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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just to get back to some sort of rational posting here I leave you another poll maybe more related to what some of us are trying to elaborate in this thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=384558

Actually that's a bad poll, because it's clear that most people haven't played all the Civs. In any case you can't expect a game 20 years old to compete with something much newer in loads of areas, but if you took which was the biggest game at the time, the original would win hands down. Won just about every poll and award going.

It's rather like Doom, which came out a couple of years later. Clearly today's FPS have a lot more things going for them, but in terms of the impact they make, none will ever be as big as id's genre maker.
 
I've played Civ for 19 years, and so far I am enjoying Civ5 very much indeed, as I have for every Civ-game ever. Some of the changes makes it the best Civ game ever in my opinion, such as the one unit per tile. The new culture system is also the best ever in the series, no doubt in my mind. I find the new game mechanics in general very cleverly made and thought of. The developers have once again made a fun, interesting and intelligent game to play.

The AI needs some more love, the multiplayer needs to shine some more. Added with a few expansions I feel certain we have a new winner here. This game certainly feels much better then Civ4 vanilla felt. God damn I missed so much from Civ 3 complete when 4 came out, but I soon realized it was a good game with great potential too.
 
I registered just to give my opinion on Civ5, as many people in this thread.

I'm just WTH at the game. I bought it eyes closed, sure it would be a good game. If I had known...

I'm not a "I played all civs from the beginning." I played mostly Civ 1, and such a great game it was. I was not overly fond of the 3 or 4, some changes didn't please me at all, feeling the game lost some good traits, but it was OK still.

So I found myself playing the 5, and I was whishing SO MUCH for some tables that were in the 1. Mostly F4 gave you an overview of your cities, and especially of some critical buildings (coliseum, etc...). Overall the tables were so much more detailed, you could really get nearly all the information you could.

In the 5 they just suppressed nearly all information. WTH ? How much does each unit cost for maintenance ? Why can't I see this ? Why can't I see how much my buildings drain in each separate city, or at least an overall cost in your empire based on the function of the building (research, culture, ...) ? Why no governments ? You had to think before. Where has gone all the complicated stuff, the optimisation, the understanding of the game economy, the different bonuses ? Especially the goverments who could change your economy so much. And most of all, why are the detailed tables not detailed at all ? That's what I loved about the game.

I'm not even whining at the new concepts of global happiness, 1 upt, city states, research based on pop, etc... They can be great concepts. But if you remove all the optimisation process, the things you wanted to think about before pressing next turn, it's not a civ anymore. You can't even sell buildings... You could in the 1. Come on. Now you just press "next turn", "next turn", and do things without thinking.

All that is left for the player is the diplomacy / war aspect of the game. It has never been the best part in the civ series, but it's definitely broken in the 5. Even there you have no information as to the behaviour of the AI, whether they're happy, angry, etc. One turn they are happy the other they declare war.

I tried a game in Emperor, sure I would get owned, and indeed I got, but not for the reason I thought. I was being very careful about expanding, since the AI declare war so easily, and waited. Then the Jap started a war in their place, and soon began to take a huge advantage and have an incredible number of cities. So I declared war on my side, took out two civs (lol at how easy it was), made another city or two. I had 8 cities, the Jap 12 and far ahead in game score and all demographics panels. I decided to play macro instead of war, hoping to win tech or culture or whatever. Outmacroing the computer. 20 turns later (and still far behind the Jap, but far ahead the others), 4 civs declared war to me, one being the Jap ... Ok, you stupid AI, let the Jap win the game, that's the most obvious thing to do ...

I didn't play another game. OP described my feeling the best, with a lot fewer words : "there's no excitement with this game".
 
Actually that's a bad poll, because it's clear that most people haven't played all the Civs.

Here you have a point not contemplated into the poll's question, yes.

In any case you can't expect a game 20 years old to compete with something much newer in loads of areas, but if you took which was the biggest game at the time, the original would win hands down. Won just about every poll and award going.
...

We don't expect it to compete, agreed, that's why no considerations apart we just voted for the one which we consider to be the best, simple as that.

