Best Civ version

[Kin]

I've been playing since day one. I think civ II or III was the best one yet. What are your thoughts?

I'm an average player I guess and I really enjoy reading on all the tips and strats ya'll are posting. I learn a lot and that makes my gaming much more fun. So keep it coming gang.t

Moderator Action: Moved to General Discussion.

 

[VainoValkea]

Civ II was fun for playing world domination. Civ V is better as a game though, but you can't take over the world in a similar manner, without worrying about the perils of overexpansion.

 

[Past Redemption]

While I love 3 since it was my first installment (I've since gone back and played them all) I really have to say civ 5. While 4 was more complex, I really, really, really hate infinite city spam, and I really disliked how competitive Civ 4 and even 3 came down to ICS or strats to counter it, while it's all but dead in Civ 5.

Plus, game sales really say it all here. Civ 5 has blown away all of it's predecessors.

 

[pawelo]

I used to like each and every one of them If I had to point out a single one out of them, I'd say Civ IV BTS with BUG mod
Otherwise, once I got into Civ V, I don't look back to playing previous versions.

 

[civvver]

Civ5 has blown away the others in terms of sales because it's on steam and steam and the digital game industry is exploding. I don't think it has anything to do with 5 being the superior game.

And now since this topic hasn't been discussed enough already...



I prefer 4 by a slim margin over 5. 2 is third, I didn't like 3 much, and 1 is last, though awesome for its time it simply lacks depth and features now.

 

[pilot00]

Plus, game sales really say it all here. Civ 5 has blown away all of it's predecessors.

Game sales crescent good games that people play for two months and nobody remembers afterwards. Plus some of the best games in history are games that sold poorly and years afterwards people realized their true value.

IMHO its a tie between 3 and 4.

EDIT: I would name 5 as the best but the fact that all of its iterations are incomplete rush jobs that require at least three patches to call em ok, just means no.

 

[I was NC]

SMACX
I'd pay a lot for a re-release based on Civ 5 (the second best).

 

[Past Redemption]

EDIT: I would name 5 as the best but the fact that all of its iterations are incomplete rush jobs that require at least three patches to call em ok, just means no.

And Frozen Throne was the best game ever before patches? They still balance patch o this day, frequently ruining game breaking bugs, and it had three times the development cycle of GnK or BNW. And calling BNW a rushjob is being a bit mean-spirited, especially since the only glaring issue is AI aggression, and a large percentage of players prefer multiplayer now, at least relative to other civ incarnation where it was much, much more difficult.

The only real overarching game-breaking issue in 5 is, ironically multiplayer in nature. How on earth the computer still cannot contact human players in MP is far, far beyond me.

 

[Rambuchan]

I have played every version of Civ since the very first. Civ I and II were great in their day but times have moved on I feel. If I had to choose one version to take to a desert island, it would be Civ III.

Whilst Civ V has many great features and beauties about it, ultimately the late game still bores me. Even though they've put all that admirable work into fixing that there is still a drag element to it and many of the features still feel gimmicky and not fully realised (hello, world congress), plus they've nerfed the warmongering a bit too much.

Civ III on the other hand always had an epic feel to it, with good old world domination a real satisfying option, yet also with all the other victory conditions pretty much equally balanced.

In essence, III hit a sweet spot between simplicity and complexity, balance and power. Something I think both IV and V have not quite achieved. Plus, Civ III was much easier to mod!

 

[Piobmhor]

In before "Civ 5 sucks! [Insert Favorite Civ version] was much deeper and better!"

 

[Past Redemption]

In before "Civ 5 sucks! [Insert Favorite Civ version] was much deeper and better!"

Seriously.

I loved Civ 3, but the only features I miss were the greater depth of wonders and the ability to sacrifice peasants for rushing production. Wish Civ 5 had that

 

[Draco84]

I hold Civ 1 very fondly in my memory, but I have to say Civ 5 is probably the best so far, Civ 4 annoyed me because I'd play for several hours thinking I'm doing great then a stack of doom would march over and blow up my civilization.

I love the graphics in Civ 1 though, Civnet is good too since it's not as broken, but the graphics don't feel the same.

edit: I really like Civ Revolution though, I'd stick that up near the top, the game is very limited but lots of fun, would make a good web-based Civ game, I would buy it on PC too. If you could make the world bigger it would be awesome.

 

[Rambuchan]

Civ Rev? Major disappointment. The problem with it is the lack of map types and the small world size. The game just feels so samey and stunted.

 

[Brian Shanahan]

4>SMAX>2>3>1












and about 5m LY away from competence, 5.

Moderator Action: This sort of thread bump is just looking for trouble. Please don't bump threads in a way designed only to get a negative reaction.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Haig]

1. Civilization V - Brave New World
2. Civ IV - Bts
3. Civ III - Conquests

 

[Qoma]

I haven't played them all (have played I, and either II or III (I'm not sure which it was anymore)), but Civ V is easily my favorite.

 

[Jandos]

Alpha Centauri is best hands down. But i just cant play it anymore, hoping for the day when SMAC 2 will be announced

 

[civ54lyfe]

CivII was the best experience for me since it was the first i played and was younger and just had that sort of "wonderment" or whatever since Civ was new to me back then.

Civ5 is the best to me though, although yes i do get the feeling that the complexity has given weight to a carebear late-game.

 

[rockyjusticar]

IMO the ranking would go like this:

1.- Civ IV
2.- Civ V
3.- Civ III

Civ IV offers much more dept of gameplay than V, so in my opinion that by default makes it better

 

[Dirty Bob]

I jump back and forth between IV and V. Have been on a V kick lately since I haven't had time to really try out G&K until recently. I can't say I like one better than the other as there are things I like and dislike about both.

I'm sure I'll go back to IV until BNW goes low enough being the cheapskate that I am. The digital download era has made me a patient man when it comes to buying.