Civilization 5 - Consolization?

[White Elk]

From what I've read thus far, I'm not concerned about a dumbing down of the game. Its the graphics got me concerned. The changes to combat will yield more complex battlefield strategy. Gone seems to be the days of simply building mass units, piling them up, then pointing them at an ever under-defended target.

The changes to Diplomacy adds depth to the game. Now it seems that we will have to think more about our decisions. It appears that there really will be consequences to our decisions this time round. Which equates to interesting and more complex decision trees.

The AI has been totally re-imagined to think in different parts. It'll look towards the big picture while balancing that with whats going on in the local here and now. A smarter AI, and a dumbed down game don't equate. Previous AI were sitting ducks. Or more like turkeys drowning themselves under rain. The new AI might actually get in outta the rain.

I think the CivRev comparison is made for the games interface, not for it's content. The lessons learned from the console game to be applied to streamlining how we deal with Civ5's complexity. Time will tell. But from what I gather, Civ5 is NOT being designed as a dumbed down version to appeal to the masses. But rather that it IS being designed to give us fanatics a deeper game while still making it more accessible to the noobs, and allow us all to keep our head in the game instead of monkeying around with buttons and such.

 

[oynaz]

Excuse me, but you are a bunch of whiny old men, complaining how things were better in the Olden Golden Days

Claiming that Civ4 is less complex than Civ2 or Civ3 just shows how much time can cloud one's judgement.

 

[Grimlin]

Excuse me, but you are a bunch of whiny old men, complaining how things were better in the Olden Golden Days

Claiming that Civ4 is less complex than Civ2 or Civ3 just shows how much time can cloud one's judgement.

I have to sign this and ask the question whether or not some people here like Civ to be something of a sports series. Like FIFA, every year a new version with other players (civs) and some minor updates but it retains the good old stuff.
Ah no, everyone would start crying about the minor updates...

Maybe we should wait and see? In my opinion its better to try and improve something, even at the risk of failing, instead of just staying at the old level, remaining there forever.

 

[Cropper]

I have to sign this and ask the question whether or not some people here like Civ to be something of a sports series. Like FIFA, every year a new version with other players (civs) and some minor updates but it retains the good old stuff.
Ah no, everyone would start crying about the minor updates...

Maybe we should wait and see? In my opinion its better to try and improve something, even at the risk of failing, instead of just staying at the old level, remaining there forever.

As previous posters have stated, we shall see. The real question is, what changes would you PERSONALLY accept or reject to the core gameplay of Civilization before you don't consider it fun anymore? I have stated mine, and it's unfair to label that crying. It is an opinion and just as valid as yours.

People who state that other are whiners because they give a dissenting opinion are neither to be taken seriously, nor contribute anything valuable to a conversation.

 

[Takeda]

It might not be clear, but there is a trend to that side of the fence compared to Civ 2's gameplay. Although the algorithm's may be complex, they are simplifying the ability to play the game, because attention spans are shorter these days than they used to be. And they want to include more casual gamers (which Civ 4 started heading towards).

Casual gamers is the vast gold pile they want their grubby hands on , therefore those who like complex, won't get complexity as in Civ 2 and 3; but 'streamlined, no-thought needed' gameplay. This allows everyone to play, while those who like complex, can dig down just a bit deeper to gain subtle advantage.

2K games started this, and it started with Civ 4, and will continue on... the days of Civ 2 and 3 are over forever and never coming back.

Tom

wow, this just boggles my mind

Just to make sure I understood you correctly and am not merely hallucinating, you think that CivIV is LESS complex than CivIII

It's a statement that is on its very surface an absurdity, so I want to be absolutely certain that I didn't just misunderstand you. It's just a bit like claiming that Candy Land is more complex than Chess is all.

 

[Newcomer24]

Civ4 is defenitely more complex and deep than Civ3, by a good margin.
I hope that Civ5 will offer a level of complexity similiar to Civ4... maybe a little higher but hopefully NOT lower, I'm a bit worried as from the little info we got it seems they are simplifing some aspects of the game... but it's still early to tell.

 

[Magma]

I agree that Civ should not be dumbed down, but having the option to automate certain stuff I approve of. Not everyone finds it equally fun to micromanage their cities.

 

[Bostock]

You realise that games are just coming home don't you? All games started on consoles (Atari 2600, 8-bits, Amiga, SNES, C-64, etc etc) and were "PC-onised" in the late 80's early 90's. All these games are simply coming home.

The 8-bits, Amiga, and C-64 were PCs!! They could be used and were used perfectly well for era computers' home computing abilities (weak though they were).

However, consoles definitely did dominate gaming for much or most of the period. Definitely started my career on the 2600, and later salivated over acquaintances' Colecos, Nintendos, etc.