Civ IV or Civ V?

[azzaman333]

The correct answer for me is, "I don't know" because I haven't played Civ5 (beyond the demo). I did consider buying it at 75% off last night, but then considered that's without any of the DLC, and without the upcoming expansion, which, if it follows Civ4's pattern, will make it a lot better. As the so-so experience of Civ4 Vanilla soured me on that iteration for years, I suspect Vanilla Civ5 would do the same. But, I haven't played it, so I can't say definitively.

Overall, I prefer Civ3 to Civ4. But Civ4 BTS is a lot closer to Civ3 Conquests than Civ4 Vanilla was to Civ3 Vanilla. Had I waited until BTS was out to play Civ4, I might have actually preferred it to Civ3.

You could've bought Civ5 + All/Most (I have no idea which) DLC for about $25US yesterday.

 

[Polycrates]

Curious to know how many of the 10% voting Civ V have actually played both games. Be surprised if it was a large percentage.

Yep, sure have. Played them all since Civ I, and Civ V is for me significantly better than BTS or any of the previous civs as an overall package. It's gotten a bad rap by being wonky and unfinished at release, but it was always brimful of potential and I think that the patching has polished it up nicely and really made it very good indeed. Very much looking forward to the expansion.

Incidentally, the Civ V AI seems to me to really be less purely aggressive as just a ruthless opportunist; it will attack if you've got an insufficient army (near them), but planting a bunch of units on a mutual border will often quash their ambitions in a jiffy.