As a old player of CIV series for 15 years, I have to say CIV5 is the worst

[charon2112]

People that prefer a more 'gamey' civ like civ 5.
People that prefer a more empire building civ dislikes civ 5.

completely untrue generalization. I prefer the empire building aspect of civ and LOVE Civ V...

 

[Katzenkrimis]

Since 1996, I have played all CIV series and mod packs. As a big fan, I spent at least 1,000 hours in CIV.

But I have to say CIV 5 is the worst.

Does anyone have the same feeling for this game?

Don't worry, your opinion is valid. People don't need to qualify themselves by telling us how many Civ games they've played. It doesn't take professor to know where this game stands.

One of the most popular quotes attributed to Albert Einstein is “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”

It's a great quote, because this is exactly where this game failed.

Keeping it simple is generally good advice. However, keeping it as simple as possible is not.
.

 

[Nutteria]

You know I gave it a thought about what happened that Civ 5 turned soo much easier AI aside.

And it struck me.It is more intuitive(which is good even tho it peels some "hard" off the game).The fewer factors players have to consider can bottleneck them to make more "right decisions" instead of wrong ones.

And the BIGGEST factor imo - you DO NOT get punished enough or even at all for making wrong decisions.In most cases even big war or economy blunders won`t effect the outcome of your game.Even choosing completly strange policys compared to what you want from the game does not have this adding penalty that we used to see in the previous Civs(the only exception being going for culture win without taking culture policys and/or going large empire early on).

Combine those two with the very VERY lacking AI and you get your self a game that is on par with "Island rainbow kitty adventure deluxe" difficulty wise.

That being said I think that solving the AI problem won`t do that much to straightening the game in the long term(tho it will make Immortal and DIety hard enough I guess)

 

[Akka]

I don't know if it's "the worst", but in the 17 years that have passed since I first picked Civ1 on my Amiga, Civ5 is the ONLY ONE where I was actually bored while playing my very first game.

Seems like a console version of Civ, dumbed down and stripped from most of its depth.

 

[mrt309]

IMO it's not the worst but it's a disappointment for me after Civ IV. Maybe my expectations were high.

 

[Nutteria]

IMO it's not the worst but it's a disappointment for me after Civ IV. Maybe my expectations were high.

That is a very valid point btw.I won`t be too surprised if the majority of the active Civ Community was expecting BtS with hexes and city-states.

However that is a flaw of Firaxis not us - Failure to promote CiV5 for what it is(design wise).

 

[troytheface]

injecting a dose of "call to power" would go far

also - for all the graphic enhancements they left out the little things that draw a player in

footsteps in the snow when you are exploring with a unit added fifty billion more times a connnection to the unit then twighlight zone white fog

as a matter of fact- the "unseen" would not be foggy. That would be more like "oh, must be in low lands near a lake, or in dimension 5" black was better

but i am liking it more now at any rate and i say when the new civ comes out it is tradition (a social choice) to hate its guts and say its a piece of W#%$&&* crap that ##%&^*( and can go %#%&*((

The tap into rome total war was a good move- late- but expected, in the sense of it seems like that would be a good way to spice up the combat - i just thought of something- i suspect a disconnect between the map and gameplay that i cannot define

the evidence is clear

 

[Ricci]

That is a very valid point btw.I won`t be too surprised if the majority of the active Civ Community was expecting BtS with hexes and city-states.

However that is a flaw of Firaxis not us - Failure to promote CiV5 for what it is(design wise).

Of course Nutt, if they would just have named it Civilizations: tactics of the ages .. or whatever of the sort, people would be in awe now and very expectant to see a merge of it's great features with BtS into a new game soon. Granted, not advertising it properly was their biggest mistake I believe.
I wouldn't have bought it either as I did not get Revolutions, but I would be expectant at the moment. Now I did not buy V nor I am expectant.

 

[MoonFlare]

I agree.Civ5 is a total disappointment for me.AI still sucks(even on high difficulty settings) and graphics are pretty low for a TBS that requiers a high-end PC to play at max settings!!!No end-game statistics,no final movies,bad diplomacy,a crapload of bugs...The only good things:music and combat.
Badly optimized beta version...This is not right

 

[streetdog]

This civ is pathetic.
First of all the graphics is sooo bad that I can't find words to describe it.
The gameplay is totally mess, the diplomacy is useless, the woders are boring and don't give you anything.

I play Civilization series since 1993, actually this was my first computer game ever and i am really disappointed now. Really sad

 

[Disorganisation]

civ5 worse than civ1? you make me laugh
you are obviously biased

When did you last play Civ 1? I last played it at the beginning of september (I was writing a retrospective at another forum) and it is indeed better than Civ 5. I've noticed a recurring trend in these threads: whenever anyone talks about Civ 1 in comparison to Civ 5 they're casting their mind back 20 years, not drawing on recent experience.

 

[DarkSchneider]

When did you last play Civ 1? I last played it at the beginning of september (I was writing a retrospective at another forum) and it is indeed better than Civ 5. I've noticed a recurring trend in these threads: whenever anyone talks about Civ 1 in comparison to Civ 5 they're casting their mind back 20 years, not drawing on recent experience.

