Reasons to still play 5 after the release of 6

[ZTZaorish]

So, from looking at quite a bit of Civ 6 news, it essentially seems like Civ V but with superior UPT, and city building. Essentially, Civ V 2.0 of sorts. (Obviously I am being overly simplistic,but the point stands I believe.) This has gotten me thinking. What do you personally believe will keep people playing V after VI is out. (Apart from having to buy a new game)

For me, I'd probably say mods may do it, and the simplicity of 1UPT in Civ V has some some appeal well.

What are your thoughts on this topic? Perhaps you think there won't be any reason to play V once 6 is out.

 

[Mesodius]

I'm going to wait until they work out all the major bugs before purchasing.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

There are some interesting concepts that I like the sound of in Civ6, but it will be a whopping £44 on release. Recent experience shows that the game will need balancing, patching and expanding - and that as it does, it will also come down in price

Not to mention those horrible mobile freemium graphics. Hopefully there'll be a mod along at some point to make those better.

 

[danaphanous]

civ V has become a pretty good game through all the patches and community mod balancing. It will take a long time for civ VI to catch up in this respect, so I'm sure plenty of players will buy it just to try it out, but it won't be "perfect" or will have issues or be simpler in a way that will make the balanced, modded, Civ V superior to fall back on. the same thing happened with IV when V came out. In fact some players still prefer IV.

 

[sunbeam]

This is hard to explain, though lots of people have said similar things over the past few years.

Civ 5 is addictive. The fact that you can play a game pretty quickly (for the most part), and the late game slowdowns that Civ 4 had aren't there for the most part... however they did it, they refined "Just one more turn."

But after all this time, I'm still not sure this is as good a game as Civ 4. Addictive, enjoyable, but still... just seems like you could do more things in Civ 4 to me.

What's going to make my decision is whether Civ 6 is as good for modders as 4 was. I've never counted, or seen a count, but I'd be surprised if there were even a fifth of the mods available for 5 as compared to 4.

If someone can do something like Fall From Heaven with Civ 6, it's good. If not, then I think I'll pass.

Plus like someone said, we really won't know what Civ 6 really is till after the second expansion pack or so anyway.

But to me this game better be designed from the beginning to be accessible to modders.

 

[Alleria]

So, from looking at quite a bit of Civ 6 news, it essentially seems like Civ V but with superior UPT, and city building. Essentially, Civ V 2.0 of sorts. (Obviously I am being overly simplistic,but the point stands I believe.) This has gotten me thinking. What do you personally believe will keep people playing V after VI is out. (Apart from having to buy a new game)

For me, I'd probably say mods may do it, and the simplicity of 1UPT in Civ V has some some appeal well.

What are your thoughts on this topic? Perhaps you think there won't be any reason to play V once 6 is out.

Civ IV was trash at launch, Civ V was trash at launch, why do you think Civ VI won't be trash at launch? Spoiler, it will.

For your own good, think about Civ VI's launch not to be this year, but in two years after two expansions packs which should have been in the original game from the start. Then, in two years, you can buy the full game that Civ VI will be.

That is, except if you want to pay an exhorbitant price for a beta version with removed content.

Also, I'm far from being a tryhard fan of graphics, but Civ VI's graphics really hurt my eyes.

 

[beetle]

Civ IV was trash at launch, Civ V was trash at launch, why do you think Civ VI won't be trash at launch? Spoiler, it will.

You forgot III in your list, as it was also quite terrible at launch.

SMAC, which feels more like a sequel to III than II, was good at launch -- but it actually released before III so it predates the pattern of selling beta quality at full MSRP. Its expansion doubled the civs available, but most players did not seem too enamored with them. SMAX added a couple “barb” units, corrected a few UI inconsistencies, and introduced psionic combat, but otherwise was modest compared to the expansions for IV and V.

 

[tide15]

I will buy it but living through several initial Civ releases I won't get into playing it until upgrades come out.

 

[NebulousJaguar]

The leaders look more realistic and human in Civ V. I also prefer the graphics from Civ V overall than what I have seen from Civ VI. (aesthetic appeal is very important for me, it seems).

 

[choraltrickster]

- lousy computer
- no $
- Civ V is awesome!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[Sussemilch]

I'm going to wait until they work out all the major bugs before purchasing.

There's no shelf life on it so I'm going to buy Civ VI right away - knowing that it won't be really fun to play for a year or so, and play Civ V in that time.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

You forgot III in your list, as it was also quite terrible at launch.

SMAC, which feels more like a sequel to III than II, was good at launch -- but it actually released before III so it predates the pattern of selling beta quality at full MSRP. Its expansion doubled the civs available, but most players did not seem too enamored with them. SMAX added a couple “barb” units, corrected a few UI inconsistencies, and introduced psionic combat, but otherwise was modest compared to the expansions for IV and V.

Many SMAC fans prefer vanilla over SMAX. OP alien factions, one of the most OP wonders in Civ history (cloudbase academy).

 

[danaphanous]

what does SMAC stand for again? Is that the Alpha Centauri franchise? (loved that game!)

It had many things civ games don't today including full terraforming where you could create artificial islands, dig canals, settle floating cities in the ocean, dig boreholes, change elevations, etc. I always liked the environmental win condition.

 

[Browd]

Yes, SMAC = Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri

 

[Acken]

It isnt released yet hard to say how it will really ene up. That said on paper it look like an upgrade to civ5 so we will see after a few patchs how it ends up. At least beach isnt an amateur.

I just hope the ai is decent... balance we can mod it but not a broken ai.

 

[stormtrooper412]

If 6 is to my liking, i.e. if they go through the "civ5 but upgraded" thing, then it's unlikely I'll be playing 5 much longer. However if they slap it at like 60 bucks and it turns out there's a metric ton of bugs, then I'll skip it until it's fixed

 

[beetle]

Many SMAC fans prefer vanilla over SMAX. OP alien factions, one of the most OP wonders in Civ history (cloudbase academy).

Well, we are getting off-topic here, except that the relevance of the expansion packs to the franchise history. Building off 5 so clearly, I am optimistic that the 6 base game will have nuance enough. I will wait until the reviews, but I will probably buy-in earlier than I did with 4 or 5.

(IMHO, Cloudbase Academy was not nearly as OP as the Hunter-Seeker Algorithm. So the best game experience for me was SMAX (better mechanics, including a nerf to HSA) using mostly only the SMAC civs.))

 

[Socratatus]

The more realistic leaders of Civ 5 will certainly keep me on that for a long time.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

Well, we are getting off-topic here, except that the relevance of the expansion packs to the franchise history. Building off 5 so clearly, I am optimistic that the 6 base game will have nuance enough. I will wait until the reviews, but I will probably buy-in earlier than I did with 4 or 5.

(IMHO, Cloudbase Academy was not nearly as OP as the Hunter-Seeker Algorithm. So the best game experience for me was SMAX (better mechanics, including a nerf to HSA) using mostly only the SMAC civs.))

Haha, yeah that too

 

[miaasma]

it's hard to say without 6 being released yet; depending on how good at is i may replace civ 5 entirely with it, but that's unlikely even if i end up liking it

civ 5 has been a game i have consistently played over the years, to the point where it's effectively my go-to for strategy games. if civ 6 is good i might play it as much, but i imagine it'll be different enough to offer a different experience than civ 5 (i played civ 5 and beyond earth at the same time, before eventually ditching the latter due to boredom with it)