Million dollar question.......

[david1806]

Hi all
Firstly, apologies for a question that has probably been asked before. I did try searching the forums for this question, but no luck. Ideally, I should post this on all the Civ General Discussion Forums, but that would really be sad.
So, the question is, which version of Civ do you prefer, and just as importantly, why? I've noticed from the forums that plenty of people are still playing (wow, say that drunk ) Civs' I-IV.
So, go for it. I'd be really interested to know. Personally, I'm loving Civ V, loved Civ IV, was not so keen on Civ III, and Civ II took over my life for a short while. And of course, the mother of them all, the original Civilization. That's what started me on this journey over 20 years ago. Jeez, TWENTY years!!!

I really like the streamlined look of Civ V, and I don't think it's compromised what is in the game, just made it easier to get to. I much, much prefer the hex system - I come from a table-top board wargame background, and have always thought that hexes were the best way. And this, combined with no more stacking of units, adds so much more to the game tactically. I find combat a much better and more enjoyable experience. Terrain, promotions, ranged units and unit types really come into the game now, rather than just making a huge of stack of whatever-type of unit and steamrolling over the map.

I'm happy without religion, it was one of those things that was fine to have, but not really missed without. I never got into the whole espionage part of Civ IV, and am I wrong, but there are no spies or suchlike in Civ V? mmmm, come back to you on that one....

I could go on, but the truth is, I'm actually only on my first game of Civ V, so have a lot more to discover. But briefly, I like the new happiness and resources, and as for the graphics, well, of course, I love 'em.

Anyway, thanks for your patience, and apologies for going on a bit, but please, come and ramble even more!!

David

 

[Blitz66]

When Civ V came out, I was pretty unhappy with it, and jumped on the bash Civ V bandwagon.

I did not uninstall it, and nor did I go back to what I felt at the time was still the superior game Civ IV, rather I played several months worth of Total War and Paradox strategy games.

A few weeks ago I fired up Civ V, and within several hours that "just one more turn" feeling I used to have playing Civ IV was back. I've now logged in over 100 hours of Civ in the past couple weeks, and I am very much enjoying where the game is. I have enthusiastically purchased the 3 Civs available through DLC, and I anxiously await tomorrows new one.

Now there are things I miss from Civ IV. My one criticism of Civ V is the slimming down of the complexities for which I love strategy games (I know Paradox games are in a different league of strategy games but I love games like HoI 3). Things like global happiness, no espionage or religion, and while I like social policies, I think I prefer civics to them.

Edit: Oh and a major one here: I seriously miss pollution. I don't like that I can spam factories now with no eventual environmental impact.

All in all, Civ V is a great game now, better overall than Civ IV, but I do think it needs a good expansion to add some complexities to it.

 

[AriochIV]

I have been very disappointed with Civ V, but I got about 200 hours of play out of it before I gave up and couldn't take any more. But there was really no question of going back to Civ IV. I played Civ IV a ton. I squeezed every last drop of entertainment out of it. It was a superb game, and I think it's still superior to Civ V in many ways, but I just can't go back to it. So I just stopped playing Civilization for a while.

The recent patches have made Civ V more playable, and I have since gone back to it. I feel it's still a deeply flawed game, and it will take probably at least one major expansion and a serious overhaul to several game systems before it can ever approach the quality of Civ IV.

 

[Schalke 04]

Currently I am playing Civ 5 only and I really like this game. I hope that there are more patches (and maybe even some expansions) to come, to improve it even more.

However, my favourite is still Civ 3.

I think I started with Civ 2 and played it "a little" (honestly I can't remember, as I was pretty young). Later I really got hooked up by Civ 3. Especially the concept of cultural boundaries made me a real civfanatic. I discovered this great community here, and read a lot of strategies which lead to a great interest in this whole franchise!

Unfortunately I had two big problems with Civ 4:

1. I didn't like the graphics. STOP! One may intervene, that Civ is NOT about graphics. Ironically this was one of my reasons. Civ 4 started to be the first "somewhat 3D"-Civ, and I didn't like this progress. I wanted my 2D Civ back and even today I find Civ 4's screenshots somewhat confusing. I don't like the graphics of Civ 4 at all and find it very uninformative (which greatly is based on my inexperience with this version, I have to admit!)
2. I haven't had a PC, that could support Civ 4, for a long time (This may be the most important point). So I just sticked to Civ 3 AND greatly enjoyed it.


HOWEVER, I kind of regret it, that I never really played Civ 4 (I started a few games, but never ended them), as I think it could be a great game. I read a lot of positive comments in this forums regarding Civ 4.

We all know that the Civ franchise is "epic", so I can imagine, that I will start with Civ 4 in some years... Right now I am playing Civ 5 and have Civ 3 as a "backup"

 

[Save_Ferris]

I got it in January, and fell in love with it. I'd put it slightly above IV, although I only had that in vanilla. To date, I have never downloaded a mod, DLC or expansion for either.

 

[Schalke 04]

I got it in January, and fell in love with it. I'd put it slightly above IV, although I only had that in vanilla.

Sounds like a fair comparison, as Civ 5 is just "vanilla" atm as well...

 

[david1806]

Hi all
@Save Ferris, you say you "got it in January", which version do you mean? Civ V?

also, I keep seeing the word 'vanilla'.....what does this mean??

 

[Schalke 04]

@david:
"Vanilla" means the original/first version of a game, without expansions (but including current patches afaik)

 

[Tabarnak]

I played a lot Civ 2 when i was a young adult. I've played my best singleplayer games for years. I hated Civ 3. Really. Then Civ 4 showed me the beautiful world of multiplayer which i really liked.

Civ 5 is the top game civ for multi because of 1 upt feature. Still playing multi a lot but i sometimes sink myself in some singleplayer games in GOTMs and HOFs games. I like competition but multi is the best way to compare skills(more active than passive competition).

 

[Save_Ferris]

Hi all
@Save Ferris, you say you "got it in January", which version do you mean? Civ V?

also, I keep seeing the word 'vanilla'.....what does this mean??

Civ V. The mac version.

 

[shihuacao]

Nothing beats Elvis as your advisor.

 

[snarzberry]

I prefer IV over V right now as is, but I expect (hope) that V will eventually be the better game.

 

[Camikaze]

I enjoy playing Civ5 rather than Civ4, but that doesn't necessarily translate to which one I think is better, or which is my favourite. I got years out of Civ4, it's time for something new. That doesn't make it any less of a game. And that Civ4 was what came before Civ5 doesn't make Civ5 any less of a game in my eyes. I still very much like Civ5. But I think Civ4 beats it.

 

[Brichals]

Since I bought some good headphones Civ5 has taken on a new life to me, the music is phenomenally good. I preferred Civ3 to Civ4 but also loved Civ1 and 2 but was too young then to really understand how to play. I think 1 good expansion and Civ5 will be breathtaking. And currently it has more players on Steam than Portal 2, so it's not an unpopular game at all..