killmeplease
Mk Z on Steam
arent all these total wars basically the same game?
if so that's 7.5 million copies and TW is more successful product than civ?
Civ5 has sold approximately 5.84 million copies
- Thread starter Quintillus
- Start date
if so that's 7.5 million copies and TW is more successful product than civ?
No, they aren't
The entire Civilization series sold in over 20 million copies.
Civking5
Prince
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 393
I remember when civ5 came out, some of the civ4 fans were predicting massive failure for civ5 based on what they called "bad design desision". And boy, they were wrong!
Funny thing is some of them still argue about " bad design desisions" ( and usually start their argument/ rant with sulla's outdated and biased article.)
And some of them were advising civ developers with their great wisdom to drop civ5 immediately and move to civ6. Lol
Funny thing is some of them still argue about " bad design desisions" ( and usually start their argument/ rant with sulla's outdated and biased article.)
And some of them were advising civ developers with their great wisdom to drop civ5 immediately and move to civ6. Lol
CaterpillarKing
Conqueror of Cacoons
I'm one of those rare freaks that loves civ 4 and 5.
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
glider1
Deity
You are over simplifying. If the only car available in the United States were a GM SUV and everybody who needed to drive their kids to school, drive to work and drive to do the shopping bought a GM SUV, do you think that means a SUV is a good design?
Civ5 is a dog's breakfast of a design because there has been no competition. In terms of TBS historical gaming and competition, we live in a communist central state run by Firaxis. You can't even move units in a group in this game. It is like building a manual car without a gear stick.
The post you're quoting doesn't say that the design decisions were not bad, but that the predicted mass failure of the game has clearly not eventuated.
This thread isn't the right place to re-litigate the supposed failures of Civ5 design.
PhilBowles
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2011
- Messages
- 5,333
Unlikely - R2 is at its core a mediocre entry in a series of stronger titles, and TW games have less than half the supported lifetime of a Civ game. The game structure also isn't designed to accommodate anything as substantial as Civ expansions. A lot of work was put into bringing R2 to the standard it is now, so people starting to get into it now will probably find it a serviceable game for the most part - but I doubt it will get significantly better and the designers have expressed no interest in reworking core game problems significantly (although I looked at the latest beta patch notes and they're removing movement points and forced march from newly-recruited armies, which may help ameliorate the current 'Out of position? Spawn an army and run back to defend next turn' issue).
glider1
Deity
Hmmmmm. I also gave a reason why mass failure of the game has clearly not eventuated, because there is no competition in this market and they just get high sales in a consumer market where people will buy anything that seems trendy. The company benfits by working to it's own time table. It is probably going to be FIVE YEARS probably six until we can even do basic things that we could do in previous civs, like move combined units (and that UI change cannot be modded). Bad design comes from a market where there is no competition. Just look at the market for TBS fantasy games and compare the variety of design there. Why does the civ community take this state of affairs? That Firaxis is able to sell high volume to casual gamers that play this game less than 50 hours?
Civking5
Prince
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 393
Please Stop making up delusional stories. The fact is you and a small minority like you are not able to deal/ adapt with changes in game design while majority of people play the game and enjoy it.
Also calling others casual in a game forum doesn't make you a genius. I bet I have played more civ4, eu4, ck2, total war, etc than u played, and I prefer to not be a self entitled elitist out of no where.
At the end, get over yourself.
Also calling others casual in a game forum doesn't make you a genius. I bet I have played more civ4, eu4, ck2, total war, etc than u played, and I prefer to not be a self entitled elitist out of no where.
At the end, get over yourself.
LoneRebel
Emperor
Amen.
Abraxis
☮
Consider many people may have bought civ specifically to play in offline mode on airplane trips and other situations in which they have no internet availability. The vast majority of my many, many hours have been offline.
I don't think we're rare, in fact I think we're the majority. We just don't argue about it cause we're busy playing Civ. (or recognize the futility in most internet arguments)
I don't think we're rare, in fact I think we're the majority. We just don't argue about it cause we're busy playing Civ. (or recognize the futility in most internet arguments)
I've one of those above median (having logged 879 hours atm, only very few offline hours due to a construction site round the corner). I have played almost every civ-frachise game starting with colonization. Ive got Civ4 only after second expansion and civ5 as budget (with G&K following after some days of playing. Very rarely I play older civ games, and then rather spin-offs than civ4 - SMAX and Colonization TAC.
