Civilization 5 Rants Thread

Found an awesome comment on you tube. Lol.


We know why Gantor555. We know why. ;)
The opening song Babu Yetu is so epic in nature. *Sigh* :D
Civilization 5 can't hold a candle to it. No contest.
Right from the very beginning, cIV is totally more epic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5rJe-rAjW4

Longer version of that most awesome of all songs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCsDPwqWsPM&feature=related

If you can listen to that song without a tear coming to your eye you truly have no soul. ;)

Christopher Tin did a great job with that music.They could have used another song from that album http://www.christophertin.com/store.html

And what did they choose?Generic as hell.
 
Christopher Tin did a great job with that music.They could have used another song from that album http://www.christophertin.com/store.html

And what did they choose?Generic as hell.

Thanks for that. I now have many birthday and Christmas presents planned. :D

cIV really was the perfect storm. Soren Johnson and Christopher Tin working together. Beats the crap out of the motley Civilization 5 crew. (Although Knorr and Curran did a respectable job music wise, I must admit.)

Civ II had some nice music as well come to think of it. The World of Jules Verne for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFsP9_w1Qww

Anyway, pretty damn impressive for being "generic as hell". :eek:

By far his biggest break came in 2005, when Soren Johnson, his roommate at Stanford and now working as a game designer at Firaxis Games, asked him to compose the theme song for Civilization IV. Tin responded with "Baba Yetu," a choral piece performed by Stanford Talisman. Its lyrics are a Swahili version of the Lord's Prayer. It garnered a huge critical response, with over 20 reviewers singling out the theme on IGN, GameSpy, and Game Shark,[14] and is a persistent favorite of blog posts.[15] Contemporary Tommy Tallarico called it "incredible".[16] and the piece is a staple of the concert tour Video Games Live, which Tallarico organizes. It won Tin two awards at the GANG (Game Audio Network Guild) Awards in 2007.

On December 5, 2010, it was reported that "Baba Yetu" was nominated for the 53rd Annual Grammy Awards in the category for 'Best Instrumental Arrangement Accompanying Vocalists', making it the first video game theme nominated for a Grammy Award.[17] On February 13, 2011, it was announced as the winner of its category, making it also the first piece of music composed for a video game to win a Grammy Award.[18]

"Baba Yetu" has also been performed at various venues and events around the world, such as the opening ceremonies of the 2009 World Games in Kaohsiung Taiwan, The Dubai Fountain (the world’s largest water feature), concert programs at The Kennedy Center and Disney Concert Hall, and many more. Additionally, "Baba Yetu" is one of the most widely performed pieces of contemporary choral music, with hundreds of amateur choirs singing it internationally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Tin

They don't make 'em like they used to...
 
Civilization: Stanford Edition...

An immortal classic.
 
The reason I came to write that rant was because I had that "Civ" itch after months of not playing. So I loaded up Civ5. After an hour of realizing why I never play that game anymore, I came here to complain, ESPECIALLY about the stuff they "patched" which actually made the game worse!

I said I didn't want to play Civ4 because of the graphics and etc but that was before I put the disc in my tray. I've now returned after a weekend of "one more turn-itis". I am completely hooked on 4 again! I have a new computer so I maxed out the graphics and put on the highest resolution possible. It's a totally new game now! Wow. It actually looks pretty good in comparison to 5.

All the reasons I love Civ came flooding back to me. And all the reasons I hate 5 became clearer.

I really think the devs on 5 never played Civ in their entire lives. They took the basic idea of the game and then crapped on it to appeal to the console audience.

I bet there are a lot of us out there that are longing for an indepth COMPUTER strategy game. Lets see, Civ has now been ruined... The Settlers was ruined after IV... It looks like there will never be a Sim City 5... What do we have left?

I too am now back to playing civ 4 again. I played 4 for around 5 years so It got quite boring until I downloaded the RoM MOD. Now its like a new game for me also. And a more difficult one at that. So much depth to the game and the AI is very difficult to beat on the higher difficulties !

I used to play 4 at Deity everytime and won most games. Im down to Emperor now and still finding it a good challenge. I'm really loving this RoM MOD.

