1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Civ 5: Average

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Stalingrad, Sep 22, 2010.

  1. Stalingrad

    Stalingrad Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    41
    Location:
    the South
    First note: I am not a reviewer I'm merely expressing my opinion sorry but i have the balls to call out the game on several issues that didn't deliever compared to Civ 4

    Ok, well I'm not a huge Civilization fan, I don't mod or play endless hours of gameplay to where I am missing out on other ends of life. But I can tell you that I have been playing every civ since Civ 2 on and off. Honestly I think every Civ since has just gotten better and better adding new things and building off old ideas raising the bar for the next civ not to TAKE AWAY things, but to add more concepts and ideas. However Civilization 5, NOT led by Sid Meir himself, I already notice the difference. Civilization 5 Instead of adding on a bunch of new things (which it did) it merely took away things and changed a lot to morph the game into something that didn't resemble civ at ALL. Civ 5 reminds of civ rev but more in depth, but not near as in depth as civ 4. For those of you who have been dieing for this game to come out I know you want to "believe" this game is awesome, but in your civ heart, I know you know its not that good. You cant "learn to love" a game and by my first impression im not as impressed as i thot i would be, in fact stuff seems to be missing.

    The graphics to me are no where near as nice as the graphics in Civ 4. I like the 2 1/2 d graphics delivered in Civ 4 because it was not only easier on min spec computers, but it also had a more open and easier interface than Civ 5. I will list several things, including my main problem, the interface to my list of why I won't be playing Civ fairly often this semester of my college course.

    First and foremost the loading screen is a pain the butt, I load load load to a 2d screen on the main menu, it gets really old having to wait an hour to load a not so detailed screen, and the movie yes people, it gets old I already have to load my game, too much coding in my opinion for a not so beautiful main menu

    The Interface: In general as stated before I will reemphasize how the inteface to me is the biggest dissapointment compared to civ 4. I like the notifications menu, but the map on the bottom right part of the screen looks too artifical compared to civ 4.

    Auto explore with scouts or any other unit is something I have always done, I want to get to the meat of the game so I try to bypass the nit and griddy scouting around the map, so i auto explore, well my scout decides he is going to tresspas every city state on the board 5 times and i get 1000000 notifications telling me this, it really gets old and annoying towards the medieval ages.

    1 unit per tile is something i personally dont like, i think they could have capped it at 2 units per tile, because 1 unit per tile is fun on pangea, but on archipelago where the city you have is surrounded on 4/6 hexes by water, its damn near impossible to take it over, trust me one city state held off most of my units cuz all the injured ones in the front couldnt move out of the way for the reinforcements, i think unit stacking was a good thing personally but i think it should be capped

    AI isnt that intelligent then again i played on warlord, but when napolean invaded me, he had a crap load of units yet all he did was go on a tour through my civ, he dditn attack any cities nor did he pillage anything, he just camped out in the countryside, doing the russian farm ladies

    Religion WAS a good thing they shoudl have reinstated it, because not only did it shorten the tech tree but made the game have less realism taste to it

    Cities other than capital generally take FOREVER to build things, i know i know increase your hamemrs you noob, is probably what your thinking, but seriously I worked the crap out of the land and yet it took me 20 turns to make a krepost, 15 to make a monument, 35 to make a library, maybe im just playing the wrong way? But really buildings and even units othre than in yoru capital take FOREVERRRRRR to build

    No research slider like in civ 4, i cant customize my research and espionage output like i used to, its as if instead of building off ideas they just shrink them

    In conclusion (for those of you too lazy to read the rest before you) Seriously If you liked Civ 4, and Civ 3 this game hardly resembles the two you can tell its built by a whole new team that sure they made good money off this game, and they could careless as long as their bank statements stay fat, its all about money money money in any industry. yet this civ was average it wasn't bad i thot the city-states were cool and the combat WAS funner and more realistic, So there were some upsides to the game most def.

    All in all it didn't deliver and wasnt epic and open and seemlisly easy to interact with your cities, your empire, and all of what you hold right there at yoru finger tips. The Interface was a big dissapointment, all the cartoon animation that i took 1 minute to load the game for did not make me happy. And the shrinking tech tree made this civ look like something before civ 4. All in all if yo8ur a civ addict you may like the game, but its not epic as I thot it would be. You civ nerds can flame me and call me a noob BLAH BLAH BLAH! but those of you normal people out there playing civ as recreation on time off honestly dont expect toe be addicted to it. I definitly did not feel the "just one more turn" feeling like i kinda did in the tohers. I think the game is worth the buy at 29.99 but def not at 49.99 so for those of you speculatin on getting it, dont be overly ecstatic. All in all is an average game that meets the min requirements for civ, but doesnt deliever like I thot it should have. Bottome line: While still adding more ideas like the city states it takes out a lot of things that were built up by sid meir himself in the previous civs, therefore simplifying the game ironically in the 5th edition(you would think it would make the game more complex) making the game good for a guy just picking up civ, but not for someone who has been civing for a while.

    heres the list of how i rate this civ Civ 4>Civ 3>Civ 5> Civ 2
     
  2. Mannu

    Mannu Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Messages:
    230
    haha. no.

