eastsidebagel
Deity
After some months of its release, were you dissapointed by the game when you actually played it?
CivRev: A dissapointment?
- Thread starter eastsidebagel
- Start date
bonafide11
Worker
I have trouble saying I was disappointed in it because I like Civ Rev a lot, but there's definitely some room for improvement. Maybe I had too high of expectations for it.
eastsidebagel
Deity
People also said that Civilization is just a game you can't successfully convert to a console. But what bonafide said is the general tone I'm hearing a lot about this latest offspring of the Civ series:
Not even close to excellent, but...acceptable.
Not even close to excellent, but...acceptable.
Kadazzle
Emperor
I'd say it was excellent! The problem is, is that people thought it would literally be Civ 4, but for the console. Which, obviously now that a lot of people have played it, they have realized that it is not. I love the game, but I think they dumbed it down a little too much. The gameplay is awesome, but adding things like personalities, religion and civics would make the game a load more fun. I do love the war mechanic in this game way more than I like Civ 4's, though.
Over-all I was not disappointed, but like what Bonafide said, there is room for improvement.
Over-all I was not disappointed, but like what Bonafide said, there is room for improvement.
For the true "Civ fanatic", I suppose it could be a disappointment. After all, many thought (or at least hoped) that this would be "Civ5", despite frequent denials from Firaxis, and the constant touting of it being "streamlined" for faster play.
For myself, I'm still excited about it. I still play it. Of course, I took Firaxis at their word when they said it was streamlined (I hesitate to say "simplified") to attract the console-only players, get some of their money, and hopefully attract some of them to the more "complete" world of PC-Civ.
For myself, I'm still excited about it. I still play it. Of course, I took Firaxis at their word when they said it was streamlined (I hesitate to say "simplified") to attract the console-only players, get some of their money, and hopefully attract some of them to the more "complete" world of PC-Civ.
kadazzle can you please explain me exactly how the game is dumb downed please? I see the game streamlined, tonned down, and faster play, but not dumbed down.
Please expalin why you say dumbed down, because that is pretty insulting without proper explanation.
Please expalin why you say dumbed down, because that is pretty insulting without proper explanation.
eastsidebagel
Deity
Insulting to whom? Firaxis? Forgive me then, Firaxis, for saying that I'd never buy your product because CivRev just seems to be a bit incomplete and made without thinking about it first. I mean, just look at the screwed up AI! That's the biggest failure I have to complain about!
Kadazzle
Emperor
Dumbed-down in the sense that you dont have individual worker units, there are no strengths/weaknesses to units (Besides the obvious strength, but I mean Axes being goo vs. Meele units, Spears being good vs. mounted units etc), and there are no civics. You cant create an economy, only add infrastructure to the built-in game economy. I see the reason they dont have civics, its because of the lack of an economy.
Those are the reasons I can think of off the top of my head. Sorry for the bad grammar and punctuation, my keyboard is acting up.
Those are the reasons I can think of off the top of my head. Sorry for the bad grammar and punctuation, my keyboard is acting up.
I love the game and still play it after several months. However, as with all games I own, there is room for improvement and hopes for a better game when/if a sequel comes out. I wouldn't like it go down the route of micromanagement (as in Civ4) but to make it better in its own right, e.g., stronger/smarter AI, personalities for AIs, better/larger diplomacy, a potential option for a larger map size on SP.
Not insulting to Firaxis, because they deserve all the critism espically when they toot their own horn. But when you say it's just dumbed down, that is insulting to me and people who like the game.
You say dumbed down, so if the game is dumbed down, does that mean were are dumb or stupid because we like the game? I don't think you ment it that way, I that is how I read it the first time and had to reread again. It just seems too many people just say the word too easily without really explaining themselves properly.
Kadazzle
Emperor
I explained myself above.
As for your latest post, I say it is dumbed-down, not because I think the people playing it are dumbed-down, but due to the fact that it is dumbed-down compared to Civ4 and Civ3. As well, I don't think if you like the game you are stupid or dumb. As I said in my first post, I like the game a lot, and as proof, you usually can see me scrolling and contributing in this forum. Just because I say it is dumbed-down, does not mean I don't like the game.
As for your latest post, I say it is dumbed-down, not because I think the people playing it are dumbed-down, but due to the fact that it is dumbed-down compared to Civ4 and Civ3. As well, I don't think if you like the game you are stupid or dumb. As I said in my first post, I like the game a lot, and as proof, you usually can see me scrolling and contributing in this forum. Just because I say it is dumbed-down, does not mean I don't like the game.
bonafide11
Worker
I don't think he meant "dumbed down" as an insult, he just means it's much more simplified than the PC versions of the game, which it is.
I see what you mean now Kadazzle. Sorry I missread it, had a very long day at work, rough week, I was tired when I came on the forums and misread your post. Sorry about that.
I am playing the game now, and I am loving it. Well it's only my 2nd game. Will have to see when I play my 20th game if I have the same opnion, but so far, I am loving it.Getting tech every 5 turns, is a bit of a turn off, but having combat more faster is good, something different witch I don't see in a Civ game.
Wish there was bigger maps, but considering this is a first time to console, I think it is good. I don't see anyother games like this. I agree with you, there is room for improvement.
I do hope we get an expansion or Civ Rev2 will come out.
I am playing the game now, and I am loving it. Well it's only my 2nd game. Will have to see when I play my 20th game if I have the same opnion, but so far, I am loving it.Getting tech every 5 turns, is a bit of a turn off, but having combat more faster is good, something different witch I don't see in a Civ game.
Wish there was bigger maps, but considering this is a first time to console, I think it is good. I don't see anyother games like this. I agree with you, there is room for improvement.
I do hope we get an expansion or Civ Rev2 will come out.
calico
Chieftain
i like it, but it does seem a but dumbed down. why do other civs declare war for absolutely no reason?
there are many other things but i'm happy to ignore them as i still enjoy the game. the only thing i wish they'd included is being able to carry on playing after the match has been won
there are many other things but i'm happy to ignore them as i still enjoy the game. the only thing i wish they'd included is being able to carry on playing after the match has been won
ColdWizard
Ancient
Given that I have only played a few times, only paid around $10, and expected little from a "civ on the go" game (I have the DS version), I am not disappointed.
Similar threads
