Box Art Revealed

I also like the place holder art. This is good, but not for me. Imo its just too much, sure that stuffs all in civ, but it doesnt capture the series for me, the feel. On the other hand all black with just the title and gold V shows class, and sophistication. Have the back be loaded with all the units/buildings. This cover will just blend in with all the other games on the shelve, all Black will catch someones eye, because its elegant, simple. Nothing More to add, and nothing more to take away.
I must disagree with the criticizers. It's much LESS cluttered than Warlords, for instance. Prettier than vanilla Civ4, more of a spectrum of units than the BtS artwork.
It looks like a regular box art for a 2010 game. Which is of course just fine.

Mail the graphics from the game to anyone decent at photoshop, this is what you would expect to get in return. Jaybe, I agree it's prettier than VanillaCiv4. Especially the colorscheme is much nicer. The argument for the Civ4-box is that you have that symbolic road from the stonehenge to the rocket. So there's at least a message in it. Maybe I'm missing something, but the Civ5-box is only a collection of Civ5-graphics put together without any special considerations.

I'm buying online anyway so I'm kind of glad I don't miss anything magical or classic.
What I really like is where the title is, with the stars/moon and clouds. That part looks great. Also the "city" skyline. I dont get why theres a random factory chilling out on the cover, they couldnt have put something else there?
What many of us here said before me:

It is to much put together in kind of haphazardly, I mean, what is the topic in this picture?
What is the story it tells? Concept? Where should I look on it? I, as viewer, am confused...

And i don't like the look of fire of the AA unit in the middle, to aggressive or what...
Too much military...

But I somewhat understand this "failure": it is a complex game :)


Placeholder art with the civ5 logo was a winner...
I'm not really a fan of this cover art, it amkes out the game to be way too war-like. While I, personally, like how Civ V is improving the battle mechanics, it does really seem that the game appears to be too focused on war, and this box art doesn't alleiviate those fears.
Honestly I think it's gorgeous.

I don't see it as too focused on Battle. In the background you have the beautiful things that mankind has created, the icons that represent and signify our advancement, our civilization.

But in the foreground... you have war. A plague that man has not been able to outrun, despite the beauty that man has at his fingertips.

That's a message for you. :)
I see Sydney Opera, Pisa-tower and that Toronto tower... Hmmmmm, intruiging...

Civ4's box art has the Leaning Tower as well.

I did a quick comparison of box arts. It's theme is very similar to all of the previous ones. There's less chronology, but the Civ2 box didn't have it either. Less military than Civ3's original box art, but more than most. That being said, the skyline in the back is really cool (as is that battleship!). Overall, I like it.
this one's prettier, but so focussed on war ... Almost makes me fear I'm buying a wargame instead of a 4x game.
While I, personally, like how Civ V is improving the battle mechanics, it does really seem that the game appears to be too focused on war, and this box art doesn't alleiviate those fears.

Exactly my thoughts - and probably the thoughts of thousands of people who do not want to buy another wargame. But 2K probably analyzed the market, finding that there are millions of people fascinated in war and wargames, so 2K now is producing just that. Warfare sells.

However, Civ4 has been filled up with spirit right from the starting screen, and this made it magical to play for people enjoying not just warfare. And Civ5? Religions dumped with other features for builders - and warfare improved as the key selling point. How unique, certainly no other game is doing just that... Maybe "Civ 5" is just the selling title of "CivRev 2.0 for PC"?
Are people forgetting that the differences in warfare between civ 3 and civ 4 are virtually as great as those between civ 4 and civ 5.

Civ 4 introduced a proper veterancy system, promotions, a single attack/defence value, bonuses for combined arms, collateral damage, bombard-able cities, etc...
Reminds me of Settlers7 and how different the game art for the same game can be.
Woah, thanks for that link, this is tough stuff. It clearly shows how different the USA is from Europe. The Americans seem to prefer explicit warfare images, while we Europeans probably prefer a wider approach and imagination.

As a similar contrast to an explicit warfare cover, filling up the package with hundreds of details, here a simple cover sketch I suggested for Civ4 some years ago, trying to catch the spirit of the game and making room for personal imagination:



  • Toronto's_CN_Tower.jpg
    328.4 KB · Views: 60
  • 381px-Shanghai_oriental_pearl_tower.JPG
    41.8 KB · Views: 62
I actualy sort of liked the previous all black with highlights placeholder box more. It had more of a 'civilized' feel that meshed well with the art deco styling. The current box, while not bad, feels a bit too cluttered and warfare focused.

Of course, by this point you guys have probably already placed the order for the boxes and it wont change though.
Nice looking box art. As others have pointed out it looks like that the box art is giving the impression that Civ V is more of a wargame (akin to Panzer General and perhaps Total War) than an empire builder.

I have one question though - why is the lighting for the city dark? It looks like the background city is going through an ice age or something.
Top Bottom