    You ranked Civ2 last and Civ3 above Civ5. Civ3 was awful and Civ2 was great.

    Are you comparing Civ5 to Civ4 Vanilla or Civ4 Beyond the Sword? Cause that game took about 5 years to make.
     
  3. mva5580

    mva5580 Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    ITT: Someone who thinks his opinion will equal the opinion of everyone else. Pathetic.

    I enjoy the game very much and will be playing it for a long time. I LOVED Civ IV and so far am enjoying Civ V very much. Civ IV, out of the box, was not this unbelievably amazing game you're making it out to be. It needed years of patches and expansion packs to make it the nearly perfect game it is right now. Go back and install ONLY Civ IV, without any patches or expansion packs, and let me know how great it is. It's still a solid game, yes. But you're making unfair comparisons and again your "I hate it, and deep down I know you hate it to" opinion is really, really irritrating.

    The game is fine, and I'll be playing it for a long time. Patches and expansion packs will put it right there with what Civ IV is today.
     
  4. Stalingrad

    Stalingrad Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    41
    Location:
    the South
    Civ 2 was fundamentally sounds but civ 3 added things and didnt really take ANYTHING AWAY! but civ 4 did the same but civ 5 hardly did that, if you read my article more concisly you would get my point, and i never said my view expressed everyone elses, maybe if you read the first few sentences you wouldnt make such an idiotic remark
     
  5. squadbroken

    squadbroken King

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    716
    lrn2navy ffs
     
  6. digitalcraft

    digitalcraft Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    291
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Yeah what is up with the automated explorers. Whaaaaat? It's bad when I trample all over city state tiles? Oh here let me walk back and fourth in their borders and do nothing else! I had to keep turning off auto and pulling them out because they'd just beeline over to city states and do loops in their borders. idiots!
     
  7. Bibor

    Bibor Doomsday Machine

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,856
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    I like Armored Princess more than CIV5. Nuff said.
     
  8. charon2112

    charon2112 King

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    sid didn't design civ IV either.
     
  9. Zhahz

    Zhahz PC Gamer

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,615
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Stating your opinion is not calling out the game because pretty much everything you listed is personal preference or taste and I disagree with pretty much everything you wrote based on my opinion.

    Calling out the game is more like saying:

    The tactical AI is very poor and whoever wrote it should be flogged standing next to Shafer who should be flogged for being a fan of Wesnoth and PG and letting this tactical AI go live. Almost everything else people are mentioning is trivial compared to poor combat AI when combat is a huge part of the game (compounded by Shafer's Civ III diplo model of hypocritical AIs only respecting the sword - combat is pretty much certain).

    A key element in Wesnoth's AI, for ex, is patience. In Wesnoth if the AI has a terrain advantage it will very often just sit there and wait for you to come to it, then chop you to bits if you bite. You have to work hard to get an advantage and crack the AI's lines. The combat AI in Civ 5 has zero patience and makes pitiful use of terrain, supporting ranged fire, promotions - it's almost like Civ IV where the AI rushes you with numbers/tech and little thought.
     
  10. RockTheCazbah87

    RockTheCazbah87 Pacal's pal

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    649
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Manhattan, NY
    Give it more time?

    And the whole thing about 1UPT on Archipelago - man up! Get inventive. That's what Civ's all about. Finding a problem and finding the coolest way to deal with it.
     
  11. Esham

    Esham Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    Messages:
    22
    Location:
    Canada
    Civ 5 is more appealing to the general audience. A lot of gamers (both pc and console) are turned off by the depth of civ 4.

    Civ 5 is the natural step in appealing to a wider audience.

    yes, its dumbed down
    yes, its shiny and new
    yes, its a money maker


    I have tested out the demo and will probably wait. It just seemed to easy compared to Civ 4 with a heck of lot less control over what i wanted to.

    tbh it felt like the first time i played civ 4 on chieftain when i set every worker to auto, every scout to auto explore and just flew by the seat of my pants. In the end i won handedly.