I mentioned this poll because it is indeed related to the topic many of us made in this thread other than if we thumb up or down on ciV.
 
civ5 worse than civ1? you make me laugh
you are obviously biased

Yes...
Since he was stating a personal preference he's stating a bias...

Please leave the tea party arguments in your toybox with with Peter Panda and Polly Prissypants.
 
I have played Civilization games for over a decade. I liked them all until the remake of Colonization. When I first ran that game I was worried about the next Civilization release. The bugs were so bad that the best strategy was not making an army. I don't know if they ever fixed the bugs because I never reinstalled it. Instead I waited for what I really wanted, the next release of Civilization.

So on the date of its release I purchased the DRM infested game. I've never purchased any game with it before, but I was willing to do it for Civilization. I bought it straight from Steam. Then I had to remove my firewall because it couldn't find the internet. Once I'm past that it starts to install itself. At the end it informs me that it can not replace Steam.exe. Not that this is 2k's fault but damn even the DRM is buggy. I install it again and it finally let's me download the game. 2 hours later it is installed.

I start the game and I'm greeted by Steam asking me what I want to play. Do you want to play Civilization, or do you want to play with DirectX9? I click Civilizations. Then it asks me do you want to play with DirectX 9 or DirectX 10/11. At this point I'm starting to worry. Finally Civilization V is loading up. The video begins glitching like mad. I'm thinking WTH because I just built this entire computer to the specifications of this game. Everything is built above those specs it should not be doing this. I hit enter repeatedly to no avail. I'm forced to watch and listen to the glitching.

Finally, the moment of truth. I click play the game and I am in my first game on chieftain. I figure what the heck and let it ride. At least I'll see what's on the game before I move up. I think everything looks great. Then I'm presented with my first wonder for +1 culture. I'm thinking oh no right away. I explore the map. It's time to fight and I start rolling through everything. I notice that my archers don't like water. If they are near it they get really confused and can't attack the target unless they are right next to it. In fact they'd prefer to build a ship then launch a ranged attack. My first wonder completes and I get a water painting pop up. Are you serious? Yes, yes they are. Next I become aware that my trading posts do not mature. I've conquered most of the map already and suddenly a box pops up. What is this? I tab through it and find that I've won a domination.

The next game is on prince aka normal. I fly through the tech tree and it tops out very early. So I proceed to destroy everything in sight. There are no ships anywhere and nobody has the balls to team up on me. I get a msg that city states don't like what I'm doing so I kill them all. I max on my techs and there is nothing left. Then I'm just staring at the screen wondering why I built all of this research. I start over.

The rivers are so ugly that I play with the settings until they finally have a current. I'm content with that. Now to replace that damn movie with a chick strip teasing. At least when it hiccups it just freezes her booty. With that in place I'm ready to rock.

I decide to go for culture, but I have nothing to do. Wonders don't seem to provide enough culture to spark my interest. I just build the +5 buildings. I can't take the boredom and conquer my continent, but I leave all of the city states. They aren't bothering anyone. In fact they don't seem to do anything, but you can give them all of your money if you don't know how to make a unit? I figure what the hell I'll befriend anyone with culture. Then I notice that I am losing money fast. I already spent a ton of time making everyone happy, but I focus on economy. Where is the economy? OMFG I am paying so much money just for buildings. My only option is to flip everything to wealth and stop building unless it generates currency. Napoleon shows up and he has conquered a much larger continent. He proceeds to blast the city state above me with 7 frigates, which eventually are replaced with battleships/destroyers, from 1800 until the final turn. At no point does he actually occupy that city or land troops. He likes me. He's kept one other Civ with him. Catherine has one city but doesn't even show up as existing. The game tells me only two players are left. Well, whatever I think. Let's try a little experiment. I proceed at the year 1800 to sell every single military unit that I have and put every single city on wealth. Even then I'm losing money but I have stolen enough workers from Rome to sell them for a great profit, and that's what I do. So there I am with 6k and everything on wealth. From then on I proceed to click enter all of the way until I'm presented with a box of tabs. Again I tab through to find that I won a timed victory.

