So apparently, there's nothing wrong with Civ V

[Veshta]

With the exception of some very loud whiners in this sub-forum, the reception of the game has been mostly exceptional. What's the problem?

Sub-forum? This is the main forum for Civ5

"Exceptional reception" is very relative when you dig into the sources.

Most of the reviewers giving it high marks have had no contact with previous versions whatsoever and ALL the reviewers with that experience give it "meh" ratings.

Polls both here and on the fan-boy central forum, aka. 2K Civ5 forum, have 25%+ of responders giving it a "meh" or "thumbs down" rating .. a full quarter or more of people buying a product and being dissatisfied with said product is bad news for any company.

After they patch the bugs we are left with a game that is not nearly as engaging or challenging as previous versions were, simply because its built like an interactive cinematic ..

 

[Nutteria]

whining usualy means that people care.Some jump the zealotry boat ofc. but all in all concern of people who really wish the better for the game is the main motivator of the whaling around here.

 

[Cilpot]

Sub-forum? This is the main forum for Civ5

"Exceptional reception" is very relative when you dig into the sources.

Most of the reviewers giving it high marks have had no contact with previous versions whatsoever and ALL the reviewers with that experience give it "meh" ratings.

Polls both here and on the fan-boy central forum, aka. 2K Civ5 forum, have 25%+ of responders giving it a "meh" or "thumbs down" rating .. a full quarter or more of people buying a product and being dissatisfied with said product is bad news for any company.

After they patch the bugs we are left with a game that is not nearly as engaging or challenging as previous versions were, simply because its built like an interactive cinematic ..

Judging by the general tone of the "Civ5 - General Discussions" forum one would think that most people really hate the game. But every poll here has also shown a clear majority of people liking it. But these polls are not scientific by any means, surely people who hate the game passionately are more likely to vote in these polls than people who are ok with it?

whining usualy means that people care.Some jump the zealotry boat ofc. but all in all concern of people who really wish the better for the game is the main motivator of the whaling around here.

I do admit that whiners is a hyperbole. Just a response to the gazillion threads that repeat the same criticisms over and over. Can't we simply report the bugs and issues and move on?

 

[MaximumPain]

I was going to disagree with you and state my reasons.

But then I read this post from you in another thread:



Seeing as you know nothing about comparison between Civ4 and Civ5, any post you make on this subject is a complete waste of time and bandwidth.

Civ5 is not a challenge to experienced players of the series. I played my first full game on Prince level. Standard map, England. My first warrior upgraded via goody huts all the way to a Mech Inf. I only built one unit the entire game, a Trireme which I later upgraded to a Destroyer. I was gifted my only other military unit from a city state, a Pikeman that I (much later) upgraded to a Mech Inf.

With no other unit builds, I conquered the entire map and won a Domination victory just after 1850AD. That was not a challenge.

Moreover, I have no great desire to try harder difficulty levels after seeing most of the boring-as-watching-paint-dry tech tree. Each level just unlocks more buildings that do exactly the same thing as previous buildings, but with a slightly increased maintenance cost.

Glad you noticed that, i saw his other post too. God knows why he is on here trying to defend something when he doesn't even understand what we are complaining about.

Well I have played every version of Civ from Civ I and I absolutely love civ V. Id be playing right now if it weren't for the need to remain gainfully employed. I acknowledge that there are some issues with the new game mostly with the AI but that has been the case with most of the programmed opponents Ive played against in any game.

I certainly recognize your right to complain and I hope the devs pick up on some of it and make improvements to this game.

 

[kaltorak]

Judging by the general tone of the "Civ5 - General Discussions" forum one would think that most people really hate the game. But every poll here has also shown a clear majority of people liking it.

That's not true, somebody earlier today claimed the same thing, and even posted a link to a poll showing he was right. Somebody else answered with links to all the polls. The first poster had taken the only one where "like" was over "don't like". Not only that, but it was also the one with less total votes.

And you can't even count those polls, since likeing the game also leaves place for hating many aspects. I for instance voted "like" in all those polls. Because I have fun playing it. But that doesn't mean I don't like how they did a lot of things.

 

[Yuufo]

Here is a German poll. Only 30% found Civ V better than Civ IV BTS.

http://www.civforum.de/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=7512

 

[Malkaviel]

And yet every time theres been a poll on here, its shown an overwhelmingly positive response to the game. It's just that every. single. person. who doesn't like the game seems to feel they need to open a separate thread about why they hate it sooo much, and i suspect that's skewing the perspective.

This. Also the 80-100 nay-sayers on this forum aren't representative of the 30k online at any given time (according to Steam stats) who do not post here. They're just loud and persistent. Over 2/3 who voted in polls on this forum say it's at least "mediocre" to "great".

 

[Antmanbrooks]

Sorry but the people who complain about CIV 5, complained about CIV 4, after done some digging into the forums!