    I am just worried about what deitylevel players on civ 4 do to this game on deity. I have a feeling they are going to slamdunk the AI in the 1500's or something ridiculous.
     
  12. Hogar313

    Hogar313 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2010
    Messages:
    63
    Location:
    Kraljevo, Serbia
    Yeah, I hate that when I sense it in a statement too. :p But I'm gonna wait to get the game and see if I agree. For now, reading all the reviews both praising and bashing it, it looks overly simplified. We'll see...
     
  13. Shiggs713

    Shiggs713 Immortal

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,361
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    while the graphics and immersion have never been greater in a Civ game, I too find it a bit lacking, especially in the supposedly innovative AI. Seriously it is a slap in the face for them to tell us this is better. Tactically the AI couldn't be worse. Strategically the only way it stands a chance is because all the hidden bonuses we all know they have. Even at king level (where the AI gets some advantages) the AI just stagnates and is sitting around waiting to die.

    I wouldn't fret too much though, tons of modders and data tweakers will have this fixed before long. Civ4 had many of the same problems, and the good news is all of us amateurs will do a better job than firaxis on testing and tweaking the AI data. They had what 20 people that do this for a living, not a passion, we have hundreds and thousands of people that do this because they love it. I still see plenty of potential.
     
  14. wapamingo

    wapamingo Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Messages:
    399
    I agree with quite a few things Stalingrad said; but I keep telling myself that this just got released.

    Truly, I am waiting for some really smart and driven modder to come and make the game what it needs to be so CivFanatics can enjoy it.
     
  15. Matte979

    Matte979 Jedi Master

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2001
    Messages:
    287
    Location:
    Chicago
    I agree with the poster saying its all about personal preference. CIV5 is not simplier its at the least more complex and very diffrent than civ4. I have played civ since civ1 back in the days.

    CIV5 is the first game where I feel things come togeheter. Its sleak and easy to play as the same time they have made the game more complex. its a great feet.

    Religion was a joke in CIV4 its basically ruined diplomacy and could be exploited to death by the human player. Health was also a joke, it was a good idea but just did not work well to balance the early game. The cilivization wide happiness is so much better to limit the silly strategy of creating as many cities as possible and win in CIV4. I my humble opinon the Strategy options in CIV4 was so limited compared to the options you now have in CIV5. Diplomacy with number was joke in Civ4 it was so easy to play the AIs beacuse you know exactly how they felt. Could we add back some information yes, but the all knowing and number based diplomacy in CIV4 was just bad.

    Face it its diffrent and you might not like it beacuse your used to CIV4, happens for every change in life.

    Some adapt some just seem to complain. If it would have been the same as CIV4 then I would have never bought it.

    But simplified or worse than civ4 its not. Its a diffrent game and in my opionon it fixed a lot of the issues I had with Civ4 and previous games.
     
  16. Crezth

    Crezth 話說天下大勢分久必合合久必分

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Messages:
    10,803
    Location:
    北京皇城
    dear god
     
  17. Catapult

    Catapult Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2010
    Messages:
    6
    I haven't played Civ 5 so I don't have any opinion on the game itself. However I have to disagree with the philosphy that new versions should never take away a feature but only add them. That is a recipe for endless bloat and a game which gets more and more complex with every new version. It would make it impossible for newcomers to enjoy the series and in the long run kill it. I think taking away features which add to micromanagement without much strategy is absolutely the right way to go. From reading the comments possibly Civ 5 has gone a bit too far in that direction but the basic idea is sound.
     
  18. dirtforker

    dirtforker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    11
    I'm having fun with the game but I agree it's been dumbed down ALOT.

    Will I be playing this in 5 years like I did Civ4? Time will tell. We'll see what they can do with patches and expansions first.
     
  19. Matte979

    Matte979 Jedi Master

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2001
    Messages:
    287
    Location:
    Chicago
    May I ask what you think is dumbed down ALOT?

    Religion and Health? They sucked in CIV4 anyway.

    Sliders - Was not point in CIV4, you maxed research and was done with it.

    Battles - Only have to say stack of doom..

    When they get some pacthes for the AI and some changes to diplomacy. CIV5 is going to be so much more complex that CIV4.

    More options does not mean its not DUMB. If your many options always end up the same like CIV4 thats DUMBed down.

    Choices that make a huge diffrence and the fact you cant have everything thats Strategy.
     
  20. Shiggs713

    Shiggs713 Immortal

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,361
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    Any dumb animal or programmer at firaxis should know this AI is not acceptable. There are many capable programmers out there that could make this happen, its really not that hard, in fact I could write down all the logic for them if they would like. Thats whats dumbed down; the AI.
     

Share This Page