This just goes to show.... I cant believe im back to loving a game that was released what ? 6 years ago ? Yet the sequel released 8 months or so ago is to me by far the worst civ game of them all.

The next patch apparently will have some great balance changes in it... I wonder if that menas getting rid of all the map sizes larger than tiny so eveyone doesnt get late game crashes and we can all have a 1 city empire !
 
"What do we have left?" - I know what you mean. Our tried and true series have died a major death in search of "mass-market" appeal, who if you talk to any of them they only want to play for a couple of hours at most to get a result.

I, and many other "Strategy Gamers" here want to play a game that will take days to conclude and try different strategies, etc. By its very nature these are long games where you play your wits against a computer or human opponent, and many of us have been "chess players" as well. i.e. we want to think about our moves, etc.

I play Civ 4 mostly on "marathon" mode and on "huge" maps, so I can manage my empire for longer, have more depth of experience and also, if the going gets tough revert to another strategy mid-game and try to win. But really it is playing the game that is more important to me, then winning the game. Its the enjoyment of the experience.

When I got Civ 4, I was initially disappointed, because it was not like Civ 3 and also, it was very slow on my computer. But I persevered, playing Standard maps and none of the scenarios. When BTS game out, I played Next War alot and as it seemed a bit like "Test of Time" with extended techs. Later I discovered "Road to War", but due to my slow computer, I had to turn off all the effects like "bitter winter" and "battle effects" to be able to play.

When I finally got a new computer, I started to mod my own version of Road to War in January 2009, whereby I initially worked on changing Dale's Ultimate Edition. Firaxis released an unexpected 3.19 patch, which encouraged me to write for the original version in BTS as opposed to the Ultimate Edition (recompiled for 3.19 by Deanj). All this work eventually led me develop a comprehensively new version called Road to War - Historical), which has led to my version been downloaded over 3,000 times. Which is quite an achievement for a novice modder like me.

The point I am trying to make here is the Civ 4 is just so good because of its mods and modders, and if Civ 5 is not good enough for experienced players like ourselves, who have an interest in modding, there is not much of a future. Civ 4 is so good because of its rich variety of mods. As I said earlier in this thread, I am playing Final Frontier Plus 1.651 and there are still so many other mods for me to try.
 
Interesting reviews of Empire Earth 3 from back in 2007.

In a year of excellent RTS titles, Empire Earth 3 has nothing to offer. In an effort to garner mass appeal, the game has been dumbed down to the point of irrelevancy. Series fans have no reason to return, and newcomers have no reason to show up in the first place. Empire Earth 3 is the epitome of a video game series' death knell.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/gamingreviews/empireearth3/index.php

Closing Comments
Fans of the series will be sad to see that this version of Empire Earth has been stripped of the depth and detail that made the first two games so attractive. I mean, it's not as if there's a shortage of shallow RTS games already, so seeing one of our favorite series effectively lobotomized is a real shock. Putting aside the damage that it's done to the brand, we might be able to appreciate the simplicity that Mad Doc was trying to go for here. Unfortunately, the horrible pathfinding and weak AI render any discussion about the overall concept or branding moot.

When you add in substandard performance, outdated visuals and jokes that completely spoil the mood, you've got more than enough reasons to pass this one up. If you're looking for something more worthwhile to waste your money on, why not just buy some of that horrible Ham Soda?

http://pc.ign.com/articles/836/836093p3.html

PC PowerPlay
Empire Earth is a disappointment; a title that snubs its core audience only to ineptly target a new one. [Jan 2008, p.57]

Games Master UK
In an attempt to be a game for all, it turned into a game for no one. [Jan 2008, p.78]

45

Jolt Online Gaming UK

Removing micromanagement is one thing, but when the gameplay goes out of the door with it, it becomes a serious case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Eurogamer

Empire Earth 3 simply tries too hard to be popular. In doing so, it strips out everything that made it good in the first place and forgets to replace it with something equally worthwhile.

http://apps.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/empireearth3

Sounds familiar doesn't it?
 
"Sounds familiar doesn't it? " ... Are they any links to bad reviews of Civ 5 from mainstream websites like above ?
 
