3 reasons for civ 4 over civ 5

Stauffenberg wants diversity on the map and not a handful of tile improvements to choose from to fill the whole map.
In civ 5 this was clearly an improvement over civ 4. Natural wonders, landmarks, etc.
In civ 6 it only gets better with wonders + districts on tiles, because they interact with other tiles get more bonuses. (science, culture, gold, faith, etc.)
One the of reasons I loved SMAC so much. The player could shape the landscape he or she wanted by terraforming it.
In civ 4 and older versions the player developed a compulsive need to spam cities everywhere and fill it's territory with tile improvements.
And if you didn't expand, the AI would take all the land. The civ 5 AI still has that behaviour when ideologies come into play.

Lemon Merchant said:

It was in Canadian dollars, so for me it's $80 out of my pocket, no matter the exchange rate. That means I pay almost $20 more for a game than you do. Not exactly fair. Australians have it even worse.

Click to expand...

It may cost you more in Canadian dollars, but Canadian dollars don't correspond to US dollars 1:1, which was my point. $60 US is worth $78.08 Canadian, so the game is marginally more expensive for you in real terms.

This is because it's not the dollar amount itself that matters, but what you can buy with it. The exchange rate of $60 US to $78.08 Canadian implies that you can buy the same amount of actual stuff with each of these dollar amounts - some groceries perhaps, or a video game like Civ VI

Now, you might rightly point out that within Canada, the amount of real stuff that $80 buys you varies depending where you live - and that would be another way that the game might be more expensive for you, again in real as opposed to nominal terms. If you live somewhere with a lower-than-average cost of living, you would probably also get paid less than someone doing comparable work in a more expensive place, and thus the game would be more costly for you in real terms than for someone living in that more expensive place.

Tatran said:

Stauffenberg wants diversity on the map and not a handful of tile improvements to choose from to fill the whole map.

Click to expand...

Problem being..Stauffenberg and most who complain that you need so many workers and fill so many tiles are probably not very good players.

Good players know they can handle stuff with less workers (in our deity games over at tips & strategy, we have seen ~3 workers for ~6 cities often..).
They also know cities need not every tile improved.

They know the game.
Guys complaining what was tedious usually do not know the game.

Fippy said:

Problem being..Stauffenberg and most who complain that you need so many workers and fill so many tiles are probably not very good players.

Good players know they can handle stuff with less workers (in our deity games over at tips & strategy, we have seen ~3 workers for ~6 cities often..).
They also know cities need not every tile improved.

They know the game.
Guys complaining what was tedious usually do not know the game.

Click to expand...

Is the contention here that making the game feel tedious to new players is good for the long-term financial health of the company and the popularity of the title?

On the other hand, I would say that Civ 5 has the worst tedium model from 3-5 as far as workers go, since you're no longer allowed to stack them to speed things up.

Bandobras Took said:

Is the contention here that making the game feel tedious to new players is good for the long-term financial health of the company and the popularity of the title?

Click to expand...

Hobbit logic again? Great.
We all know they probably make more money with simple games, but what does that do for us.

What's so tedious about controlling some workers..
geez the newbie Civ4 diff. levels are so easy, you could only improve your specials and win. Guys like Stauffenberg act like Civ4 is all about tile improvement only, what do i know why people feel tired in games..

It's just becoming annoying when they think they are in any form believable in their game reviews, any halfway talented gamer knows when he should learn more before shouting out sorry that's tedious, please remove.

Lexicus said:

It may cost you more in Canadian dollars, but Canadian dollars don't correspond to US dollars 1:1, which was my point. $60 US is worth $78.08 Canadian, so the game is marginally more expensive for you in real terms.

Click to expand...

I agree with your reasoning here, and I know what you are trying to say. However, in terms of purchasing power, and what I know of US prices buying books and computer hardware as a comparison, it seems that $50 US is worth about $80 CDN. Canadians seem to pay a heavy price for cross border shopping. In fact, I once heard a government official the Canadian Finance Ministry, quoted in the newspaper, saying that Canadians don't mind paying higher prices for their goods and services compared to Americans. Absolutely stupid.

