More Civ, Less Fanatic

Buccaneer said:

You are obviously overlooking the many threads, esp. in Strategy and Tips, where there are good intellectual discussions and debates going on about the strengths and weaknesses of the game. Given many peoples differing perception (and attacks/defenses) of the game, one has to clearly point out fallacies and misconceptions, as well as outright lies, in order to get more at the truths (e.g. Aussie's post is right on the money, imo). But other than that, there are many ideas being thrown around in a lot of threads, why don't you participate in some of those instead of babysitting this one?

Click to expand...

Maybe you should review my posting history before making such declarations.

And if you note, I said "Everyone." I am not sure if that translates to "Aussie" in your language. If so, my mistake.

Aussie hit it on the nail, once again. I think most of the detractors, me included, see that net loss of depth and features as the biggest negative of them all. Sure, the AI is pale, but modders have shown before that they can fix almost anything with the right tools and time. If you look closer to most of the sincere complains (sincere as in "no trying to rant"), you will find that they are not focusing on the AI or other technical aspects of the game, but on the complete lack of depth and the abscence of what I (and probably many others) see as the "core" of the franchise. Now THAT is the main complain, worry, call it whatever you want.

The first problem with that is that it probably cannot be fixed. The second problem with that is that it signals a trend that for many of us is not "encouraging", so to speak. In my case, at least, and I have said it many times before, I feel that this iteration signals the start of the mediocrization of the series. No offense intended, but that is what I feel. Is that good? Depends: from one point of view, if that brings the "mass market" to the cash register in order to further support the series, it may be good. But then again, why would I want the series to survive with this new mediocre face?

That inherent contradiction is what makes me (and probably many others) hopeless. Sure, the money from the "casuals" will help the franchise survive (although I'm not sure if it is that vital, because the franchise has survived for 20 years riding on the backs of the "hardcores"), but for what? The "casuals" will abandon the series as soon as they get bored, and winning at deity without thinking will sure bore them, as well as anyone else... so, after the short term hit in finances, who will be there to continue playing (and buying)?

My answer: I don't know. The problem is, this is the first time in the series that my answer about its future is "I don't know".

Aussie_Lurker said:

Civ4 also had far more content, again, than Civ3
...
disposing only of things like "whack-a-mole" pollution & corruption.

Click to expand...

Lets not forget that Civ3 had true Ranged combat while Civ4 didn't (AI not being able to use it in Civ3 being besides the point).

Similar then Civ2: Test of Time had build in support for up to 4 seperate maps, a feature which had many uses that has yet to be included again (even just a latent DLL support for multiple maps would be nice).

Aussie_Lurker said:

This leaves Civ5 as the game with the smallest amount of *net gain in features* between any two versions of the franchise

Click to expand...

If by "smallest amount" you actually mean "negative amount" then I would agree.

CyberChrist said:

Lets not forget that Civ3 had true Ranged combat while Civ4 didn't (AI not being able to use it in Civ3 being besides the point).

Similar then Civ2: Test of Time had build in support for up to 4 seperate maps, a feature which had many uses that has yet to be included again (even just a latent DLL support for multiple maps would be nice).



If by "smallest amount" you actually mean "negative amount" then I would agree.

Click to expand...

Cyber-for the basis of *fair* comparison, I'm only using the Vanilla versions of each game in the franchise. Yes, ToT did a *lot* of very interesting things to the game, but not everyone bought ToT (I only got it because it was bundled in with something else ).
Its true that Civ3 had ranged combat & Civ4 didn't, but that still leaves Civ4 way ahead of Civ5 in terms of the "net gain of features". The worst part, though, is that even the stuff they *did* add to Civ5 feels like it was added as an afterthought (especially in relation to the AI). I feel like ranged combat is almost as overpowered as it was in Civ3-especially when I read of longbowmen sinking destroyers. City-States, once the initial novelty wears off, are actually incredibly dull & transparent, most Wonders are now very bland & almost not worth building, & the social policy tree & Unique Abilities all definitely feel imbalanced.
Now Civ4 wasn't perfect in its initial implementation, but I never got the feeling like I was playing a game that was rushed out the door in a half-finished state. I most certainly *never* felt the need to play Civ4 with Mods *just* so I could enjoy the vanilla game experience. Not claims I can make in regards to Civ5 (which I *only* play with the Balance Mods in place!)

