For someone who hated Civ5, is that worth the buy?

[m15a]

80+% of most helpful Steam reviews are negative.

How is that statistic relevant to (the opinion of) the game quality?

 

[terraslayer]

This game is just Civ 5 reskinned for space. Seriously. As much as I love this game; while looking through the files, to try to find civs start locations to edit it for coastal starts (God I HATE starting city 1 plot outside of coast), I see alot of code originally from Civ 5. It feels to me they just took the original unpatched Civ 5, and modded it over with a few additions for space (which explains alot of bugs and crappy AI, which was fixed in later patches in Civ 5). So pretty much the way the game is coded, we payed full price for a Civ 5 mod from Firaxis.....

 

[manu-fan]

This game is just Civ 5 reskinned for space. Seriously. As much as I love this game; while looking through the files, to try to find civs start locations to edit it for coastal starts (God I HATE starting city 1 plot outside of coast), I see alot of code originally from Civ 5. It feels to me they just took the original unpatched Civ 5, and modded it over with a few additions for space (which explains alot of bugs and crappy AI, which was fixed in later patches in Civ 5). So pretty much the way the game is coded, we payed full price for a Civ 5 mod from Firaxis.....

What a load of rubbish.

There are tons of things in Civ 5 that are not here.

And there are tons of new features like quests, Aliens (totally different from Barbs), tech web, unit upgrades, Affinities etc. etc.

All this 'It's just Civ 5 re-skinned' is ridiculous.

 

[terraslayer]

It's not ridiculous when 90% of the files are from Civ 5. This game is basically a space mod of Civ 5. That would be like if Firaxis had made the planetfall Mod from Civ 4, and then selling it to us as a new game which is pretty much what they did here. Of course the game has additional features and removes things from the original game, that's what Mods do.

Now by all means I am not saying this game is bad, as I said in my previous post I love this game. I just think its despicable for a development company to sell a modded game as a new game. It's not that they used the same engine, they used the same GAME.

 

[Bandobras Took]

It's not ridiculous when 90% of the files are from Civ 5. This game is basically a space mod of Civ 5. That would be like if Firaxis had made the planetfall Mod from Civ 4, and then selling it to us as a new game which is pretty much what they did here. Of course the game has additional features and removes things from the original game, that's what Mods do.

Now by all means I am not saying this game is bad, as I said in my previous post I love this game. I just think its despicable for a development company to sell a modded game as a new game. It's not that they used the same engine, they used the same GAME.

So using the same engine isn't the problem. In that case, just what makes something a different game? At what point is the break? If BE is just a mod, what would it have had to do, specifically, to be a different game?

More to the point, was that 90% figure made up? Because the music is different, the art is different, all the Civilopedia entries are different, the voices are different, and the game mechanics are largely transformed, meaning those information files are different.

Was saying they used 90% of the files from Civ 5 hyperbole, or have you actually done a comparison of all game files for both games? Or did you mean something else by "file?"

 

[Bandobras Took]

It doesn't really play much differently when it comes down to it.

Well, let's see.

You've got idiotic AI that doesn't know what it's doing and is still utterly befuddled by 1UPT.

This has been true of all games in the Civilization series. The AI didn't handle stacks of doom any better than 1UPT, and the only game that managed something approximating a good AI was the expansions for Civ 4. Vanilla was horrid.

You've got horrendous diplomacy if it is even right to call it that.

This is shared by Civ 3. Therefore, it is not an exclusive feature of Civ 5.

You've got crappy barbarians that are dull as ditchwater.

Your opinion of them can be whatever it wants to be, but Civ 5 Barbarians play entirely differently from BE aliens.

Trade posts are somewhat different but they are basically city state vending machines. *Yawn*

There we go again. "Even though they're different, they're the same" . . . why? I don't have to worry about influence with stations. I can't conquer them and gain a fully functioning city. They don't give me resources. They can't claim tiles. These are substantial differences, and mean that the game does not play the same way.

Orbital layer is new but it really isn't very exciting.