Ultimately I think Civ 5 BNW is the best part of the series, although there are many features I miss about Civ4 BtS, like companies, colonies and sexy erotic assassin spies. The big basic flaws of earlier civ titles was expansion was key and you could switch war and peace policies to go both warmongering and building up afterwards. Civ5 is the first game where I feel growing tall is equal, if not superior, to growing wide. I know this thread is not about a battle on what game is the best, but there were some threads alluding to this eternal discussion, so just adding my opinion.
Looking forward to Beyond Earth!
Ultimately I think Civ 5 BNW is the best part of the series, although there are many features I miss about Civ4 BtS, like companies, colonies and sexy erotic assassin spies. The big basic flaws of earlier civ titles was expansion was key and you could switch war and peace policies to go both warmongering and building up afterwards. Civ5 is the first game where I feel growing tall is equal, if not superior, to growing wide. I know this thread is not about a battle on what game is the best, but there were some threads alluding to this eternal discussion, so just adding my opinion.
Looking forward to Beyond Earth!
Acken
Deity
Civ5 is a good game with mostly balance problems and a rather stupid AI.
The annoying part being that Firaxis probably will never try to rebalance Civ5 from now on.
But I've never felt Civ4 was better in that regard to be honest.
Civ5 Vanilla 1.0 wasn't that great though... G&K saved the game for me.
The annoying part being that Firaxis probably will never try to rebalance Civ5 from now on.
But I've never felt Civ4 was better in that regard to be honest.
Civ5 Vanilla 1.0 wasn't that great though... G&K saved the game for me.
Five years ?
Modding combined units move may not be an easy mod to do, but it would be a matter of weeks if not days for someone experimented.
I am pleased by the success and not at all surprised. I personally have played the game nearly every day for the last year and a quarter and still do not find it becoming stale in any way. There is just so much to involve oneself with. No other game has kept me interested for more than three months, but if I have a day off from Civ5 I get that itch to load it up again. A brilliant game with admittedly a few minor faults, but what value for money! Unfortunately my computer is in its death throes, so my fix of Brave New World is about to become interrupted for a short period
I've played every version of Civ, other than the one non-Sid Meier (Activison?) version, starting with Civ I on my Atari ST. I enjoyed both Civ IV and V. For me Civ III was the nadir of the series.
I suspect that one of the problems people have with a Civ game is that due to how much post-main release content/expansions are added to the prior game the new version never seems as expansive, complex and robust as the final version of the previous version.
On another note, apparently I hadn't logged in to this forum since July of 2006. So many changes in so many things since then.
I suspect that one of the problems people have with a Civ game is that due to how much post-main release content/expansions are added to the prior game the new version never seems as expansive, complex and robust as the final version of the previous version.
On another note, apparently I hadn't logged in to this forum since July of 2006. So many changes in so many things since then.
Mrdarklight
Warlord
Its interesting that Empire: Total War is still far and away the most popular TW game.
I'm playing Kerbal Space Program a lot, though it is nothing like Civ or TW. It makes you use your brain though.
I have over 1400 hours in Civ 5... Kind of scary.
I'm playing Kerbal Space Program a lot, though it is nothing like Civ or TW. It makes you use your brain though.
I have over 1400 hours in Civ 5... Kind of scary.
Acken
Deity
Empire was the first Total war game that really was sold on steam and therefore benefit from being there longer and having gone through more sales.
And I'd bet the fact that it was a rather weak game in its original version, something that only mods fixed, drew away many players from the next episodes. Then there's probably the appeal, shogun 2 was a good game but I can see how it's not as popular and Rome 2 was heavily criticized for being a rushed disapointing product.
With all these in consideration, I'm not that surprised Empire is first.
And I'd bet the fact that it was a rather weak game in its original version, something that only mods fixed, drew away many players from the next episodes. Then there's probably the appeal, shogun 2 was a good game but I can see how it's not as popular and Rome 2 was heavily criticized for being a rushed disapointing product.
With all these in consideration, I'm not that surprised Empire is first.
Similar threads
- Sticky
