Civ VI comes out.

beetle said:

I don’t think that should be the case because...


"I'm more interested by the storytelling, how lush the world I'm creating feels. Which one would you say is more absorbing on a narrative level??"


...no one has argued that 4 is better than 5 as far as this aspect of the game goes.

Click to expand...

Really??? I could have sworn at least someone made that argument.

After looking at some screenshots it turns out that despite my previous claims of jumping from III to V I did actually play IV. I remember the lions and bears, they were a nice touch. I obviously didn't play it for long though.

YungPtolemy666 said:

Thanks to this thread I now am back to square 1 with no idea which game to purchase.

Click to expand...

If you want a definitive answer ask the same question in the Civ IV area

To OP, buy both at a discount and you will know the answer.

Warning, both games are heavy time consuming if you play on large/huge maps and slower speed.
And not to forget the turn times. Keep an eye on that. Waiting 15 seonds or longer for the next turn isn't acceptable.
Do the math and those numbers become scary. (Hours doing nothing.)

From the point of storytelling, I would (cautiosly) argue for Civ IV, because of somewhat livelier diplomatic interaction and bigger choice of actions.

Religion plays much bigger role in IV's diplomacy than in V. You may find yourself at the crossroads of which religious camp to pick. You may have to wait with your decision, to drop one religion in favour of another because of your own opportunistic plans or in fear of impending doom. In V religion is more of a nice tool for your internal purposes and hardly ever a casus belli.

The vassal state system. It may have it’s flaws, but it certainly adds to the storytelling. Clashes between two or three great alliances have always been a source of inspiration for storytellers of all kinds. One moment you may face a seemingly monolithic alliance with little options for you, the next – some peacevassal renounces it’s master's protection and opens a breach for you to step in and strengthen your position. Or vice versa – a hopeful friend, whom you courted in every possible way, peacefully vassals to your rival, and next thing you know they're both knocking on your gate with a very big club. In Civ V the lines of the great divide between groups of countries are drawn after ideologies come into play, but for me it feels a bit forced.

A game of Civ IV is probably more manoeuvrable, if you can say so, you can juggle civics, research and money sliders, etc., and the one of CiV is more rigid, with policies you set your course for good. And more often than not it will take longer.

As for the lushness, Civ V is an eye candy, true, but now there are some nice graphical mods for Civ IV, Blue Marble, etc. which improve things to some extent.

And for conclusion, as some people already mentioned, the big sales season is approaching. Are you sure you won't be able to pick both of 'em?

Also, I imagine the price of CIV5 will go down once CIV6 comes out, the "last year's model" effect. CIV4 is probably as cheap as it's gonna get.

MrRadar said:

In V religion is more of a nice tool for your internal purposes and hardly ever a casus belli.

Click to expand...

Really? In almost every game of Civ 5 I play I'm declaring war on an obnoxious civ that insists on spamming my cities with its Prophets and Missionaries

MrRadar said:

From the point of storytelling, I would (cautiosly) argue for Civ IV, because of somewhat livelier diplomatic interaction and bigger choice of actions.

Click to expand...

Okay, but is this not pretty much a narrative that you are creating for yourself in your own mind -- and not something explicitly supported by the game mechanics?

Maybe it is because I am not as imaginative as you, but the outside-the-game story I find easier to immerse myself in with V because the AI personalities are more distinct, and the UU and UA give me a way to tailor each game.

shaglio said:

Really? In almost every game of Civ 5 I play I'm declaring war on an obnoxious civ that insists on spamming my cities with its Prophets and Missionaries.

Click to expand...

That is RP that you are engaging in outside the game mechanics. But I agree that V has plenty of opportunity for that!