That's interesting... do you mean better for the time it was released, because it certainly was. Do you mean that Civ I would still be a better game if both were released today?

 

[USAFireFly]

How can you take something good and make it worse? I've seen this on web pages, web browsers, and now, Civ V.

I should have been warned that something was going on because of Colonization. You end up tweeking wagons pretty much the whole time even on 'automatic' which isn't good. Kids playing Oregon trail will stick with Oregon Trail. I think this must be a warning about Firaxis and it's leadership. Anyone know?

I am really surprised you haven't heard worse from people on Civ V. It's that bad. Even if you were a newcomer to Civlization I think you'd play perhaps a few hours and than go to something more interesting. Nothing is better; awful to look at and I don't know how that's possible, and has the look of a middle school player. But middle school kids are used to sophisticated games and looks with Playstation, XBox, Wii and other video consoles. It's a loser but because of it's reputation and shear numbers of people it will sell a lot. However the cost will be the long run of losing a huge client base. Big mistake!

 

[Hulk]

hi dickens
My answer to you .
I play civ since 21 years. Civ 5 is a SID M. well balanced, no patch to launch it like civ4, and the mods for it , will coming soon within this civfanatics forum .
Nice time to u and all the others
choice a civ
Hulk

 

[Viperace]

... Civ5 is the ONLY ONE where I was actually bored while playing my very first game.

Seems like a console version of Civ, dumbed down and stripped from most of its depth.

Completely agree , except I get bored after 3 games

 

[Charles555nc]

Anyone remember when Total Fail, I mean that Total War expo, when it first came out? It was complete beta material full of bugs and unfufilled promises, just like civ5 status is now.

You know what happened in their forums?

100 Angry Customer Posts: I am mad because my game crashes, I cant save my game, massive lag, didnt get my extra pre order material, you promised us more features/depth ETC ETC ETC.

100 Fanboy Posts: This is best game ever! I dont know what you dont love about this game! Enter random hostile comment. (notice no reasons given about WHY the game is actually any good, just hostility that anyone could/would dislike the game).

What I have yet to decide is this: are their really like 30-40 fanboys for every bad game that come out who troll the complaint posts in forums to insult people disappointed with a bad game? Or do companies hire one person who makes 30-40 login names and posts a bunch of times for PR and damage control reasons?

Like Dale calling every person who dislikes civ5 "a sheep" who isnt "trying hard enough" to have fun with civ5. Is he a troll, fanboy, or company employee? You decide!

I made a post before the game came out, because, for the life of me, I could not understand what there was to be excited about in civ5. (One salesman, I mean poster, said they were excited about road maintenance). In my eyes, so much was taken away in civ5 and so little was put back in. Dale said back then that no one could have an opinon until the game came out. The game is out now and many people are massively disappointed, are they expected to wait for patches to fix the repetitive boredom/let down of this game before laying down judgement? Imo people do not have to wait any longer before they can say "I dislike this game" or "I am disappointed".

Unnecessary qualifying statement: Yes, I have played all the civ series games and their expos. And yes, this is new login name.

Moderator Action: Discuss the game, not other posters please.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Venereus]

Don't worry, your opinion is valid. People don't need to qualify themselves by telling us how many Civ games they've played. It doesn't take professor to know where this game stands.

One of the most popular quotes attributed to Albert Einstein is “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”

It's a great quote, because this is exactly where this game failed.

Keeping it simple is generally good advice. However, keeping it as simple as possible is not.
.

I'll show you a good quote about Civ V.

"This ain't pool. This is for bangers. Straight pool is pool. This is like hand-ball, or cribbage, or something. Straight pool, you gotta be a real surgeon to get 'em, you know? It's all finesse. Now, every thing is nine-ball, 'cause it's fast, good for T.V., good for a lot of break shots... Oh, well. What the hell. Checkers sells more than chess."
- Paul Newman as Eddie Felson in Scorsese's "The Color of Money".

 

[Pitman]

Hmm i don t agree. I play board game and computer strategic game since 20 years now and i m very pleased with CIV V.

The best games are always more simple with light systems. That's why the American from avalon hill were dismish by the new german generation of board game, same in video.

Good grief. Euro games had nothing to do with the demise of Avalon Hill. In fact, Euro games end up bringing people to board wargames. You need to know your gaming history.

 

[Pitman]

Frankly, it's hard for me to find a good thing to say about Civ 5. I haven't been pleased with Steam, I don't like the graphics, or how it handles graphics, it runs too slow (on a computer that runs civ 4 very fast), it doesn't have many options or as much replayability, too much that was good about civ4 was stripped out with no compensating good additions, and above all else, it just doesn't hold my interest very much. I'm quite disappointed by it; so far it has been a real let-down. I have played Civ since the very beginning, and this has been my least happy experience so far.

 

[Mesopotamian]

i love Civ 5

i love it to the degree that i'm up playing all night (4:00am) will be missing my morning lecture (9:00am) and will wake up to play it first thing tomorrow