Who else agrees that Civ 5 has been dumbed down?

Who else agrees that Civ 5 has been dumbed down?

  • Yes

    Votes: 853 50.7%

  • No

    Votes: 677 40.2%

  • Undecided

    Votes: 152 9.0%
  • Total voters
    1,682
Status
Not open for further replies.
40 percent is huge! Playing this Civ 5 makes me feel like the game is holding my hand while it leads me to victory.

Traitorfish said:
Will you stop acting like your conducting anything close to an effective study?
Click to expand...

Number don't lie. Opinions are like lips and a**holes, everyone's got one.

Moderator Action: Swearing is not allowed on these forums. Thanks.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
clearly dumbed down overall,
some features have changed and can be considered more complex then their equivalent in Civ4, social policies in for example are more advanced/complex then the system of governments in Civ4.

the dynamic with city-states is also more advanced then the interaction with barbarian villages in Civ4... ok granted...

and the diplomacy has some new features, although you can't get the nice "F4" screen that was telling you who was at peace with whom, etc... but still someone can argue it's now more advanced...

the advisors (which are useful only at the beginning of the first game you play...) are much better... but after 2 hours you don't need them anymore...

everything else is just plain dumber and easier,


I hate rolling over crossbowmens and pikemens with tanks and mech inf... what a waste of time
 
"3+6+1" is more complex than 10. But to call "10" a "dumbed down" version of "3+6+1" just because they took out two numbers is completely asinine. And that is exactly what some of you posters are doing.

Complexity for complexity's sake is whats dumb.
 
vandyr said:
You're right, they don't lie. And you're still in the minority.
Click to expand...

But did you get the fact that only 1 in 2 agree with you. That's only 50 percent. So the other half obviously disagrees with you. lol

Someone mentioned that if this poll was done again from this point that because more people have had the time to play the game more, that the numbers would show even more that think the game has been dumb down.

Moderator Action: Please don't make consecutive posts, instead, edit your previous post, thanks.
 
rune42 said:
"3+6+1" is more complex than 10. But to call "10" a "dumbed down" version of "3+6+1" just because they took out two numbers is completely asinine. And that is exactly what some of you posters are doing.

Complexity for complexity's sake is whats dumb.
Click to expand...

Not complexity. Depth. Not having thing more complicated just for the sake of being complicated. Is about having more options. About having a more detailed representation of the world you are playing it. Why do we need such a powerful PC if the world has less detail? Only for the graphics? Well, the better the graphics the merrier, but I don't buy those games for the graphics.
 
also I don't understand why the fans of Civ5 are saying statements like "Civ5 is better because it's more a strategy game and not an empire building game..." I keep seeing comments like this... ridiculous.... what's wrong with an empire building strategy game... the few nice things they added in Civ5 could have just as easily been implemented in a Civ4-like game (city states, social policies, improved diplomacy...)
 
OliverFA said:
Not complexity. Depth. Not having thing more complicated just for the sake of being complicated. Is about having more options. About having a more detailed representation of the world you are playing it. Why do we need such a powerful PC if the world has less detail? Only for the graphics? Well, the better the graphics the merrier, but I don't buy those games for the graphics.
Click to expand...

But their target audience does. People just need to wake up and realize they didn't make ciV for long time fans.. they made it for mass appeal. The sooner you realize this you can uninstall it and go back to your favorite version. I put in maybe 40 hrs of play time before I uninstalled it and went back to CiV IV with ROM a new dawn. Everything i love about Civ IV.. with limited units per tile. I set mine to 3 good times :p

New Civ games have no place on my PC.. V will be the last time firaxis gets my money. Sure it wont matter cause of all the newer gamers they are attracting with their "stream line" approach but its the only thing we can do. All the polls, complaints etc isnt gonna make them go back and Fix alot of my core issues with the game.
 
Fistalis said:
But their target audience does. People just need to wake up and realize they didn't make ciV for long time fans.. they made it for mass appeal. The sooner you realize this you can uninstall it and go back to your favorite version. I put in maybe 40 hrs of play time before I uninstalled it and went back to CiV IV with ROM a new dawn. Everything i love about Civ IV.. with limited units per tile. I set mine to 3 good times :p
Click to expand...

They should just give us another Civ 4 expansion pack to quench our thirst.
 
But did you get the fact that only 1 in 2 agree with you. That's only 50 percent. So the other half obviously disagrees with you. lol
Click to expand...

most players weren't "hardcore Civ4 players"... most people have better things to do in their life hehe, so for those I am sure Civ5 is better. Less details, easier learning curve...

but for me, and it looks like around 40% of the crowd here, Civ5 stinks lol
 
what i like:
1. hexagons are GG
2. fewer roads, very nice implemented
3. cool graphics ( we live in 2010 and why not)
that's all, now what i don't like part:
1. total empire happiness
2. removed healthy resources
3. irrigated wheat, bananas etc doesn't give a bigger bonus that plain irrigated. also you are only able to irrigate them and not build anything else over.
3. lower hammers on a city associated with high hammer cost of units buildings
4. removal of worker abilities: windmills, watermills, workshops
5. high science advancement rate ( i play on epic most of the time and instead of building units to have them become obsolete when finished i just pay a militaristic state, they would always give me some unit every 10 turns, or just buy them with gold)
6. fewer information over all the empire
7. again is better for me, if being warmonger, just to build a good 5-6 cities, buy some units and go to a complete pillage raze everything in my path to capital instead of annexing them, just to avoid again happiness going red
8. made for XBOX play
 
Fistalis said:
But their target audience does. People just need to wake up and realize they didn't make ciV for long time fans.. they made it for mass appeal. The sooner you realize this you can uninstall it and go back to your favorite version. I put in maybe 40 hrs of play time before I uninstalled it and went back to CiV IV with ROM a new dawn. Everything i love about Civ IV.. with limited units per tile. I set mine to 3 good times :p
Click to expand...