No, the thing that gets me about the Civ 6 price of $80 is not the exchange rate, but the fact that Steam operates in Canada as well as the US. My regional Steam server is in Montreal. They operate locally, why can't they price games locally? Why should I have to pay US exchange pricing from a company which operates in my own country?

I understand the exchange rate, but why is it necessary? Civ 5, IIRC, was the same price in Canada as it was in the US. What has changed?
This is because it's not the dollar amount itself that matters, but what you can buy with it. The exchange rate of $60 US to $78.08 Canadian implies that you can buy the same amount of actual stuff with each of these dollar amounts - some groceries perhaps, or a video game like Civ VI

Now, you might rightly point out that within Canada, the amount of real stuff that $80 buys you varies depending where you live - and that would be another way that the game might be more expensive for you, again in real as opposed to nominal terms. If you live somewhere with a lower-than-average cost of living, you would probably also get paid less than someone doing comparable work in a more expensive place, and thus the game would be more costly for you in real terms than for someone living in that more expensive place.[/QUOTE]

Lemon Merchant said:

I agree with your reasoning here, and I know what you are trying to say. However, in terms of purchasing power, and what I know of US prices buying books and computer hardware as a comparison, it seems that $50 US is worth about $80 CDN. Canadians seem to pay a heavy price for cross border shopping. In fact, I once heard a government official the Canadian Finance Ministry, quoted in the newspaper, saying that Canadians don't mind paying higher prices for their goods and services compared to Americans. Absolutely stupid.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily stupid; I for example would be willing to pay significantly more for a computer game if I could be assured for example that all the workers involved in the development process had been well-treated and well-paid.

Lemon Merchant said:

No, the thing that gets me about the Civ 6 price of $80 is not the exchange rate, but the fact that Steam operates in Canada as well as the US. My regional Steam server is in Montreal. They operate locally, why can't they price games locally? Why should I have to pay US exchange pricing from a company which operates in my own country?

Click to expand...

AFAIK it's not Steam but Firaxis(?) who decides what the price of it will be. I'm not sure what the scope of their operations are, or whether they operate in Canada. I'd guess that they come up with a price based on where they think the biggest market will be, and I would imagine for Civ games that's the US.

Lemon Merchant said:

I understand the exchange rate, but why is it necessary? Civ 5, IIRC, was the same price in Canada as it was in the US. What has changed?

Click to expand...

No idea, but if Civ V was the same number of Canadian dollars as American dollars it was cheaper for Canadians. Maybe it's as simple as people who decided what the game should cost learned about exchange rates

Originally Posted by Lemon Merchant
I understand the exchange rate, but why is it necessary? Civ 5, IIRC, was the same price in Canada as it was in the US. What has changed?

Click to expand...

That was several years ago. At that time there was parity between the US and Canadian dollars, ie at that time the exchange rate was $1 US = $1 Canadian. There was a brief time shortly thereafter when the Canadian dollar was actually worth more than the US dollar. That said, I think that it is unreasonable for something like a game that they will soon sell for ten bucks or so.

Fippy said:

what do i know why people feel tired in games..

when he should learn more before shouting out

Click to expand...

I'll let that speak for itself.

s.bernbaum said:

That was several years ago. At that time there was parity between the US and Canadian dollars, ie at that time the exchange rate was $1 US = $1 Canadian. There was a brief time shortly thereafter when the Canadian dollar was actually worth more than the US dollar. That said, I think that it is unreasonable for something like a game that they will soon sell for ten bucks or so.

Click to expand...

Correction to what I said. I didn't realize this was the case.

What's so hard about adding options in the game set up.
Control workers YES/NO
Etc.
That was the beauty of 4. You got to choose.