Whether it is exciting to you is irrelevant. Your claim is that the game plays the same way. There is nothing akin to the orbital layer in Civ 5, and the orbital layer adds a new dimension to the game. If you simply claimed that you didn't find BE exciting, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The Tech web is different but it's basically just point and click for the next affinity bonus for the most part.

Your personal method of handling the tech web has nothing to do with whether the tech web of BE differentiates itself from the tech tree of Civ 5.

Trade routes are different in that they are now annoying and add to the tediousness of shuffling all your troops around doing the 1UPT dance.

Trade routes moved from a global resource to a per-city resource. This is a significant change in gameplay.

In summation, it's essentially Civilization 5 with a pasted on Sci-Fi theme.

Nothing you've posted here supports that. Those elements that are genuinely shared between the two games are also shared by others in the series. They do not suffice to show how the games are essentially the same.

What is the essence of Civ 5? What is the essence of BE? Is it the same as the essence of every other game in the Civilization series? Or do you mean "essentially" as a shortcut for "this is how it feels for me?"

And your summation has little to do with your opening premise. "It doesn't really play that differently" and "it's Civilization 5 with a pasted on Sci-Fi theme" may be related, but you've not shown how. The bulk of the mechanics that are not common to the 4X genre itself are different.

 

[terraslayer]

Okay, let's just say BE is a standalone expansion for Civ V. Akin to say Civ 4 Colonization (music is different, the art is different, all the Civilopedia entries are different). In regards to my 90% similar files comment, the XML and Lua files are the exact same ones from Civ 5, except for a few minor changes to accommodate the new additions in BE.

Edit: I'll post additional info later, after I prepare my dinner.

 

[Thormodr]

Well, let's see.



This has been true of all games in the Civilization series. The AI didn't handle stacks of doom any better than 1UPT, and the only game that managed something approximating a good AI was the expansions for Civ 4. Vanilla was horrid.



This is shared by Civ 3. Therefore, it is not an exclusive feature of Civ 5.



Your opinion of them can be whatever it wants to be, but Civ 5 Barbarians play entirely differently from BE aliens.



There we go again. "Even though they're different, they're the same" . . . why? I don't have to worry about influence with stations. I can't conquer them and gain a fully functioning city. They don't give me resources. They can't claim tiles. These are substantial differences, and mean that the game does not play the same way.



Whether it is exciting to you is irrelevant. Your claim is that the game plays the same way. There is nothing akin to the orbital layer in Civ 5, and the orbital layer adds a new dimension to the game. If you simply claimed that you didn't find BE exciting, we wouldn't be having this conversation.



Your personal method of handling the tech web has nothing to do with whether the tech web of BE differentiates itself from the tech tree of Civ 5.



Trade routes moved from a global resource to a per-city resource. This is a significant change in gameplay.



Nothing you've posted here supports that. Those elements that are genuinely shared between the two games are also shared by others in the series. They do not suffice to show how the games are essentially the same.

What is the essence of Civ 5? What is the essence of BE? Is it the same as the essence of every other game in the Civilization series? Or do you mean "essentially" as a shortcut for "this is how it feels for me?"

And your summation has little to do with your opening premise. "It doesn't really play that differently" and "it's Civilization 5 with a pasted on Sci-Fi theme" may be related, but you've not shown how. The bulk of the mechanics that are not common to the 4X genre itself are different.

Superficial changes do not a new game make. Your opinion is, of course, no more valid than mine.

Agree to disagree, then.

 

[Drakarska]

Okay, let's just say BE is a standalone expansion for Civ V. Akin to say Civ 4 Colonization (music is different, the art is different, all the Civilopedia entries are different). In regards to my 90% similar files comment, the XML and Lua files are the exact same ones from Civ 5, except for a few minor changes to accommodate the new additions in BE.

Edit: I'll post additional info later, after I prepare my dinner.

You forgot to mention the similarities with the DLL files, with the exception of the Global_Art _Defines and GlobalXML.... .