Well, that's my long ass story. I am wondering if this game will go the same route with me as Colonization. Can I wait out them fixing this? Will they fix this? Are these people making positive threads working at 2k? I'm just lost at this point. Other people are saying to wait it out, some like certain aspects, and the 2k forums are spammed hardcore by disgruntled veterans. I'm just in shock really. That's why I made this long post. Shocked. :confused:
 
As a player that has been a hardcore fan for 15 years
(or is it 16 now?) , I have to say that CiV is one of the better ones.

I prefer reading over writing as can be seen by my post count in the past decade of membership, but the debates that've been going on in the past 1 week has kind of tipped it over for me.

People, this may not be the best, but it's not terrible either. Do you know about Simcity Societies? Now that's the way to go if you want to ruin a classic series. CiV is still a very enjoyable game, and I end up drinking loads of coffee when I get to work every morning because I just had to go and play one more turn the previous night.

Just too much negativity in this forum. I think I'll have to take some time off my beloved civfanatics for a couple of weeks until things settle down. After all I'm human, and can't stop myself from getting affected by these negative posts.. Then I'll resume my old habit of stalking you :scan::)
 
Your right, but people have a bad habit of focusing on cons, and ignoring the pros. I don't know how CiV didn't meet people's expectations: it has all the features that were mentioned in all the previews that I've seen. Of course, they didn't mention the things that they left out (better resource management, for example) and things that weren't really finished at release time (AI, Multiplayer). You can look at what is there and say "There's some issues, but this is still a very fun Civilization game) or you can look at what isn't there and say "I can't/won't see past the problems long enough to enjoy myself: Civ5 fails!" I enjoy video games much more when I do the former...
Respectfully, Civ5 is like a house without a roof. It may have gorgeous marble flooring, stainless steel SubZero appliances, concrete countertops, and one of those Japanese toilets that cleans your bum without you having to touch anything, but without a roof the house is (almost) useless.

Many of us simply cannot enjoy the current experience.

As a player that has been a hardcore fan for 15 years
(or is it 16 now?) , I have to say that CiV is one of the better ones.

I prefer reading over writing as can be seen by my post count in the past decade of membership, but the debates that've been going on in the past 1 week has kind of tipped it over for me.

People, this may not be the best, but it's not terrible either. Do you know about Simcity Societies? Now that's the way to go if you want to ruin a classic series. CiV is still a very enjoyable game, and I end up drinking loads of coffee when I get to work every morning because I just had to go and play one more turn the previous night.

Just too much negativity in this forum. I think I'll have to take some time off my beloved civfanatics for a couple of weeks until things settle down. After all I'm human, and can't stop myself from getting affected by these negative posts.. Then I'll resume my old habit of stalking you :scan::)
As I understand it, Simcity Societies was a clear spin-off from Simcity; it was not a successor to Simcity 4, The Great!

If this were Civilization: Kindergarten, then okay. As a successor to Civ4 it fails.
 
I agree. The game lacks the magic of Civilization and Alpha Centauri. This designer succeeded in breaking the core food, science, production mix, the signature of the series. Now just spam gold everywhere. The game feels like it was made for the Blizzard generation.
 
The game feels like it was made for the Blizzard generation.

Maybe cause it was.. the steam requirement shoulda told you that much.
 
After ~30 hours of gameplay, I am really disappointed. Some new elements I like (limited strategic resources, natural wonders, the hexgrid is refreshing.), but overall the game has been simplified to death.

No espionage, no wild animals, no religion, the techtree has been slaughtered, diplomacy is a joke. "culturebomb"? Please...

In multiplayer each turn takes 20 seconds to compute on a tiny map, there are only simultaneous turns which makes it a game of 'who's the fastest clicker', the AI has had a lobotomy, I can continue but I won't. The game is an insult to the series.

It's a better treatment for civaddiction than any civanonmeeting could ever be.


Reading back I notice that I haven't even mentioned Steam. I deinstalled the game and hope to be able to sell it secondhand for half price, but I am unsure if this is even possible, since I vaguely remember a notice during installation saying the CD-code is now tied to my Steam-account.
 
