Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by dot, Sep 24, 2010.
That's un understatement sir, actually this game is to Civ IV what a simpleton would be to Einstein.
but who cares, since the end game graph/replay is gone?!?! Why bother playing if you can't relive your triumphs?
I mean c'mon - its been 20 years. At least match civ 1 in feature set.
No game clock... Without it I'm find I'm unable to attend to the real world... again.
Couldn't have said it better myself
Really? I mean, really? Because there are no sliders? Or no religion?
Amen to that. It just feels like a war strategy game, and not a civilization game.
I mean, it's not a very BAD game. Just NOT Civ 4. And the reason why people cross-anyalzing Civ 4 is because Civ 4 is the ultimate Civilization game.
I cross-anaylize the games I review to the best game of that genre all the time. Without it, you won't have a basis to compare a poor made game to a good one.
Edit: Yay, I just got the game today!!!!!!! WOOT WOOT WOOT!
Less options to play with, no espionnage, system is much simpler, diplomacy is shallow etc
Not to say I'm not enjoying the game, though. It's just simpler, much much simpler. I bought this game hoping to play mp for the first in my civfanatic career, seems I will have to wait for a patch.
Here are a couple more reasons for disappointment. (At least for me)
Game still won't authenticate on Steam.
2K and Steam won't reply to my Support requests.
Hmm, almost sounds like vanilla Civ 4
Digitalcraft put it very well. It actually seems to be programmed quite like Rome: Total War with notifications dropping in a similar way. It felt more like Rome: Total War (without real time battles) than like Civ IV.
The other grouse that I have is that color contrasts are not sharp and vivid, forcing you to focus too much on the screen. For instance, in Civ IV, you could quickly see the food / production / Gold on a tile. The shapes are different as well as the colors are strongly contrasted. In Civ V, all are small coins of different color and I being somewhat color blind, it is a real pain trying to figure out which tile is working and which is producing what.
Civ 4 had vivid and sharply contrasting colors and shapes. Civ V is one light colored screen with different shades within that light color for different objects. Not only is it hard on a partly color blind person like me, it also makes it harder for me to connect with the game.
I am going to stick to Civ IV till I learn of substantial improvements in the Civ V.
For sake of clarity (hoping someone will read these posts and incorporate changes), I would like the emphasis on civilization building that Digitalcraft mentioned and also the color schemes should be substantially changed for me to be able to perceive all different info as easily as I could in Civ IV.
MANY MANY of these bashes against civ5 are horribly wrong and based on strict opinion that is based on the person only liking civ4.
Case in point this sad sad person whom i have cited just below and showed what was wrong with his comment.
1)Play against others instead of ai
2)they tried not to just force u to use actual governments and government types, and that can be changed in a mod easily.
Since units are limited to only one per hex it would make sense that you can't churn out units in 2 turns anymore and i always found that the production was too fast in civ4.
1)Graphics are definitely not bland, your just an blind idiot that doesnt know art deco when u see it.
2)Religion they took out most probably to release controversy and another reason might have been because it got bland and became a "who can found the first religion to get more happiness" rush that was extremely detrimental on the type of gameplay the devs are going for.
Civ5 didnt try to make another civ4 with better graphics it tried to change things and is getting bashed about it. That kind of attitude is what has destroyed gaming and made it full of horrible call-of-duty twich-based games that lack any a)creativity and b)thought. Nuff said.
Actually, the polls have been showing that 25 percent think the game is going backwards, and another large percentage haven't made up their minds yet. That leaves about 50 percent that are satisfied somewhat with the game so far. That means only 1 out of 2 users are happy with the game. That's not a very good approval rating.
^this sums up perfectly my disapointment with the game.
Panzer General and civilization are my two all time favourite games and a merge between the two should have been a dream come true.
I was expecting and accepting combat had to be simplified from PG original in order to fit within the bounderies of a civ game. But I was not expecting the Civ game to abandon those elements I enjoyed about Civilization - city spam, being able to fully develope all your cities, optimising for production, non-war ways to win, technology trading, believable diplomacy, etc.
The end result is a game that IMO feels more like a total war title that a Civ one.
