Civ 5 expansion and latter games = way less sales

[Lillefix]

By change I assume you mean get rid of all the new features, take back all of Civ IV's features, and rename it Civ V: Beyond the Sword. Because obviously the game is ruined forever and no amount of refining the new, untested features will ever fix it because the game isn't enough like Civ IV, and we should all give up, pretend the game never happened, and never try anything new again because it's just not enough like BtS.

Well,
Link to video.

 

[Mathochism]

you know how easy it is for big companies like 2k to pay off review sites to get credibility for their game before a release? im sure there is more, but i give this guy the guts to point out everything, shoot this guy hit civilization 5 on the nose

So, everyone who actually liked the game got paid off?

I confirm and understand that you believe in outlandish conspiracy theories.

 

[YoHo]

Firaxis has simply done what all the other game companies are doing these days. Release a bare-bones, vanilla game and then add in most of the content later in the form of expansion packs. It just seems to be the way of gaming companies these days.

At least Firaxis made the game highly moddable. Modders will turn Civ 5 into a great, complex game.

This is exactly what they gave us in Civ4 as well. a Bare bones buggy game with what some would call broken AI. All was forgiven once it was fixed.
I suspect the same will hold true with V.

I do think the 1upt does make the entire fix of the AI harder, but then, its 2010, not 2005. We'll see how it goes.

 

[Hacksaaw]

Civ V had to be better and compare to Civ IV and all its expansions.

for me the stacking limits, and the whole lets play a tactical game on a strategic map just wrecked the game.

if i wanted to play a perfect general game i would play one, i wanted to play a new civ game, that immersed me in spreading my Civ accross the planet. Its not like the combat system is in any way unique or new. What they should have done is forced you to combine the units in a hex into an army that would fight all together as a single unit.

but the current system, is just idiotic and breaks down the feel of the game for me.

 

[dragomaster]

By change I assume you mean get rid of all the new features, take back all of Civ IV's features, and rename it Civ V: Beyond the Sword. Because obviously the game is ruined forever and no amount of refining the new, untested features will ever fix it because the game isn't enough like Civ IV, and we should all give up, pretend the game never happened, and never try anything new again because it's just not enough like BtS.

Of course, something like that whold suit me better than this. I belive some parts are good yes; hexes, grafic and some parts of the city cultural system, but to gain depth they need to radicaly change the game.

 

[OzWiz]

Although I am biased - yes I think Civ V falls short - it seems the posts saying the Civ IV release had the same problems are not correct.

I went back and went through the Civ IV CFC forums posted post-release, and yes there were issues. But they were fundamentally different in that they were about bugs (not that many really) or specific balance issues.

There wasn't the generalized disappointment that Civ V has generated.

Without doing a numerical survey I can't be 100% certain of this, but it definitely seems to me that Civ V has been received much less positively by CFC members.

 

[Warspite2]

can you say, told you so? hehehe check out this link peepz http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3181540&p=1

Civilization 5 has delievered a rushed, pile of junk that despite some people's addiction to it, most people are not satisfied (just look through the civ 5 thread since game release). Regardless of it, Firaxis and all the design team is laughing all the way to the bank, i bet they are popping the champagne bottle right about now on how many sales they have accumlated. People, we live in a world where money is the driving force behind everything we do. Including this civ 5, it was either dumbed down intentionally to increase the fan base or it was totally rushed and not completed and unintentionally feels dumbed down for the majority of players.

Regardless of this, I'm not on here to vent, but I just felt I logically wanted to state something should come common sense to most people out there. That is Firaxis with the complete dissapointment to most of its surviving fan base, will cause many of us to go back to our beloved Civ 4, Civ 3 and even Civ 2. We will live off the mods of that game as our "new releases" and enjoy that. Sure I bet some of you think 'well goodbye then.' Well u dang right goodbye, goodbye from civ 5 (at least until they improve with an epic patch that i will NOT hold my breathe for) and yes say hello to civ 4, civ 4 mods, etc. etc. That game is a timeless and i can play it so many different ways and not get bored. Civ 5 was something i looked foward to not just as a purchase of a game, but as something i can relive and replay over and over and not get bored. Civ 5 is a dissapiointment over and over i guarantee you Firaxis has LOST my business if any civ comes out of this design team, and if any expansions come out i guarantee you i wont buy it unless i see perfect scores on every review site thats not being paid off (everyone but ign and gamespot).

Haha and that link i posted at the beginning said everything i need and everyone needs to say Civilizatio nhas FALLEN! oh well i'd slap that 25 year old dude so damn hard who made the game that his 4000 bc ancestors would feel it.