How long did you spend digging? That's the most ridiculous comment I have ever heard. I'm sure I could find a host of people that complained about one, the other or both. It proves nothing other than the fact on release people were unhappy. Without their complaints, nothing would have been improved.

Ummm, actually it says "some people are upset about the loss of civics and religion"....I find it quite odd that people who dislike this game so much continue playing it, logging on to civ 5 forums, and saying how they don't like it compared to civ 4.

Quite a few people have stopped playing it. I play Civ IV RoM regularly online with two others, and out of 3 of us, none plays CiV after a week and that includes one of us that actually liked the game! It has very little replayability and has lost the "one more turn" affect. The reason they log on to complain is they love Civ and have invested time and money into it. They expect more.

And yet every time theres been a poll on here, its shown an overwhelmingly positive response to the game. It's just that every. single. person. who doesn't like the game seems to feel they need to open a separate thread about why they hate it sooo much, and i suspect that's skewing the perspective.

I havn't seen one single poll that shows overwhelmingly positive response. Most of the one's I've seen are 50/50.

 

[Blackadar]

I havn't seen one single poll that shows overwhelmingly positive response. Most of the one's I've seen are 50/50.

Then you haven't seen one single poll, because they've all had the same results.

Here is a German poll. Only 30% found Civ V better than Civ IV BTS.

This does not surprise me. Then again, that's Civ IV with two expansions and 4 years of bug fixes and play testing. Personally, I think Civ IV + BTS is better than Civ V. I also happen to think that Civ IV was the best TBS game of all time.

Asking Civ V to meet or exceed that standard is a bit unrealistic. As such, I'm really enjoying Civ V and the fact that more people think Civ IV + BTS is better does not mean that Civ V isn't getting an extremely positive response.

Well I have played every version of Civ from Civ I and I absolutely love civ V. Id be playing right now if it weren't for the need to remain gainfully employed. I acknowledge that there are some issues with the new game mostly with the AI but that has been the case with most of the programmed opponents Ive played against in any game.

I certainly recognize your right to complain and I hope the devs pick up on some of it and make improvements to this game.

+1. I've been playing Civs since the release of the original in 1991 and I think this is a great game. It's not dumbed-down or lacking in strategy - it just has a different emphasis. But I'm not calling for a halt to people whining, because quite often they have legitimate gripes and I think there are quite a few things (most especially the tactical AI and diplomacy) that need to be fixed. In addition, I think it's going to take an expansion to turn Civ V into a classic in the genre - which is exactly what Civ IV needed as well.

 

[Zhahz]

I'm enjoying Civ 5. I didn't expect or want it to be Civ IV. For those who want features from Civ IV in Civ 5, I suggest stickign with Civ IV, then everyone can be happy and this forum will be less cluttered with junk.

 

[Xa4]

average? xD

When you can destroy 3 civs with 4 horseman (the same 4), I wouldnt call the AI average.

Yes, I'm experimenting that too, although I'm still playing at "prince" difficulty.
I begin to think that the bonus against mounted units of pikemen (which the AI tends to favor) and the like should be raised. Could this solve this balance issue ?

 

[duxup]

And yet every time theres been a poll on here, its shown an overwhelmingly positive response to the game. It's just that every. single. person. who doesn't like the game seems to feel they need to open a separate thread about why they hate it sooo much, and i suspect that's skewing the perspective.

I think that has a lot to do with the extremes that everyone discusses the game, or portrays people that they disagree with.

I think you can like Civ V, and acknowledge it was also released in sub par, or at least with some issues.


Personally, I really like the core changes. At the same time I'm seriously disappointed / annoyed by much of the unfinished or unpolished aspects of the game. Unfortunately most polls and even other users only see someone as either loving or hating the game.

 

[Drawmeus]

The thing is you are supposed to gather experience. I totally agree that civ5 vanilla is better than civ4 vanilla, but I think that is no excuse for repeating mistakes. Even less when many of civ4 vanilla mistakes were fixed by modders instead of developers.

So they did make it better, they just didn't make it enough better for you to credit them for that?

Game development doesn't work the way you want it to. Their list of things they wanted to get done was almost certainly man-years longer than they had time to do, which left them having to prioritize based on how long it would take to do things vs how much impact they'd have.

Civ 6 will have quite a few of the same issues at launch that Civ 5 has. Well, that or it will more properly be called an expansion pack than a sequel.

 

[Thormodr]

So they did make it better, they just didn't make it enough better for you to credit them for that?

Game development doesn't work the way you want it to. Their list of things they wanted to get done was almost certainly man-years longer than they had time to do, which left them having to prioritize based on how long it would take to do things vs how much impact they'd have.

Civ 6 will have quite a few of the same issues at launch that Civ 5 has. Well, that or it will more properly be called an expansion pack than a sequel.

Hopefully Civ VI will go back to the god game design rather than the board game design favoured by JS. I'm sure Civ VI will have its teething problems and won't be perfect but if they return to the style of Civs I through IV, I'll tolerate the initial problems.