"Sounds familiar doesn't it? " ... Are they any links to bad reviews of Civ 5 from mainstream websites like above ?

What I meant was from the fan's perspective.

The big game reviewers must have not been paid off enough by Sierra.

2K Games ensured the wheels were properly greased so to speak.
 
1. City States. The existence of city states is cool. The implementation is awful for several reasons. First, they're way too powerful. The easiest way to win is to build a strong economy and then start buying city states as allies. Typically by the mid-game I'm getting more science from city states than my own cities. Paying city states isn't fun; it's tedious. LOL at the quests. Why should I engage in a question when I can just pay them?

Second, city-states make a diplomatic victory way too easy. All you have to do is buy them.

Third, the provision of units by militaristic city states is just asinine. Hey developers: Did you ever play this game? Apparently you did because you made it possible to turn off unit spawning. As you must have realized, unit spawning is ******ed. I don't want a rifleman on an island out in the middle of nowhere on an archipelago map. It's just a hassle. Quite frankly, I don't want a riflemen anywhere, any time. How about a science city state? Too obvious?

2. Warfare. Horrible. Offensive-minded warfare is clearly not worth the cost (gold and opportunity) and unhappiness if you're just trying to win. Moreover, it's way too easy to defend your own city. Thus, sensible "warfare" in Civ 5 consists of at most building walls, garrisoning a state-of-the-art unit, and maintaining enough gold reserves to buy a state-of-the-art unit here or there in the event the AI sends lots of troops.

Most of the units suck. There are only a few units that have any utility (e.g., swordsman, longswordsman, cannon). Horses are a joke. I laugh in despair when the AI purchase my horses for a large sum. What are they going to do with them? Send them at my cities to die immediately from ranged attacks? Developers, did you ever play this game? Did you ever try to accomplish anything with horse-based units?

3. Diplomacy. Ugh. So superficial, so forced. Diplomacy in Civ V is so half-assed that the game would be better off without it. There are only two purposes for talking to other civs: 1) Trade luxury resources; 2) Sell luxury or strategic resources (especially HORSES--I'd sell a horse for one gold but ******ed AI civs will give me 100+ per horse). Everything else is a waste of time.

4. God this game is boring. BORING BORING BORING. I don't want to watch the Aztecs engage in a pointless war against Venice. It's so ******ed to attack a city-state given the fact that (for completely incomprehensible reasons) it's far better to pay a city-state than to own it. Regardless, the AI can't even figure out how to capture Venice. LOL. Everything that happens in the game is pointless.

Moderator Action: Merged into the rants thread.
 
The only site I know of that was willing to tell "the truth" (or part thereof) about Civilization V was 1Up. The rest of them gave Civ V glowing reviews. Obviously most of the reviewers never played an earlier version of Civ or were willing to be critical of the publisher and developer.

Linkage: Civilization V 1up Review
 
So stop playing.


What I mean is, you say you aren't enjoying yourself. So then play something else I guess.

Moderator Action: Please ensure that your posts are conducive to civil discussion.
 
Horses were extremely powerful when the game was first released..

Even when i have owned nearly all city states on the map the science i recieved from them was that of not even half of the science my own cities output

going on an offensive war early is the most efficient way to when diety. calling it worthless is a joke..

yes the ai is not great but it is getting better. maybe you should try higher difficulties?
 
Welcome ,Mabey post in the rants section? Im sorry if i sound not to welcoming but these threads use to plaugh the whole civ 5 forums so theres some hostility. Trust me the majority of the people at the civ 4 forums agree with you. You may find alot of "civ 5 nationalists" here such as my self.
 
1. City States. The existence of city states is cool. The implementation is awful for several reasons. First, they're way too powerful. The easiest way to win is to build a strong economy and then start buying city states as allies. Typically by the mid-game I'm getting more science from city states than my own cities. Paying city states isn't fun; it's tedious. LOL at the quests. Why should I engage in a question when I can just pay them?

Second, city-states make a diplomatic victory way too easy. All you have to do is buy them.

