At the current state (1.0.0.20) out of 10 pts Civ5 gets....

[JLoZeppeli]

I think the people who say they find the game boring and "just clicking next turn" don't really like Civ games anymore. It is no more or less boring or clicking next turn than any other TBS game. In fact it is probably a little quicker paced in some ways. People's tastes change, I used to like FPS when I was 15 now I don't.

Perhaps a lot of these people simply don't have the time/attention span for Civ games anymore and are mistaking that for "boringness". The combat AI is horrible and that is frustrating, but the game is anything but boring.

As for the long load times, play in strategic view, or on smaller map,s or get a better computer, and especially play on emperor, the extra units the AI has on immortal and deity cause a huge amount of the slowdown.

It's a good statement, but i'm playing multi Civ IV ROM while playing Civ V, and the difference is quite big. I think that the difference may be the fact that CIv IV appeals everyone, but Civ especially warmongers... I' a pacific builder, and in Civ V the only thing to break monotony is war, and it happens quite often, being diplomatic or not.... So i like playing Civ games now, but not so much Civ V, i stick with IV until further improvements to appeal my taste, as a builder i don't think is now worth of much time....

 

[CultureManiac]

Bimodal distribution...just like you would expect based on the discussion on this board. This version really seems to have polarized the community.

Bimodal distribution? It looks like a pretty standard bell curve to me, with a solid mode of 7.

 

[Alyosha]

Bimodal distribution? It looks like a pretty standard bell curve to me, with a solid mode of 7.

A mode of 7, but a meagre mean value - as of vote 199 - of 5.1. Not great, huh?

 

[kaltorak]

I voted 8. In a real scale from 1-10 it would have been less, maybe 7 or even 6.
1 point less for AI
1 point less for diplomacy
1 point less for simplification
and maybe 1 less for several small things

But comparing to scores usually other games get, 8 is about right.

 

[paganizer]

I gave a 7, because it still has the general Civilization feel, but "ohh my God" it has many design flaws. It was obviously rushed out and the many changes were not throught through or balanced in any way. Furthermore many working and useful things regarding UI and general management of your game from Civ4 were taken out!? Let's not talk about the AI, which seems to be copy/pasted from Civ4, but not informed of all the core changes to battle, 1upt or city/empire management.

Overall, I'm addicted, but extremely disappointed with the current state.

 

[Frosty_AUT]

8/10

It's a good game on it's own, but it's simply not finished yet.

 

[ahcos]

5/10, it's a nice casual game if you're not interested in going deeply into a game, but for me as a huge civ fan it's just a drawback. what really freaks me out are the non existant options to speed up gameplay. no, i don't mean graphic settings but things like quick move, quick combat etc. ye, quick combat is implemented but has to be checked everytime you start a game. seriously... then there is this intro you barely can cancel, absurd long loading times between the turns, crappy cityscreen view (tile adjustment! building queue! no information which tile is worked outside a city!), and with all these design failures i haven't even started about the game itself, it's horrible AI, the laughable tile improvements, the non-existant diplomacy, all those little design failures like resource trades ending after 30 turns (WHY?!?!?) so you have to go through all the boring clicks just for nothing but renewing a contract both sides wish to keep up, the fact that the game itself just isn't explained very good (civiliopedia is a joke.), the just halfway-thought-through happiness system, the annoyance of 50 messages popping up at the beginning of a turn just because someone declared on you .... and finally, social policies neither replace civics nor are a more fun element or better/more interesting/more fitting in any thinkable way. bring civics back!

well, i could go on, but everything has been said before. still 5 points for a potentially more thrilling fighting systems (although it's nowhere close to "thrilling" at this point 'cause the AI sucks), new ideas for the series (city states!), hexes and some other curious little things like the "end turn" button being much bigger and the ability to chose research by the end of the turn.

 

[Kamino]

4/10

Good :
- world generation
- strategic view
- hex & 1upt (double edge as it's a mess to move an army)
- modding capabilities

Bad :
- very slow core engine (20s between turns on a standard map with a Q6600 4Go RAM)
- ugly DX9 engine & overloaded 3D graphics (I only play on strategic view)
- horrible AI
- poor UI
- lack of stuff
- lack of flavour
- useless buildings (40%)
- boring wonders (+5 happiness wonder, +10 hapiness wonder...)
- unbalanced CS (in all my games so far, I was allied with all 16 CS !)

The more dramatic is how slow the core engine is. Modders won't be able to do anything valuable if it remains that slow !

 

[Bringa]

I voted 7, but it's worth pointing out that, at launch, Civ4 was a 6/10 for me. With HUGE potential (which it ended up living up to), so there's always hope.

 

[lschnarch]

why is there no 0/10 option? I simply can't rate an unfinished product.

The product IS finished, as you can play it.

So far I haven't read anything that a certain victory option for instance would be impossible to achieve.

So, despite all flaws and weaknesses, the game is finished from a technical point of view.

 

[Fistalis]

The product IS finished, as you can play it.

So far I haven't read anything that a certain victory option for instance would be impossible to achieve.

So, despite all flaws and weaknesses, the game is finished from a technical point of view.

I voted 2/10 cause yes its finished.. but a finished turd is still a turd.

 

[wydon]

I find this funny, studies show that when a person says pick a number between 1 and 10 they usually pick 7 or 3.

 

[Pnutmaster]

Went 6/10 myself.

Normally a 6/10 game will entertain you the first time you play it. After your first session, the veneer's dissolved and you're left with a buggy, simplistic, incomplete experience (hence all the high scores from hasty reviewers).

 

[ChaplainDMK]

5, due to the intro taking about 4 minutes and games taking 5 minutes to start, let alone load.

Anno 1602 loads in 1 second on my PC, so its better then CiV 4.

Anyways, I'm giving it a 7/10 because of all the bugs and the AI, but the game is still fun

 

[KardasMESD]

I give it a solid "meh." Like people have been saying, it's been streamlined to the point where there's not much left...

Remember when civ 4 came out? I mean, it did have a substantial amount added to it from civ 3, but it's a completely different experience playing with the expansions. Honestly, I couldn't imagine playing civ 4 without vassals.

If CiV were faster, more balanced, less buggy, cheaper, fairer, and had more content; THEN I can think of giving it a score better then 5/10.

If only...

 

[r_rolo1]

7/10 ( I would had prefered 6.5 , though )

The game is a decent TBS with a lot of unfinished stuff, horrid AI, lack of game balance and somewhat unergonomical interface that does not scale well with resolution and that needs too much of clicks to do anything relevant. It has some good ideas inside, but they are somewhat in a very untried state.

 

[SuperJay]

I have to wonder... who are the three people who gave it 10/10, and have they even played the game yet??

Owait... must be our latest astroturf marketers from 2K Games. HAY U GAIZ!!

 

[Dirk1302]

4/10

@r_rolo1 Agree with too much clicking

Game is way too easy because the AI is so bad atm. There are other issues as well but when these are fixed i think this will be quite a good game. I certainly had fun finding out how City states, Policies etc worked.

 

[Ayt]

I voted 3 since 7 would have been too high.

 

[Knightly_]

6/10 because of things that people listed already here.

Greetings