The scary part is this .... when you go back to playing Civ4, there's nothing about Civ5 that you miss..
For me I miss not having to build transports to sail your units across the sea. That was a really nice addition to Civ.
The scary part is this .... when you go back to playing Civ4, there's nothing about Civ5 that you miss..
From the notes, they aren't even really 'patching' the game yet. This 'patch' looked like a lot of stuff that should have been in the 'final' release but wasn't ready. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they fixed a lot of stuff. But, when you see a dev team still working their schedule to put new features in the game, then you know they aren't into the stage of really patching and balancing this game yet. At least a chunk of their programmers are still working on finishing the original code.
The Civ 5 layaway plan. Buy the game now, they'll deliver the final game next May.
Of course, the sad news is that you know the version that really does finally 'fix' what they can with Civ 5 won't be a free patch. Nope, that's going to be in an 'expansion pack' that you'll have to pay for.
After listening to that recent interview with Shirk, I get the feeling this will not happen, he sure seemed to deflect any questions regarding an Xpack. Xpacks are NOT the new $DLC BUSINESS MODEL$ Expect DLC for this game to be Spain @ $4.99, Malinese @ $4.99, X country not already in game @ $4.99, New UU for X Civ @ .99 cents, New UB for X Civ @ .99 cents, New leader for X civ @ $1.99, New wonder @ $1.99, maybe something bigger like religion @ $9.99... thats the way of the video game industry now, nickle and dime (heh ok dollar and fin) everyone to the max. I seriously doubt you'll see any kind of changes like the evolution of CIV did.
Steam says I played 23 hours worth. That was the same number it was at about three weeks ago or so.
Record for me that's for sure. I'm so sad over this all.
Sigh - I wish...I'm up to, what, about 70 hours. The patch made things somewhat better, but it I have come to terms with the sad fact that, at it's heart, Civ V is a game for warriors, not empire-builders. That can be fun enough -- and my children certainly like watching the little people fight -- but that is not what I am looking for in this franchise. In other words, it's nice, but it ain't Civ. If things stay as they are, I'll be playing it off and on, but it's back to Civ VI BtS for me.
The good news is that Civ VI should be awesome: Go back and use Civ IV BtS as a base, then add hexes, 1upt, embarking units, and a few other things they did in fact get right.
I think that most buyers of this game are really happy with the game and that this forum does not reflect the average consumers view of the game.
There are many people here that have logged thousand of hours in Civilization 4 and other earlier iterations of Civilization and that the difference between the earlier and the newest iteration was abit to big for those people.
Civilization V is in a lot of ways a reboot of the franchise and one where Firaxis is definitely in danger of losing a lot of already established players - i.e. players that have played Civ for years. Players that have SO MUCH experience (not me, but others) and have so much dedication to the prior games that I don't think we can tell what effect it might have on the greater community if they leave.