Would you recommend Civ5 to someone who loved Civ3 but hated Civ4?
- Thread starter SG-17
- Start date
- Status
TheMarshmallowBear
Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
If Civ 5 did not have one unit per tile /hexagons I would probably still play Civ 4.
My PC barely runs Civ 5, (it does run it well, but if it gets far into the game as well as 8-12 AIs it gets bit choppy)
THere's a lot missing from Civ 4 which I miss in Civ 5 (thankfully, some of them are coming back like religion)
My PC barely runs Civ 5, (it does run it well, but if it gets far into the game as well as 8-12 AIs it gets bit choppy)
THere's a lot missing from Civ 4 which I miss in Civ 5 (thankfully, some of them are coming back like religion)
SG-17
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 2,631
I can't run it well enough yet....there's still the demo on Steam, so you can try a bit if you like it or not.
Optional
Deity
The demo might be a bit obsolete by now, definitely with the next expansion coming in.
Since the first version of Civ 5 the game has undergone some extensive changes. Basically the first version was rather shabby, and Civ 5 still isn't a finished article.
If you listen to an interview with head of development Ed Beach (it's uploaded somewhere in the Gods & Kings) you'll hear him say that the expansion is not just about adding things, but also addressing gaps and holes that the vanilla game has.
The expansion is probably gonna be a must have if it delivers on its promises.
What Civ 5 already offers is a great tactical combat system, much better than any previous version of Civ. Where Civ 5 is lacking in comparison to Civ III is trade, and to a lesser extent diplomacy.
Since the first version of Civ 5 the game has undergone some extensive changes. Basically the first version was rather shabby, and Civ 5 still isn't a finished article.
If you listen to an interview with head of development Ed Beach (it's uploaded somewhere in the Gods & Kings) you'll hear him say that the expansion is not just about adding things, but also addressing gaps and holes that the vanilla game has.
The expansion is probably gonna be a must have if it delivers on its promises.
What Civ 5 already offers is a great tactical combat system, much better than any previous version of Civ. Where Civ 5 is lacking in comparison to Civ III is trade, and to a lesser extent diplomacy.
Cvi3 was a transformational game that introduced a lot of elements that people take for granted today. I liked where Civ3 was going but felt Civ4 put the brakes on a lot of them or went backwards on them. Still enjoyed 4, but it just didn't feel right especially in the sense that I felt it didn't really explore the ideas started in Civ3 in more detail, but retrenched and simplified trading. 1-1 trades in Civ4 absolutely sucked all the fun out of putting deals together.
Civ5 in many ways picked right where civ3 left off, in terms of exploring power diplomacy, more flexible trading, and creating a wide open 'field' diplomatically for the players to exploit without layering a lot of uneccessary things like vassal states.
City-States is a really interesting concept but half baked at the moment. I'm very interested in seeing how that develops in the expansion.
I think the most interesting thing with V is how the AI hold grudges and get mad at you for taking their workers in barb camps instead of retrning it , settling too close to them, or maybe they just don't like you because you're too close to them. Basically any number of things human players used to get away with could set an AI off, but it's not consistent either as game situations change game to game. The 'grudges' throw people off and lead to complaints of broken diplomacy, but if you've played a few full games, you'll notice certain patterns
In short, it really depends what your friend liked about 3. If it was the giant stacks or the potentially hundred of cities one could conquer, he may hate Civ5 even more. Lol. But I think most players who prefer civ3 rarely enjoy the giant stacks of the large city list. Those things seem to be tedious aspects that the designers correctly removed from civ4 and 5.
Civ5 in many ways picked right where civ3 left off, in terms of exploring power diplomacy, more flexible trading, and creating a wide open 'field' diplomatically for the players to exploit without layering a lot of uneccessary things like vassal states.
City-States is a really interesting concept but half baked at the moment. I'm very interested in seeing how that develops in the expansion.
I think the most interesting thing with V is how the AI hold grudges and get mad at you for taking their workers in barb camps instead of retrning it , settling too close to them, or maybe they just don't like you because you're too close to them. Basically any number of things human players used to get away with could set an AI off, but it's not consistent either as game situations change game to game. The 'grudges' throw people off and lead to complaints of broken diplomacy, but if you've played a few full games, you'll notice certain patterns
In short, it really depends what your friend liked about 3. If it was the giant stacks or the potentially hundred of cities one could conquer, he may hate Civ5 even more. Lol. But I think most players who prefer civ3 rarely enjoy the giant stacks of the large city list. Those things seem to be tedious aspects that the designers correctly removed from civ4 and 5.
Optional
Deity
Did you get a complaint about this? I know they are grateful when you are returning a worker of theirs, but I thought it simply didn't register when you kept it for yourself.
dilettante
Governor
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 71
My opinion is that Civ3 fans have a lot to like from Civ5. The lead designer of Civ5 was a Civ3 addict and that's shown in his handiwork.
I made a theory once on the Civ3 side of the house about this line of thought...
