Civilization 5 Rants Thread

Here's my rant.

I'm getting that urge to play Civilization again. But which one? I don't want to play 4 mainly because the graphics are ugly and dated. I also don't want to play because there is a specific way I play all of my games and I never deviate from that path.

I don't want to play 5 because it is a steaming pile of crap. The thing that pisses me off the most about 5 is the OVERWHELMING feeling of "encumbrance". Playing this game is not enjoyable because they put so much crap on your shoulders that weighs you down and prevents you from actually having a good time.

I want to play a classic Epic style game, but in 5, all Epic means is turns are multiplied by 5. Sure you have 5 times longer to play, but it also takes 5 times longer to build anything!

I want to build a Civilization that is robust and prosperous. Truly, a Civ where "the sun never sets". Sorry, after more than 4 cities it will become impossible to maintain happiness and you will never unlock another social policy. Lesson learned? Build fewer cities. Have a small empire. Is THIS the game we all know and love??

I want to build a huge army. Sorry, everything in this game costs an insane amount of money (even the roads). No money to support a large army. Better just have 1 experienced unit that you send everywhere. Furthermore, 1 unit per hex makes it so impossible and frustrating to move more than 1 unit around at a time that I'm not even going to bother.

I want to launch a huge attack on an enemy that occupies another continent with a massive sea borne assault. Sorry, the RIDICULOUS embarkation system in this game coupled with 1 upt makes that so frustrating that it's a logistical nightmare. Furthermore, why risk losing all my units it took 40 turns each to build to an errant pirate ship? Since all pre industrial naval units have a line of sight of no more than, what 2 tiles, it's impossible to protect your units. It can also take 3-4 turns to destroy an enemy ship. And in each turn they can destroy one of your units that it took 40 turns to build!

Simply put, this game is so much work (and frustrating) that it's simply not fun to play. Hopefully I can pick up a copy of BTS.

Don't forget colonization, slightly better graphics than Civ4, great for a change of pace, and some decent mods of you get bored.

Personally the graphics in Civ 5, appart from the mountains and sea, for me are a steaming pile of junk, I can't even play it without my eyes bleeding.

The new game coming out, from 1850 to 1920 looks awesome. From the last vestiges of wooden ships and iron men to, Steam Turbine Powered SUPER DREADNAUGHTS!
 
Don't forget colonization, slightly better graphics than Civ4, great for a change of pace, and some decent mods of you get bored.

Personally the graphics in Civ 5, appart from the mountains and sea, for me are a steaming pile of junk, I can't even play it without my eyes bleeding.

The new game coming out, from 1850 to 1920 looks awesome. From the last vestiges of wooden ships and iron men to, Steam Turbine Powered SUPER DREADNAUGHTS!

What game is that?

I have Colonization and it's even more frustrating than Civ 5. Too much micro managing and I never win.

Plus I don't like how cities only work the 9 tiles surrounding it!
 
Don't forget colonization, slightly better graphics than Civ4, great for a change of pace, and some decent mods of you get bored.

Personally the graphics in Civ 5, appart from the mountains and sea, for me are a steaming pile of junk, I can't even play it without my eyes bleeding.

The new game coming out, from 1850 to 1920 looks awesome. From the last vestiges of wooden ships and iron men to, Steam Turbine Powered SUPER DREADNAUGHTS!

Agreed. For a game so centered on graphics, Civilization 5 still doesn't look so hot. The mountains, deserts, ice and the sea are much improved but the rivers and railroads still look awful. :(

Pride of Nations concentrates less on graphics (although I still think they are elegant) and more on gameplay and realism. For example, 500 different leader attributes and thousands of different historical leaders plus a fairly accurate economics system. It may be more limited in scope than Civilization 5 but I feel it will be the superior product overall. Each playable nation (8 great powers at the moment) will be vastly different from the others and will offer a unique insight into why history unfolded the way it did. For example, why did Italy later on join the Axis powers in the years leading up to World War II? Primarily due to a lack of coal and the means to obtain it and that will be reflected in the game. Looking forward to an accurate simulation of the time Victorian time period and an actual fun game to boot.

Civilization always was a history lite game (a fun one however) but it's now been relegated to merely being a beer and pretzels/fluff game. It's more a game than an experience now with the latest iteration. For me and many others, that leaves us wanting more.

As far as Colonization goes, it was not bad but it left you wanting much, much more as well. Improved graphics from cIV but nothing really amazing gameplay wise. :(
 
i think this shows that civ5 is a botched game when we think about it. guess what i found this time. yeah satellites come BEFORE electronics. are the developers stupid or something?? i'm tired to rant about the game but i can't help myself. please forgive me.
and the hydro plant is just a joke. it takes aluminum, takes x2.5 or so production time compared to the windmill, cost x1.5 more to maintain than the windmill and yet give less than the windmill.. there are so many things i could list that don't make sense.
so much disappointment. this game is OVERRATED yet very addictive..in short, it's evil.
 
I disagree.

civ5 is not addictive.

I find it about as addictive as banging your head against a wall.

It doesn't feel good while you are doing it but it sure feels good when you stop. ;)
 
Here's my rant.

I'm getting that urge to play Civilization again. But which one? I don't want to play 4 mainly because the graphics are ugly and dated. I also don't want to play because there is a specific way I play all of my games and I never deviate from that path.

I don't want to play 5 because it is a steaming pile of crap. The thing that pisses me off the most about 5 is the OVERWHELMING feeling of "encumbrance". Playing this game is not enjoyable because they put so much crap on your shoulders that weighs you down and prevents you from actually having a good time.

I want to play a classic Epic style game, but in 5, all Epic means is turns are multiplied by 5. Sure you have 5 times longer to play, but it also takes 5 times longer to build anything!

I want to build a Civilization that is robust and prosperous. Truly, a Civ where "the sun never sets". Sorry, after more than 4 cities it will become impossible to maintain happiness and you will never unlock another social policy. Lesson learned? Build fewer cities. Have a small empire. Is THIS the game we all know and love??

I want to build a huge army. Sorry, everything in this game costs an insane amount of money (even the roads). No money to support a large army. Better just have 1 experienced unit that you send everywhere. Furthermore, 1 unit per hex makes it so impossible and frustrating to move more than 1 unit around at a time that I'm not even going to bother.

I want to launch a huge attack on an enemy that occupies another continent with a massive sea borne assault. Sorry, the RIDICULOUS embarkation system in this game coupled with 1 upt makes that so frustrating that it's a logistical nightmare. Furthermore, why risk losing all my units it took 40 turns each to build to an errant pirate ship? Since all pre industrial naval units have a line of sight of no more than, what 2 tiles, it's impossible to protect your units. It can also take 3-4 turns to destroy an enemy ship. And in each turn they can destroy one of your units that it took 40 turns to build!

Simply put, this game is so much work (and frustrating) that it's simply not fun to play. Hopefully I can pick up a copy of BTS.

Im sorry but I never post here but I just had to when I read this it made me LMFAO it is so true.

I personally was really trying to like Civ5 for along time and tried avoiding reading all the rants but I am really getting impatient waiting for the game to be sorted out and am starting to think it is not going to happen.

The things that are annoying me the most which you didnt mention are the lack of depth it is just the same linear game everytime I play. Before I even load the game up I know which wonders I want / which techs am going for and in which order there doesnt seem to be any decision making once you have played a couple of times.

When I first read that certain things were being removed like Religion / Espionage / Corporations etc i thought "oh ok well they were kind of unbalancing so this should be a good thing". But no now I think it was just to rush the game out of the door because there are things missing which I will never understand why they were removed.

For example.... what was wrong with having certain resources boost the production of certain wonders. I loved how you (or I) made decisions of what wonders / techs to pursue in Civ4 based on what resouces I had. But now every wonder of the world needs marble to boost the production of it. And marble just happens to also be a luxury. So if you start near marble you almost start with the Egyptian UA ! Even the Completely steel Eiffel tower is boosted by marble !! It just doesnt make any sense to me other than to rush the game, all the depth / realism / excitement seems to have been removed.

And I cant even be bothered to get started on the AI................
 
Im sorry but I never post here but I just had to when I read this it made me LMFAO it is so true.

I personally was really trying to like Civ5 for along time and tried avoiding reading all the rants but I am really getting impatient waiting for the game to be sorted out and am starting to think it is not going to happen.

The things that are annoying me the most which you didnt mention are the lack of depth it is just the same linear game everytime I play. Before I even load the game up I know which wonders I want / which techs am going for and in which order there doesnt seem to be any decision making once you have played a couple of times.

When I first read that certain things were being removed like Religion / Espionage / Corporations etc i thought "oh ok well they were kind of unbalancing so this should be a good thing". But no now I think it was just to rush the game out of the door because there are things missing which I will never understand why they were removed.

For example.... what was wrong with having certain resources boost the production of certain wonders. I loved how you (or I) made decisions of what wonders / techs to pursue in Civ4 based on what resouces I had. But now every wonder of the world needs marble to boost the production of it. And marble just happens to also be a luxury. So if you start near marble you almost start with the Egyptian UA ! Even the Completely steel Eiffel tower is boosted by marble !! It just doesnt make any sense to me other than to rush the game, all the depth / realism / excitement seems to have been removed.

And I cant even be bothered to get started on the AI................

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 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.
Yeah ... I know what you mean ... I played Civ 4 on an Athlon XP 1800 with 512 Mb of RAM and a 128 MB video card. When I moved to my Core i7 with 6 GB of RAM and 512 MB video card it was transformed.

Seeing the water flow down to the sea in the rivers, the trees wave in the wind and then the animated combat between forces and with each soldier or unit battling with each other (my mod has units graphics with up to 9 individual units) its so engrossing. Civ IV does look good.

Civ 5 is not much better and is worse in some areas of the graphics.
 
So after playing the game since release I've seen all these threads talking about constant crash mid game.
Never happened me once, on a low end laptop playing massive maps etc and then after the last update I got all the DLC content.... every game crashes usually before turn 100 on any size of map. Can only guess all that extra is just dragging my low machine down... finally understand everyones frustration.

Damn you karma!:nuke:

xx MSparkle
 
So after playing the game since release I've seen all these threads talking about constant crash mid game.
Never happened me once, on a low end laptop playing massive maps etc and then after the last update I got all the DLC content.... every game crashes usually before turn 100 on any size of map. Can only guess all that extra is just dragging my low machine down... finally understand everyones frustration.

Damn you karma!:nuke:

xx MSparkle

Sorry to hear about your troubles. Civilization 5 was poorly made. It was released far, far too early so your story is not too surprising.

Anyway, welcome to the forums. :)
 
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 thought as soon as i first loaded up Civ5 that the graphics were actually worse than Civ4 and im playing on a new computer which i can run Civ5 at high detail on large maps. Everything just seems to look plain and simplified on Civ5 apart from the mountains and the sea. And the rivers well....... 7 months after release before they made them look like rivers.



Like i said i really tried to like the game and tried to ignore all the rants but most of them are true and i cant get away from them anymore. I cant even have the score list on in civ5 cos when you try to scroll down it locks you in to the score list so you cant zoom in and out anymore.

In a nutshell, the UI is terrible and dumbed down and still full of bugs. City management is frustrating, can hardly see what each tile is giving you in the city management, the balance of the game is shocking and makes it boring, there is no depth to the game, the 1upt is a good idea in theory but very badly implemented and the AI on my Quad core 2.5 GHZ 2011 PC is worse than the AI in Civ1 on my 1995 pentium 120 MHZ
 
Agreed. For a game so centered on graphics, Civilization 5 still doesn't look so hot. The mountains, deserts, ice and the sea are much improved but the rivers and railroads still look awful. :(

Pride of Nations concentrates less on graphics (although I still think they are elegant) and more on gameplay and realism. For example, 500 different leader attributes and thousands of different historical leaders plus a fairly accurate economics system. It may be more limited in scope than Civilization 5 but I feel it will be the superior product overall. Each playable nation (8 great powers at the moment) will be vastly different from the others and will offer a unique insight into why history unfolded the way it did. For example, why did Italy later on join the Axis powers in the years leading up to World War II? Primarily due to a lack of coal and the means to obtain it and that will be reflected in the game. Looking forward to an accurate simulation of the time Victorian time period and an actual fun game to boot.

Civilization always was a history lite game (a fun one however) but it's now been relegated to merely being a beer and pretzels/fluff game. It's more a game than an experience now with the latest iteration. For me and many others, that leaves us wanting more.

As far as Colonization goes, it was not bad but it left you wanting much, much more as well. Improved graphics from cIV but nothing really amazing gameplay wise. :(

Victoria II is another Paradox title that would give one a good idea about Pride of Nations. Arguably Pride of Nations is the next installment of the Victoria series in the same way one could say Magna Mundi is such for the EU:III line.

One does find the trade goods system of Colonization interesting and I had half expected Civ5 would be some kind of upgraded/expanded version of the CivIV/Colonization engine. Looking at the versatility of CivIV's engine in general (considering how much it could be modified to make Colonization, etc.), one doesn't understand why 2K and Firaxis didn't expand and improve this "tried and true" engine into a larger series of games.

I, for one, would have liked to see some of Colonization's features in a CivIV type game (or visa versa). The trade goods system and improved graphics, just to name a few. One can easily imagine a "CivIV: Europe", "CivIV:Americas", "Civ:Asia", or even "CivIV:Mars" all being among some of the possible follow ups to CivIV based on the same engine with new gameplay, wonders, buildings, units, and victory features.
 
Victoria II is another Paradox title that would give one a good idea about Pride of Nations. Arguably Pride of Nations is the next installment of the Victoria series in the same way one could say Magna Mundi is such for the EU:III line.

One does find the trade goods system of Colonization interesting and I had half expected Civ5 would be some kind of upgraded/expanded version of the CivIV/Colonization engine. Looking at the versatility of CivIV's engine in general (considering how much it could be modified to make Colonization, etc.), one doesn't understand why 2K and Firaxis didn't expand and improve this "tried and true" engine into a larger series of games.

I, for one, would have liked to see some of Colonization's features in a CivIV type game (or visa versa). The trade goods system and improved graphics, just to name a few. One can easily imagine a "CivIV: Europe", "CivIV:Americas", "Civ:Asia", or even "CivIV:Mars" all being among some of the possible follow ups to CivIV based on the same engine with new gameplay, wonders, buildings, units, and victory features.

These are some very good ideas.

They could have done this if they had creativity and vision.

Back in the day, Test of Time for Civ II was awesome and frankly, it still is.

They could have kept true to their hardcore fans and still made plenty of $$$ as well.

Instead we get a casual, fluff game in Civilization 5. :thumbsdown:
 
Just loaded up Civ4 for the first time in over a year. Installed the RoM MOD and WOW. First thing I thought was this is how Civ5 should have been.......
 
Ok, here we go. I'm in a late game with germany and I am so frustrated. It's like playing the same game over and over and over again. There's a set bunch of stuff that you want, and theres one good way of getting them. There's not really many alternatives in how you should play the game, either go small or for world dominion (and only if the map is small).

Maybe I should just reinstall Civ IV again. Though, I will miss the mountains...
 
Just a thought: As the Colonisation was based on the Civ IV engine, I wonder if the coders thought, colonisation is more up to date then Civ IV, that they would build on that version as opposed to the Civ IV version. I noted a lot of similarities between that and Civ V, the short time I played both.
 
The denouncing system deffinitly and the diplomacy

overal diplomacy AI rondamly atacks no friendships at all.... Ai will denounce for no reason it will backstab you if it can because it wants to win...

There are 2 different typ AI's the good AI and fun AI
Good AI wants to win the game and will do everything to do it like the starcraft Ai
The fun AI still will win but its more for the player to enjoy like herous 4 might and magic

Civ 4 was in the middle the AI still wanted to win but it had olso some fun factors like different personallity's and a certain behavior Sow that every player has its fun challenging players who want a high diffuculty but olso narrative players who are in to role playing who want to play a certain leader a certain way and the Ai to have a certain personnallity and style sow it is important the AI has a MEMORY from what you've donne

Civilization 5 have only a good AI typ that wants to win. No memory or personallitys...



Because the AI wants to win so bad it comes in terms of gameplay really anoying and rondom over for some players who want a challenge it is cool but for most narrative players it is really a pain in the ass.....

Overal Ai diplomacy is just so weak you dont have so many options and you dont have many + modifiers And the denouncing system is just so bad it gives you really bad negatif modifiers
If they remove the denouncing system and add some more positif options it will be still a Good AI type but with some more fun AI elements wich is good....
 
Top Bottom