They decided to focus on the modders this time around. They need to hurry up and release us a good game these freaking modders suck. :crazyeye:
 
It's a better treatment for civaddiction than any civanonmeeting could ever be.

That's just awesome. "Civ V is the cure for civ addiction". Brilliant!:goodjob:
 
They decided to focus on the modders this time around. They need to hurry up and release us a good game these freaking modders suck. :crazyeye:

Unless the modders can re-tool the AI then it will always be severely gimped. I am hopeful that this will be fixed in a later patch.

For what it is worth, I really enjoyed the Fall from Heaven mod series for Civ4, it was really well done and I enjoyed playing it more than the original game as I like the fantasy version of the game and always felt modern level warfare is too easy in civ.
 
Well, I would be interested in learning to mod, but I'm still waiting on the world builder.
How have people made mods without it so far?
 
People aren't whining. Read my review. There are legitimate problems.

Afforess, I was curious, now that some time has passed, are you willing to update your review? Or do you have any different views regarding the game mechanics, especially since the "discovery" of the number of exploits?

Regarding mods: yes, it is a great feature for any game to have it, but it doesn't have anything to do with the quality of the product itself at the time of the purchase. After all, you don't buy a car or a computer simply because it might be upgraded some time in the future by someone else (especially for free). You buy a product primarily because of its present worth.
 


Another sarcasm victim :)

Now to say few things about the game(I have said quite a few already but still).

I remember when civ3 went live.Whoa culture borders range on siege units new resource mechanics etc.etc.

After one week of drooling to the awsome looks and design ideas something poped its Ugly head.That`s right.The 3 headed B-monster bugs-balance-battle.The general public that was fond of the big success of CiV 2 and its itterations was furious for the first couple of months.Then things settled down modders and patches smoothed the expirience and well yeah it all turn out great in the end.World championchips and stuff.Good times indeed.

Now we see the same thing with the transition from civ IV and its expansions and countless balance iterations smoothed out weaknesses and chewed to pieces tactics to a game that has relativly brand new design philosophy.Hexes, one unit per tile, streamlined resources happyness and culture.

And again at first you are like "Whoooa.AWSUMZZ" and then realise that the 3-Beast lurks again because he is a inevetable part of having new design philosophy of the game.In time he will be whack-a-moled(because face it some "fixes" will cause new problems so it will feel like a whak-a-mole) to the ground.

So my plea to Firaxis and the community is : constructive criticism and less fear of big balance changes. That is all the game needs to stand tall above its predecessors.

Sorry for the terribad spelling.

Cheers.
 
Wait! You are telling me/us that multiplayer is kinda "real-time" and no longer "first player A, then player B, ..."? srsly?

As for selling it: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9692111&postcount=13

Thanks for the reply CivFanMUC.
I am fortunate enough to not have used Steam before, so I guess I could meddle with my account a bit and then sell the game. I could only sell it to someone who doesn't have a Steamaccount yet though, or someone who doesn't care having more than one. Anyway, it sucks bigtime, I feel cheated. This whole concept is new to me and if I had known, I probably would not have bought it without trying it out first. Next time, I'll know what to look out for. More probable would be: Next time I will not buy a game anymore.

As for the simultaneaous turns thing: yes, all players play the same turn at the same time. So, if there's a standoff between a defender and an attacker, but your defender is on open ground and you want to move him to the forest but the attacker clicks first, you lose. Whoever clicks first, wins.

Now, in some situations you might prefer playing simultaneous turns over playing turnbased, because of speed. But me and my friends, we never do that. This is just not what CIV is about. If I want to play a game of fastclick, I´ll play "Unreal call of Wolfenstein" or whatever those shootergames are called. I am not interested in that kind of game. CIV is about strategy, long-term analytic thinking, pondering every move, every decision. Intelligence, not agility.

The final note is: it doesn't matter anymore. I'll keep playing civ4, I lost 45 euros and the gaming industry lost a customer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom