CIV 5 the worst letdown in PC gaming, ever.

[danisans]

I'm not trying to insult you when I say this... but I think the problem is you. The reason that we remember Doom and Master of Magic as these big, impossibly perfect games is because they were all popping a mental cherry. We were new to these things and they were amazing.

We're now old and jaded and we're expecting the thrill we got from popping Doom shareware or the original Sim City into our floppy drives the first time. It's not going to happen because it isn't neurologically possible.

Wanna see a game I used to think was awesome?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_LwDb_B20

But these games still stand the test of time. I still play to this day Panzer General using DosBox. The graphics are not great but they are still functional for that type of game. A game like Loom (Loom, not Doom) really sucks when it comes to graphics but it is still as involving as it was back when it was released. Despite the outdated EGA graphics, it is still a well made game. Stating otherwise would be like saying Citizen Kane sucks because it's not in 3D.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Forbidden Forest was an awesome game. It combined eerie music, parallax scrolling on a C64, and gameplay that constantly kept you on your toes. I liked all of the Cosmi games (Aztec Challenge even more due to the bigger variety of tasks), but Forbidden Forest was definitely very fun to play.

Liking old games (and remembering the fun we had while playing them) doesn't automatically mean that Civ5 is a more fun than SMAC or MoM though.

Civ5 is currently in pretty rough shape so I wouldn't even compare it to Civ3 as an unqualified statement at the moment( and I was something of a Civ3 hater.) I think Civ5 will grow to be better than most of these games overall. This is, of course, only my opinion and best guess.

By the way, Aztec Challenge was really great, but my favorite Cosmi game was definitely Chomp!

 

[AlpsStranger]

But these games still stand the test of time. I still play to this day Panzer General using DosBox. The graphics are not great but they are still functional for that type of game. A game like Loom (Loom, not Doom) really sucks when it comes to graphics but it is still as involving as it was back when it was released. Despite the outdated EGA graphics, it is still a well made game. Stating otherwise would be like saying Citizen Kane sucks because it's not in 3D.

I'm not even bringing graphics into the equation. I'm saying that, by and large, mechanics have gotten more refined and more deliberate as 4X design has improved.

I'm not saying Civ5 is the *current* high point in the 4X genre by the way. That distinction clearly goes to Civ4+BTS+BUG Mod.

Oh, and just to be friendly, you needn't bother with DosBox for Panzer General. Some nice guy made a version that runs on modern OSes.

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88752

Enjoy!

 

[Psyringe]

It's easy to say, but hard to hold up this kind of statement.

Well, the only thing really needed to "hold up this kind of statement" is to play a game of SMAC and have fun, and check out Civ5 and be bored. Which is the case for me. Of course, we can also try to go from subjective feelings to objective facts, as you did in the rest of your post. But I actually disagree with that one as well.

In what ways does Civ5 fail to hold up to those games (ignoring Civ4 since there are 4 billion threads on it)? I've played all of them, and while the older games were good in their day and fun to come back to sometimes, they have all kinds of glaring flaws.

Yep, they do have their flaws. Each of the games I mentioned also managed to outshine its flaws though. I'm not sure whether Civ5 can manage that (though it's not impossible, but see below).

SMAC AI is easily exploitable (it never got UN or trades), combat is extremely bland in spite of a ton of unit options, and for as long as the tech tree is there aren't a whole lot of decisions.

SMAC is a game with a great setting and an enticing story. It lets you terraform a whole planet, fight or use native life forms, perform psi battle in addition to regular troop types, has espionage, a flexible system of government policies, and even multilateral diplomacy (though rather rudimentary). Civ5 has no terraforming, no espionage, has only regular troop types except one that's absolutely ridculous, has no multilateral diplomacy except a broken victory condition, and robs the rivals of their character by making talking to them useless since they "play to win". I won't even think about the artistic quality and creativity of some of SMAC's vctory movies because in comparison to Civ5's wonder screens it makes me cry (just show these to someone who doesn't know anything about computer gaming and ask them which one is from 1999 and which from 2010, the movie or the still screen). I don't know what you mean by "technology decisions" as it's pretty clear that the game wasn't designed to allow you to pick specific techs (this option was added as an afterthought), I don't really miss it though.

You're picking out the one most evident flaw that SMAC has (an AI that can't play the game) and ignore everything else. The ironic thing about that is that Civ5's AI can't play the game either, it fails at the new centerpiece of gameplay, tactical combat. The difference is that SMAC still has its great setting to offer, and all the things that it allows the player to do, while Civ5 in its current state is just a wargame with a broken core mechanic.

Basically, SMAC is a strategy game that gave the player a lot to do and developed the AI as an afterthought. That's why the design still holds up, its core holds well together. The broken AI hurts Civ5 much more than it hurts SMAC.

MOO has vastly less colony management options with vastly more annoying MM, has nothing to counter ICS, very little technology development decisions, and tactical AI is a joke.

I was talking about MoO. You seem to be talking about MoO2. MoO actually is (imho) a masterpiece precisely because it totally avoids any unnecessary micromanagement.

MOM doesn't have much in the way of city development either, and the AI can't handle some very simple strats (IIRC going for then building paladins is pretty much an auto win).

MoM has 214 spells with many unique effects to explore, about 200 troop types, more than 100 artifacts, 35 heroes with partly fixed, partly random attributes, 14 distinct races, lots of unique effects (breath attacks, death gaze, doom gaze, stoning gaze or touch, life-stealing attacks which even create undead, etc.), and lots more. It's similar to SMAC in that it gives the player a lot of possibilities but has a weak AI. Again, the difference to Civ5 is that in MoM the sheer amount of content outshines the AI's problems in using it.

You can pick flaws in any game, none is perfect. There are many games which succumbed under their flaws (many have been mentioned in these threads). Others outshine them due to other strengths. SMAC, MoO and MoM do. I'm currently not sure whether Civ5 can.

 

[danisans]

I'm not even bringing graphics into the equation. I'm saying that, by and large, mechanics have gotten more refined and more deliberate as 4X design has improved.

I'm not saying Civ5 is the *current* high point in the 4X genre by the way. That distinction clearly goes to Civ4+BTS+BUG Mod.

Oh, and just to be friendly, you needn't bother with DosBox for Panzer General. Some nice guy made a version that runs on modern OSes.

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88752

Enjoy!

Panzer General Forever is not up to snuff. I crashes often on my PC and the balance is not the same, some of the original game's mechanics don't work as well, it is harder to complete some missions compared to the original, and it's tendency to spam defensive units around the last city to capture is really annoying. Prefer the original GP.

 

[AlpsStranger]

MoM has 214 spells with many unique effects to explore, about 200 troop types, more than 100 artifacts, 35 heroes with partly fixed, partly random attributes, 14 distinct races, lots of unique effects (breath attacks, death gaze, doom gaze, stoning gaze or touch, life-stealing attacks which even create undead, etc.), and lots more. It's similar to SMAC in that it gives the player a lot of possibilities but has a weak AI. Again, the difference to Civ5 is that in MoM the sheer amount of content outshines the AI's problems in using it.

I would like to add something here. Despite my assertion that MoM is overrated, which I feel is true due to its overwhelming bugginess, a MoM2 handled by someone like Soren Johnson could be great.

Master of Magic was very, very ambitious and they clearly bit off more than they could chew. A lot of the spells show a glimmer of creative genius, as well as the more practical wisdom they employed in essentially shoplifting Magic: The Gathering's core concept of the Color Pie. Elemental:War of Magic failed largely because it failed to do these exact things.

On the other hand, a shocking number of bugs writhe just under the surface. I forget the details, but something like 20% of the more "subtle" effects don't work whatsoever. As a rule of thumb any effect in Master of Magic that you can't see working isn't working.

 

[Psyringe]

I'm not even bringing graphics into the equation. I'm saying that, by and large, mechanics have gotten more refined and more deliberate as 4X design has improved.

In general I'd agree. However, the problem that I see with Civ5 specifically is that it threw lots of these more refined mechanics overboard instead of using and/or evolving them. It reintroduces building maintenance in a game that tries to reduce micromanagement. It reintroduces ICS as an effective strategy. It reintroduces the "build a handful units and conquer the world" strategy from Civ1. It reintroduces a 1upt limitation, which was a technical limitation that strategy games overcame decades ago. It reintroduces the infamous "build and destroy for net gain" exploit. It reintroduces a rules system in which money is paramount and everything can be bought. I'm currently not sure how it deals with spillover production and research.

As far as I can see, Civ5 has removed more of these refined mechanics than it actually implemented, let alone evolved. (However, as usual, this may change since it's at an early stage of its lifecycle.)

 

[Neomega]

MoO3 was Certainly the worst ever. I smashed my cd to pieces the day after I bought it, when Fred Meyer told me I couldn't return it. I'm still pissed about spending $50 on such a load of garbage.

 

[Superluminal]

the damn opening FMV cant be skipped for some ing reason, I want to smash the face of the old man in the tent so much.

Hilarious, leave the old man alone dude.

 

[Buccaneer]

I think it all has to do with your expectation level pre-release. I thought there were enough red-flags pre-release that it lowered my expectations and felt it could be another Civ3-type release for me.

 

[Thormodr]

Hilarious, leave the old man alone dude.

Yep, it's not his fault. He is the personification of Civs I through IV designers. Sid Meir, Brian Reynolds and Soren Johnson.

He's the good guy.

His son is Shafer though. He's the bad guy.

Someone should make up a parody video about that methinks.

 

[Superluminal]

Yep, it's not his fault. He is the personification of Civs I through IV.

He's the good guy.

His son is Shafer though. He's the bad guy.

Wow, this changes everything. You totally blew my mind bro, so maybe this is the part the old man talks about of great sorrow and all that? Yeah so that means Civ 6 will reunite the community once again. I said it today, Oct 17, 2010 6:37pm Sunday (EDT)

 

[Saarud]

Well by far the game Destiny that was released in 1996 by Interactive Magic, the game was suppose to be "Civilization on Steroids" was my biggest letdown. I remember not having time to play it for almost a week though I did read the manual over and over again and it really seemed to be the ultimate civilization game. When I actually did get time to play I realized quite quickly that the game was soooo broken and bad in just every way and from that day the game Destiny to me was the biggest let down game ever.

Civilization 5 however I like alot though I agree that it wasn't ready for release. Firaxis has some serious issues to take care of namely the bad AI and some balance issues. I have faith in Firaxis and I know they will patch the game together however I do feel for those that think they have been cheated. All I can say is that in the future try to make sure of what you are buying.

 

[MadRat]

MoO3 was Certainly the worst ever. I smashed my cd to pieces the day after I bought it, when Fred Meyer told me I couldn't return it. I'm still pissed about spending $50 on such a load of garbage.

I immediately put up my copy up for sale online as some poor sap bought it for $45 (paid $55) two days after buying it. I even told him it was a stinker when asked about why i was selling it, but in his words "well i heard some bad stuff but I really wanted to try it out."

/shrug

Rat

 

[TommyVern]

Opinion

 

[Graceheart the Leopard]

Response to the opinion. Condemnation of the OP for overreacting to the game.

 

[Qoojo]

You obviously have not played Deer Hunter 5. All you had to do was shine a light on the deer, and they just stood there while you shot them. Worst AI ever. At least in Deer Hunter 4 you had to be in your expensive sports car or on your motorcycle to freeze them like that.

 

[Disgustipated]

Thanks for the link to Forbidden Forest. the music for this game kicked ass! This game scared the crap out of me as a kid, even with it's poor graphics.

 

[marconos]

You obviously have not played Deer Hunter 5. All you had to do was shine a light on the deer, and they just stood there while you shot them. Worst AI ever. At least in Deer Hunter 4 you had to be in your expensive sports car or on your motorcycle to freeze them like that.

In RL you can make deer freeze with a dang flashlight. Deer are dumber then a box of rocks so the AI in the game sounds accurate to me .

On the CIV5 side. I have installed it, pushed through a game, started some others. I'm too bored to finish anything, I just don't enjoy the game. I was so looking forward to it after all the many many many hours I played in Civ4BTS. Ah well, back to blizzard games (not wow ).

 

[taylor_cu]

Civ V suck a lot
an other sucker game: Empire Total War