Third, the provision of units by militaristic city states is just asinine. Hey developers: Did you ever play this game? Apparently you did because you made it possible to turn off unit spawning. As you must have realized, unit spawning is ******ed. I don't want a rifleman on an island out in the middle of nowhere on an archipelago map. It's just a hassle. Quite frankly, I don't want a riflemen anywhere, any time. How about a science city state? Too obvious?

2. Warfare. Horrible. Offensive-minded warfare is clearly not worth the cost (gold and opportunity) and unhappiness if you're just trying to win. Moreover, it's way too easy to defend your own city. Thus, sensible "warfare" in Civ 5 consists of at most building walls, garrisoning a state-of-the-art unit, and maintaining enough gold reserves to buy a state-of-the-art unit here or there in the event the AI sends lots of troops.

Most of the units suck. There are only a few units that have any utility (e.g., swordsman, longswordsman, cannon). Horses are a joke. I laugh in despair when the AI purchase my horses for a large sum. What are they going to do with them? Send them at my cities to die immediately from ranged attacks? Developers, did you ever play this game? Did you ever try to accomplish anything with horse-based units?

3. Diplomacy. Ugh. So superficial, so forced. Diplomacy in Civ V is so half-assed that the game would be better off without it. There are only two purposes for talking to other civs: 1) Trade luxury resources; 2) Sell luxury or strategic resources (especially HORSES--I'd sell a horse for one gold but ******ed AI civs will give me 100+ per horse). Everything else is a waste of time.

4. God this game is boring. BORING BORING BORING. I don't want to watch the Aztecs engage in a pointless war against Venice. It's so ******ed to attack a city-state given the fact that (for completely incomprehensible reasons) it's far better to pay a city-state than to own it. Regardless, the AI can't even figure out how to capture Venice. LOL. Everything that happens in the game is pointless.

Moderator Action: Merged into the rants thread.

Welcome to the forums.

Sorry for the rude reception that you got. All your points are valid.

The game was poorly designed and released at least one year too early.
 
I wonder if this is the biggest thread in the general discussion forum.


I just checked, for fun.
I sorted all non-stickied thread by replies.

Rant thread comes in 25th place

Among the 24 bigger threads :
- 12 are pre-release discussions
- 3 are discussions about Steam
- 2 are other rants and critic thread (Sulla's analysis)
- rest is mostly patch notes

Quite impressive!!
 
I just checked, for fun.
I sorted all non-stickied thread by replies.

Rant thread comes in 25th place

Among the 24 bigger threads :
- 12 are pre-release discussions
- 3 are discussions about Steam
- 2 are other rants and critic thread (Sulla's analysis)
- rest is mostly patch notes

Quite impressive!!

That's an achievement. Why don't we all just make this huge topic now congratulating the devs on their magnificent work? You know, so they can continue to make a new DLC every weekend and not to fix the game or not to make a new one that's an improvement and not a step back?
 
Sure-fire way to win on Diety. You cannot possibly lose if you follow this advice.

Play as Siam. Build four cities. Do not expand into territory the AI might want to expand into. Build a strong economy (trade routes, banks, markets). Run down the patronage line. Buy every city state. Focus science on obtaining UN. Build UN.
 
Sure-fire way to win on Diety. You cannot possibly lose if you follow this advice.

Play as Siam. Build four cities. Do not expand into territory the AI might want to expand into. Build a strong economy (trade routes, banks, markets). Run down the patronage line. Buy every city state. Focus science on obtaining UN. Build UN.

I think you underestimate my skill at losing ;)
With focus and determination,
... I was able to achieve a loss even on settler. :mischief:
... (wait for it)
... PRE-PATCH!!! :goodjob:

Seriously,
... finding new and creative ways to lose
... can be a blast with a game this boring. :D
 
I think you underestimate my skill at losing ;)
With focus and determination,
... I was able to achieve a loss even on settler. :mischief:
... (wait for it)
... PRE-PATCH!!! :goodjob:

Seriously,
... finding new and creative ways to lose
... can be a blast with a game this boring. :D

Playing to lose while the AI laughably "plays to win."

There might be a method to your madness. Lol.
 
Top Bottom