Is this game worth playing again yet?

[MaximusDarcy]

Okay, so bought this game on release, even pre paid (ouch). After a few hours was disappointed.

I don't want to bang on about specifics for me the only important thing in a CIV game is does it possess that 'one more turn' quality?

So here are your choices

1. YES
2. Just wait for the next patch... (the maybe answer)
3. NO

 

[MaximusDarcy]

To post a reply to my own original post, i was hoping you could all spare me some hours of my life potentially wasted.

My gaming fate is in your hands

 

[Ahriman]

Yes, with mods.

 

[SuperJay]

Not right now, no, I don't feel like it provides the old 1MT feeling. If you didn't like it back in September, it hasn't changed so drastically that you'd be enamored with it now.

But hey... check out the notes for the next patch coming "sometime in February" as it seems like a step in the right direction.

 

[lschnarch]

The answer is "no".
Currently they are trying to wake attention again by tweaking some xml-values, but haven't adressed the core problems so far.

You may want to ask again in six months.

 

[Caeserportugal]

I am voting NO but I guess if you like mods then go for it I haven't checked CIV5 mods because quite frankly I hated so much CIV5 that I unistalled it and reinstalled CIV4

 

[Adam7Eight]

I'd wait and check back in a year or two.

 

[vandyr]

Been worth playing since the day it hit the shelves.

 

[Windsor]

The patches so far, and probably also the upcoming patch, doesn't change the game that much for us who doesn't like it in the first place. Tweaks, balancing and polishing doesn't help if you want real change.

Imo the game needs at least an expansion pack and/or a type of mod that only can be made after the source is released.

 

[Guardian_PL]

Nope, unless they'll buckle up and release an expansion, not lame ugly Civs with silly abilites.

It's still a steaming pile of crap.

 

[Iranon]

The game is full of horrid design decisions. An expansion that fixes them would be more demanding than writing a completely new game along more sensible lines. Also, why admit failure when your product was praised by critics and commercially successful?

 

[Drawmeus]

Very much depends why you were disappointed in the first place. If you think 1UPT is unworkable or are waiting for the magic patch that fixes everything, you really shouldn't even bother checking - wait for the expansion pack or civ 6 and check back at those times and MAYBE you won't be let down (I don't really understand at this point why those people bother to look at the civ 5 boards anymore, the game is never going to be something they like and their voices have been heard at this point as much as they're going to be by Firaxis/2k, short of boycotting future titles/lost revenue).

If you thought it had potential but the execution was poor/it seemed rushed, it IS better now in a lot of ways. It's not perfect (the signs of a rushed launch and misexecution are still all over it), and nobody is going to be able to magically tell you that it's good enough that you personally will enjoy it now, but it is better.

 

[radiohodet]

Depends... I think there are two things you have to concider.

Do you like to be handheld with +- modifiers, science slider and slavery to make up for poor tactics, then stick with Civ 4. If you want to think a little bit more, Civ 5, unless you tend to blame the game when you can't figure things out.

Secondly, I guess you have to concider if a bad combat AI is better than a non existant combat AI.

 

[JohnnyW]

Depends... I think there are two things you have to concider.

Do you like to be handheld with +- modifiers, science slider and slavery to make up for poor tactics, then stick with Civ 4. If you want to think a little bit more, Civ 5, unless you tend to blame the game when you can't figure things out.

Secondly, I guess you have to concider if a bad combat AI is better than a non existant combat AI.

It appears to be opposite day.

 

[Guardian_PL]

Depends... I think there are two things you have to concider.

Do you like to be handheld with +- modifiers, science slider and slavery to make up for poor tactics, then stick with Civ 4. If you want to think a little bit more, Civ 5, unless you tend to blame the game when you can't figure things out.

Secondly, I guess you have to concider if a bad combat AI is better than a non existant combat AI.

This person have no clue about higher levels of Civ4 play. "Handheld", that's a good one

 

[Truthy]

Playable with mods

 

[Truthy]

It appears to be opposite day.

No it's not

 

[Zyxpsilon]

It was... before Release and since.

 

[Left Foot]

I find Civ 5 not worth playing because of the lack of things to do in the game given my builder playing preference. This patch addresses and tweaks existing game mechanics, but does not add any. So even if this is the best bestest most perfect patch in the history of patches, it will not make the game worth playing as far as I'm concerned. Sure, I'll probably try a game after it is released just to get a bit more mileage out of the €s I threw out the window, but I do not see myself playing a second game once the lack of things to do (apart war) becomes all too apparent once more.

So, short answer: No.

 

[Bob_]

Well Thal's balance mod + Rhye's earth map are just great... I couldnt stop playing it. Preferably on epic speed with high difficulty.

The cool thing is that the unique abilities acually make sense then and that makes it quite immerseful