Just lost my 10 minute rant post and am too exaused to create another that is just bound to fall on deaf ears. I feel that we have been ripped off with this poor excuse of a Sid Meier's product. Thirty years of being a faithful customer only to see what you have done to the wonderful rich heritage of the Civilization product not to mention the other masterpieces he has been associated with.
Folks this isn't a keeper. Last Firaxis product I buy. Must be pretty hard up for money to promote this substandard product. Well like I said you won't get any more of mine. Kiss off that $50.
What are you talking about?
Then your general sentiment is that it is too detailed, it doesn't allow every city to become a powerhouse (you can optimize for production...), there are non-war ways to win (I'm assuming you miss religion), I don't understand the point of tech trading with AIs, and playing against AI where your relationship is fluid and ever changing is no fun?
Does not compute.
I'm just bored when I play. I don't have a specific complaint, per se.
The game's just boring to me.
lol same, my computer cant play it but i can play it on my bros new windows 7, and i do not like the steam thing
Some disappointments from civ V:
- AI is weak sauce. Weak enough to let you kill multiple civs with 4 units on emperor, which is supposedly a challenging difficulty, and attempts to make up for it on bonuses. Notice, however, that this is a pattern dating back to the original civ. In some ways, V's AI is less inexplicably terrible than IV's, ESPECIALLY than IV vanilla's.
- For god's sake, the bugs. I know it's hard, but it's a major pain that we've gone many many years without a civ game that lacks bugs. Civ IV 3.19 has glaring bugs that will apparently never be fixed...but now I can't even END A 10 TURN PEACE TREATY from turn 87 on turn 122? What? Were this the only one...but a quick glance in the bug report forum shows things lighting up.
- GUI: This is going to be like pulling hairs out one by one using teeny pieces of duct tape, isn't it? In civ IV, we had severe issues with stack selection and auto-move that were not patched. Ever. They're right there in 3.19. At the same time, V brings us unit movement capability lag, FORCED end turns if you put auto-end turn on (without any prompt whatsoever? Really? It makes that a non-option because it will literally skip ENTIRE TURNS w/o the user being able to interrupt it), unresponsive end turn mashing, etc.
- Similar to every former game in the series, balance is already an obvious issue . Even blizzard can't get it right these days, but that doesn't mean that it isn't a disappointment! Some of the civs have ridiculously strong uniques and/or leader abilities. I wonder who gets HoF banned first XD.
- RESOURCE HOG ALERT! Just like Civ IV. Civilization is a TURN BASED STRATEGY GAME. TBS. There are not actions going on every second. There is some need for graphical quality, but not to the extent of murdering gameplay. I'd have taken half the graphical quality for a more complete experience than "5 units sweeps a whole continent of advantaged AIs".
- Game length: While all civ games in the series are long, V is a particularly bad offender and much worse than previous entries in the series. I can play with everything but military on full auto, on standard speed, and it takes an hour to make any headway out of the BCs. Quick game speed is slower than I could have played marathon in the previous titles. This is a MAJOR issue, because it's going to screw up the multiplayer experience and detract from the game's playability in general.
And what contributes to slowing down the game? Pop-ups, things you can't disable, and the ever-annoying super resource hogging. Why does this game take more resources than high-end FPS or RTS games?
IMO the series has gotten away from what made it great: strategic depth and balanced gameplay options. These things are there in theory, just as they were in civ IV, but are getting covered by smoke and mirors of bugs, deficient AI, and bad user interface. The controls are CRITICAL, the should NEVER, EVER lag, do something other than what the input said, ignore commands for a few attempts, etc. Where are some of the unit control options that were modded into civ IV that helped make it convenient? Controls are a key part of any game, why can't this series ever get them right ? I guess too many people play like frozen molasses and don't try to push the game's UI or hotkeys, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't work!
That said, I've had fun with what I've played of it, before running into some gamebreaker bug stuff. It's nowhere near a complete game as of release day, but it's probably ahead of civ IV (which had things like AI randomly picking UN resolutions, overflow bugging, similar total AI vulnerability unless bonus'd beyond belief, and virtually every expansion mechanic left untested).
Notice that I am not griping about gameplay concept changes. This game COULD have and MIGHT still be great, once the BUGS and CONTROL ISSUES and possibly the GAME PERFORMANCE ON STANDARD SETTINGS ALLOWED IN THE UN-MODDED game function as advertised. Please Please please.
Separate names with a comma.