So, I went back and found an abandonware version of civ 1 (which I had never played, and because you cannot buy it from anyone anymore).
It was really great to see how it all started. If you haven't played the original, civ 1 is very much like civ 2, but with a much MUCH worse User interface. That said, it really plucked my heart strings to think that for some, THIS was the first time they'd have seen a game of this caliber. Wow.
Then I decided to fire up civ 2, but couldn't install it on my Windows 7 computer.
That's when I noticed in my collection that I had:
Civ 2, Civ 2 Scenarios, Civ 2 Fantastic Worlds, Civ 2 Test of Time, Alpha Centauri, Alpha Centauri: Alien Crossfire, Civ 3, Civ 3 Play the world, civ 4, civ 4 warlords, civ 4 BTS, and on steam I have civ 5. Heck, I have both Call to Powers too, just to round things off.
That's pretty much it, the full lineup of Civ games, only missing Revolutions and maybe you could count Colonization too.
So, I played a game of each civ game, full expanded. As the Romans. Just to feel and remember how things went. I had to get out a 5 year old computer to play civ 2 on!
It really puts things in perspective.
Civ1: The Genesis of the game. It is rough, but it really has a lot of things done well. If it had a UI that helped the player make sense of it all, it'd probably be jaw dropping amazing.
Civ2: Like civ 1, but with a great UI. It was jaw dropping amazing. Seriously, as much as some of the mechanics are clearly antiquated, this is one heck of a game. I was finding it fun to play again even after so long. Health doesn't exist. Happiness is... a truly terrible thing to screw up. Starting locations are horribly imbalanced... but man, you still expand and conquer in a satisfying way.
Civ3: While civ2 refined civ1, and made it more playable, civ3 came along and introduced a HORDE of new concepts. Culture, 'armies', Golden Ages, Civ traits, civ specific units, national wonders, Multiple victory types, strategic resources, luxury resources. Wonders having a 'type'. Siege units being special. BORDERS of an empire. Workers separate from settlers. So... the game was a bit rough, but look at all of these things that were added! If someone were to come along and refine them into a good working system, it'd clearly be the best Civ Game yet!
Civ4: Takes all the ideas in civ3 and refines them into a good working system, making it the best civ game yet. Civ4 adds comparatively few new things ('Only' great people, health, promotions, religion) but has clearly spent a lot of time making each of the concepts well balanced against the others. It feels like a full game and teems with intrigue.
Civ5: Civ 5 adds some new ideas. City States, 1upt, Social Policies, Natural Wonders, Cities Defend Themselves, embarkation. But for the first time since civ 1, it also removes a substantial number of concepts: International Trade, Religion, Health, Civ Traits (sorta), economy sliders, localized happiness.
The problem we end up having, is that while civ 5 could be considered like civ3, a game that just needs refinement, it also REMOVED a lot. So not only is the new stuff rough and untested, but the core game, what people expect, is severely diluted. Instead of having the frosting be a little bland, but at least the cake is good, all we have is bland frosting.
So yeah: Civ5 = Bland Frosting. I think that's the overall point.