Is civ5 the new civ3?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=438455
I was promptly ran out of the room...
joking aside, I really think Civ5 has more in common that it shares with Civ3 than most people give it credit for (including the hate from the Civ2/Civ4 side of the house)
I kinda get why the people who broke into Civ with Civ3 would not like Civ4 (full disclosure: I broke in with Civ3 vanilla). I made a post about it.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10668967&postcount=24
The funny thing is that I was a far better player in Civ4 than I ever was in Civ3. I can actually win at Prince level in Civ4. I suck at Monarch in Civ3.
Just as a curiosity, what don't you like about Civ4? I can (and have in the linked posts) named many many dislikes I have about Civ4. But I also think Civ4 has many good features.
I've even tried to make a Civ4 mod that heavily plays like Civ3 but I just gave up because Civ4 and Civ3 are just too apples and oranges to make it work. (see the post of some of my ideas)
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10685465&postcount=30
I still think Civ5 becomes the fully moddable Civ3 everyone in the Civ3 subforums have been waiting for. They might not think this is the moddable Civ3 but I bet it ends up being the perfect substitute. (a bunch of community people already tried to buy the source code for Civ3 to mod it and/or make the editor better but 2K lawyered up)
It's just in the offing that once we see how this new xpak performs, we'll see more mods coming out for Civ5 that changes full dynamics of the game (um... i haven't been around for a while, is the SDK .dll out yet?)
Anyways, I loved Civ3 and I think Civ5, especially with this new xpak, will be a game I will have fond memories of... just like Civ3.
my two cents... etc. etc.
I made a theory once on the Civ3 side of the house about this line of thought...
Is civ5 the new civ3?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=438455
I was promptly ran out of the room...
joking aside, I really think Civ5 has more in common that it shares with Civ3 than most people give it credit for (including the hate from the Civ2/Civ4 side of the house)I kinda get why the people who broke into Civ with Civ3 would not like Civ4 (full disclosure: I broke in with Civ3 vanilla). I made a post about it.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10668967&postcount=24
The funny thing is that I was a far better player in Civ4 than I ever was in Civ3. I can actually win at Prince level in Civ4. I suck at Monarch in Civ3.
Just as a curiosity, what don't you like about Civ4? I can (and have in the linked posts) named many many dislikes I have about Civ4. But I also think Civ4 has many good features.
I've even tried to make a Civ4 mod that heavily plays like Civ3 but I just gave up because Civ4 and Civ3 are just too apples and oranges to make it work. (see the post of some of my ideas)
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10685465&postcount=30
I still think Civ5 becomes the fully moddable Civ3 everyone in the Civ3 subforums have been waiting for. They might not think this is the moddable Civ3 but I bet it ends up being the perfect substitute. (a bunch of community people already tried to buy the source code for Civ3 to mod it and/or make the editor better but 2K lawyered up)
It's just in the offing that once we see how this new xpak performs, we'll see more mods coming out for Civ5 that changes full dynamics of the game (um... i haven't been around for a while, is the SDK .dll out yet?)
Anyways, I loved Civ3 and I think Civ5, especially with this new xpak, will be a game I will have fond memories of... just like Civ3.
my two cents... etc. etc.
ThERat
Deity
I loved Civ3 especially C3C for the warmonger I am. Hence, I still have troubles with Civ 4 though it is surely the most challenging game of them all.
I can't tell you how much I feel let down by Civ5. What were those people thinking? You want to fight a war but have so few units that still clog the map. Braindead AI that can't even put up a decent challenge as it doesn't even get the idea of 1UPT (most game breaking idea of them all).
In Civ5, you will realize that you do nothing much the whole game. I really loved armies in C3C, the grand scale of thing on huge maps. Try out civinators great mod CCM (you can find a few nice succession games in the Civ3 area. Keep your fingers off Civ 5 though, that's my advise.
I can't tell you how much I feel let down by Civ5. What were those people thinking? You want to fight a war but have so few units that still clog the map. Braindead AI that can't even put up a decent challenge as it doesn't even get the idea of 1UPT (most game breaking idea of them all).
In Civ5, you will realize that you do nothing much the whole game. I really loved armies in C3C, the grand scale of thing on huge maps. Try out civinators great mod CCM (you can find a few nice succession games in the Civ3 area. Keep your fingers off Civ 5 though, that's my advise.
azzaman333
meh
Civ 5 seems like an extension of Civ 4, except implemented worse.
headcase
Limit 1 Facepalm Per Turn
Strategic View (F11) may help if you're interested in just checking out the gameplay mechanics.
As for me I loved all three. I keep coming back to CiV though. I love the hex tiles the most. If you loved Civ 3, but not 4. I'd give it a shot anyway, especially since an expansion will be out soon here. You might as well learn the basic game with the vanilla version. Then you'll be ready to take on the expansion. 
To the OP, I loved Civ 3, played for 7 years +, hated Civ 4, bought it and tinkered with it and returned it. I'm addicted to Civ 5!, although its a bit quirky, and I think they need to iron out some of the issues. Winning in Civ 5 will require you to completely relearn your approach to playing Civ, but its a beautiful game and fun just to experiment with, learn by trial and error, etc
- Status
Similar threads