That in my opinion is a mistake. Why everything has to be mainstream? There are many successfull niche products like... what was its name? Oh yes! Civilzation! (until now :( )

Paradox are very successfull with their very complete (some people would incorrectly call them "complicated") games. GalCiv 2 is complete and has been a huge success. And last but not least, there is Civ4.

Having a mainstream Civ is not a bad idea, but they should have just make it as an spin-off of the main game. They could have had Civ5 and CivRev for PC. Many fans would even had bought both of them.

Fortunatelly Elemental seems to be recovering very well from its original disapointment. And there is always Civ4 to come back to ;)
 
I don't think it is so much the game has been dumb-down, it's the fact the AI is dumber then a bag full of hammers. In Civ IV I could win about 50/50 in monarch. I am not owning the AI on Deity. While it is fun to steamroll the AI on Deity, it just does not feel right =)
 
OliverFA said:
Not complexity. Depth. Not having thing more complicated just for the sake of being complicated. Is about having more options. About having a more detailed representation of the world you are playing it. Why do we need such a powerful PC if the world has less detail? Only for the graphics? Well, the better the graphics the merrier, but I don't buy those games for the graphics.
Click to expand...

"3+6+1" is the exact same depth as "10". The former is more complicated than the latter. And as I said before, calling the latter "dumbed down" is just asinine.

You don't need a powerful graphics card to play it. What you need is a powerful cpu processor. As another topic states, an AI playing chess can beat the world's top players, but an AI playing Go is average at best. Go has much simpler rules than chess, but the amount of depth in Go is too much to handle for today's best AI relative to a human brain. In other words, the AI in Civ5 is a lot smarter than in Civ4. The problem is the depth in Civ5 has increased more than what an improved AI using more processor cycles could handle, creating the illusion of a dumb AI.
 
sleepingbear said:
I don't think it is so much the game has been dumb-down, it's the fact the AI is dumber then a bag full of hammers. In Civ IV I could win about 50/50 in monarch. I am not owning the AI on Deity. While it is fun to steamroll the AI on Deity, it just does not feel right =)
Click to expand...

Which brings the big question.. replay factor. I think this is where CiV is really gonna take a hit. I've owned Civ IV since release and I still play it alot albeit with mods usually. Civ V i put in maybe 40 hrs of play time and it was just boring. I think were gonna see alot of people who are very happy with Civ V become less so the more time they put into it. Some people may like being able to steam roll the AI everytime.. other ppl want a bit more of a challenge. I personally like the empire simulation feel i get from Civ IV and they have made it abundantly clear they want to move away from that... which is fine it's their series. A series I felt i had much vested in but nonetheless they choose the direction. As such Civ V aint my cup o tea.
 
KingYosef said:
That's deep. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Then allow me to elaborate; you have conducted a survey that is entirely lacking in controls and is extremely limited in scope, and so ultimately acts as no more of a survey of people who responded to the poll, the most uselessly circular information possible to obtain. To take that and declare absolutes on behalf of all Civilization fans, everywhere, is absurd, because you have no reason to believe that your sample is in any way reflective of this larger group. Your margin of error could be anywhere up to 99.99%, and you have absolutely no way of knowing.
 
The game is less complicated, less challenging and yes shallower. It's fun to play and I'm happy I bought it -- but it's no CIV IV.
 
KingYosef said:
Someone mentioned that if this poll was done again from this point that because more people have had the time to play the game more, that the numbers would show even more that think the game has been dumb down.
Click to expand...
You go from saying "numbers don't lie" to "let's assume without numbers that my opinion's going to be backed up more".

You still didn't answer my original post either. You just don't like it, and you think that there's no POSSIBLE way you could not enjoy a game with depth. It's that simple.

The majority is not always right, in fact it's often wrong. This game has tonnes of depth. It has three times the opening moves of Civ4, actual good combat, and has many more mid-game strategies. Diplomacy is used a lot more as well.

I don't think you realize how simple Civ4 was. You managed an economy JUST to gain science and no other reason. When you went to war, the enemy was like a train that went 1 path, and tried to run you through. It had an illusion of depth, but if x and y both end up doing z, there's very little difference between them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Blake00
CivBattleRoyale Season 4 (CBR X4)
Replies
6
Views
1K
Blake00
Blake00
L
Civ 5 won't launch (Solved)
Replies
0
Views
374
logic2718
L
S
Is it Possible to Set Up Civ-V to play like Civ-III...?
Replies
5
Views
1K
aieeegrunt
aieeegrunt
KayAU
Which are your favourite civs (in Vox Populi or vanilla)?
Replies
6
Views
3K
Darth Tribble
Darth Tribble
The_J
April Fool's: 2K buys Paradox, Millennia is the "next civ game in development"
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Quintillus
Quintillus
Top Bottom