Aussie.

Aussie_Lurker said:

Cyber-for the basis of *fair* comparison, I'm only using the Vanilla versions of each game in the franchise.

Click to expand...

Imo then the whole "only compare Vanilla with Vanilla" approach only works as far as comparing the amount of serious bugs that initially needs to be ironed out in order for a game to work as intended. As far as basic concepts and fun factor goes then any new Vanilla version should be at least a match for the previous complete installments of the same series.

Anyway, you are preaching to the choir - in case you didn't realize it then my post was not in defence of Civ5, but just in the spirit of fairness.

I thought I would bring this back up. I feel like I am reading more of the "haters" and "lovers" posts recently, but maybe I am just reading the forums more, recently.

Let's have another truce. I am disappointed with the game and it's not the direction I would have chosen, but I still play it and I do look forward to playing it. I am not trying to hate on people who like the game. I like expressing my opinions and am not trying to encroach on other people's opinions.

One thing I enjoy in 5 is getting to a won game and turning off the hexes and resource icons and just staring at all the roads I built in. I build a hell of a lot of roads if I can afford it. Double-wide roads and multiple routes to cities. I don't like to individually move my units one tile at a time, especially in my own territory, so I build tons of roads so they have room to move around one another. I hill the sh** out of hilly areas that get heavily used. I usually build some aesthetic forts at the borders and have tons of roads there, in case I want to move some units around. Then when clicking next turn, I just kind of look at how I built all those roads and how much simpler it is to move a couple of units around. It looks pretty nice, and I feel somewhat satisfied.

It's a pain having those workers do it and in close games at higher difficulties it is not very affordable or practical, but it does make navigation and unitpathing somewhat more manageable. So I like that. Looking at my Civ without hexes or resource icons at the end of the game when I am just running out the clock.

Anyone who disagrees with me is a commie rat and should have their username revoked.

Holy cow dude this is one hell of a necropost...

As for the love/hate relationship Civ 5 has with CFC, meh. I tend to just ignore it and play the game when I feel like it.

Besides, "Even if the boxed version of Civ 5 came with a 100$ bill in it, people would still complain that it wasn't folded correctly."

joyous_gard said:

I thought I would bring this back up. I feel like I am reading more of the "haters" and "lovers" posts recently, but maybe I am just reading the forums more, recently.

Let's have another truce. I am disappointed with the game and it's not the direction I would have chosen, but I still play it and I do look forward to playing it. I am not trying to hate on people who like the game. I like expressing my opinions and am not trying to encroach on other people's opinions.

One thing I enjoy in 5 is getting to a won game and turning off the hexes and resource icons and just staring at all the roads I built in. I build a hell of a lot of roads if I can afford it. Double-wide roads and multiple routes to cities. I don't like to individually click my units to move them, so I build tons of roads so they have room to move around obstructions. I hill the sh** out of hilly areas that get heavily used. I usually build some aesthetic forts at the borders and have tons of roads there, in case I want to move some units around. Then when clicking next turn, I just kind of look at how I built all those roads and how much simpler it is to move a couple of units around.
It's a pain having those workers do it and in close games at higher difficulties it is not very affordable or practical, but it does make navigation and unitpathing somewhat more manageable. So I like that. Looking at my Civ without hexes or resource icons at the end of the game when I am just running out the clock.

Anyone who disagrees with me is a commie rat and should have their username revoked.

Click to expand...

Here, here...

good for you that you brought this back. Having been one of the most acid "haters" before, I sign your petition without a doubt.

Imagine, read this thread again and then consider that PawelS, charon2112 and myself are now forum friends (and talks about forming a group of "fanboys" and "haters" have began... we still lack a name though... "fanhaters" maybe ? ).

I'm all for the truce. A final, definitive truce. And then, all together, let's kick the Assignment of the devs so that they polish the game and add more features...

Venereus said:

Not a mod, not your job. Don't try to tell people what to do.
Moderator Action: And you're also not one. Don't troll here, contribute, don't spam.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Click to expand...

I lol'd at this. Nice try.