What else you know "Chieftain"? Why don't you go read the rest of the reviews on the internet from IGN, GAMESPOT, PCGAMER? Good advice, you better speak for yourself because you are part of this SMALL minority of people here who claim..."Oh CiV is dumbed down, a dissapointment". Oh and don't buy it, no one here cares what you buy and if you buy anything. More good advice, you may not want to accuse places like IGN and Gamespot to be paid off. The most idiot thing people say, WHERE is the proof of this BS statement? Why don't you go and actually "read" some of those reviews and see why they rated the game so high. Let me guess, I work for Firaxis now right? I am paid by Firaxis right?

 

[Thormodr]

What else you know "Chieftain"? Why don't you go read the rest of the reviews on the internet from IGN, GAMESPOT, PCGAMER? Good advice, you better speak for yourself because you are part of this SMALL minority of people here who claim..."Oh CiV is dumbed down, a dissapointment". Oh and don't buy it, no one here cares what you buy and if you buy anything. More good advice, you may not want to accuse places like IGN and Gamespot to be paid off. The most idiot thing people say, WHERE is the proof of this BS statement? Why don't you go and actually "read" some of those reviews and see why they rated the game so high. Let me guess, I work for Firaxis now right? I am paid by Firaxis right?

Ummm...more people on Civ Fanatics think the game has been dumbed down than not. That "small minority" is actually 45.5% and rising by the day.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=381961

 

[Venereus]

I'm enjoying Civ 5 so far. But if you don't think it's a dumbed down disappointment, you're blind.

 

[Mathochism]

I'm enjoying Civ 5 so far. But if you don't think it's a dumbed down disappointment, you're blind.

Or Civ V gave us more of what we wanted than previous iterations of Civ did. Namely, a considerably heavier emphasis on macro-management than micro-management.

I'm elated; not disappointed.

 

[HiroHito]

I will never buy another civ release, that's for sure !

 

[Mathochism]

I will never buy another civ release, that's for sure !

Until the expansion comes out and it magically fixes everything, causing you to forget you ever made this post.

 

[Venereus]

Or Civ V gave us more of what we wanted than previous iterations of Civ did. Namely, a considerably heavier emphasis on macro-management than micro-management.

I'm elated; not disappointed.

You sure about that? The Civ V equivalent to the macro-style sliders from Civ IV is micro-style replacing tile improvements. Need more gold? Make Trading Posts. More science? Make farms. I miss the fact that once you developed a city's BFC, it was pretty much permanent until some techs or civics prompted a few changes. Now I never get the satisfaction of looking at a fully developed empire built from the ground up with my very own hands.

 

[Mathochism]

You sure about that? The Civ V equivalent to the macro-style sliders from Civ IV is micro-style replacing tile improvements. Need more gold? Make Trading Posts. More science? Make farms. I miss the fact that once you developed a city's BFC, it was pretty much permanent until some techs or civics prompted a few changes. Now I never get the satisfaction of looking at a fully developed empire built from the ground up with my very own hands.

Having to manipulate sliders or swap civics every other turn was micromanagement at its absolute worst. I'm much happier replacing tile improvements every couple of turns.

 

[Venereus]

Having to manipulate sliders or swap civics every other turn was micromanagement at its absolute worst. I'm much happier replacing tile improvements every couple of turns.

How is pushing a few buttons more micro than going around moving and giving orders to workers?

 

[falconne]

Having to manipulate sliders or swap civics every other turn was micromanagement at its absolute worst. I'm much happier replacing tile improvements every couple of turns.

Err... can you explain further?

 

[TLF]

Who changes sliders and civics every turn?
How many times per game do people actually do that?

 

[Vordeo]

So, everyone who actually liked the game got paid off?

I confirm and understand that you believe in outlandish conspiracy theories.

I agree, and am waiting for my cheque to arrive in tha mail.

 

[jahsoldier]

Part of the reviewing problem stems from the fact that it takes a while before Civ V's glaring flaws really start to reveal themselves, I think. Bear in mind most reviewers probably only get a few days of game time with it. If I'd reviewed the game within the first few days of playing, I probably would have gone with a 9/10 rating because at the time I was absolutely loving it. It was new Civ! It was bright and exciting, had new features, and it looked lovely.

Now, two weeks later, I'm pretty disappointed as it slowly dawned on me what a rush job it obviously was, and have pretty much stopped playing until they release some major patches. If I were to review it now, I'd give it a 6/10 or so. Of course, never underestimate the power of a big release to bump up scores - highly-anticipated games (and films for that matter) rarely gets low scores even when they turn out to be terrible, sad but true that many reviewers like to go with the flow.

 

[jahsoldier]

Incidentally, I've just read Tom Chick's review and it is absolutely spot on.