Civ V a step backward?

[Me,myself,and,I]

The first word that came to my mind was SWEET!!!
the smilies are endless!!!

And then I proceeded to play CEaW to brush up on my strategery.

 

[Macadami]

Wow you can really tell the CIV community is dedicated here....and that not many of you seem to play other 'modern games' that much. I can't say I blame you, i go through my 1 or 2 months of nothing but civ 4 about every year still....but i've got some sad news for you.

Civ 5 is designed for consoles, controllers, and a much younger target audience than previous civs.

Unfortunately this is how most modern games of all genre's are headed/currently at....they dumb down the internal workings, add in lots of gimmicks, and reduce the difficulty and knowledge required to beat the game so that anyone of any age or intelligence has a high chance of 'feeling good about themselves'

Expect over simplified commerce, diplomacy, and 'civics.' Gone are the days of intense turn by turn micromanagement....welcome in the age of pressing X to skip to the turn you can fight and have very little if any downfalls for doing so.

Money is in the consoles, and the console mindset. Casual gaming, non thought provoking gameplay, and pretty graphics....8 pages and no one's said this yet?

Look at Dragon Age:Origins...made by Bioware and described as 'the spiritual successor to baldur's gate'.....the game was so simple you could beat it naked(your character, not just you!) on nightmare while using 1 hand. No min/maxing, no character building, just mindless button mashing to victory.

Let's just hope they don't follow the DLC path DA:O took, and offer a single new civ for $5 every month....or worse new units for the current civs.

 

[Ahriman]

Civ 5 is designed for consoles, controllers, and a much younger target audience than previous civs.

Again, wth do you base this on? There is no evidence that supports this.

Gone are the days of intense turn by turn micromanagement

Yes, because 1upt implies so much less micromanagement than just wandering your stack of doom around. /sarcasm.

 

[Dale]

Civ 5 is designed for consoles, controllers, and a much younger target audience than previous civs.

Cite, or retract and begone.

 

[Savoir10]

Wow you can really tell the CIV community is dedicated here....and that not many of you seem to play other 'modern games' that much. I can't say I blame you, i go through my 1 or 2 months of nothing but civ 4 about every year still....but i've got some sad news for you.

Civ 5 is designed for consoles, controllers, and a much younger target audience than previous civs.

No. Civilization Revolution was designed for consoles and a younger target audience. It was also made as a feeder program to get people interested in playing the more in depth PC games.

I would like to know what you are basing your assumptions on. As far as I can tell, you have little or no evidence to make this claim.

 

[Chalks]

Civ 5 is designed for consoles, controllers, and a much younger target audience than previous civs.

What the hell are you on about?

They're doing a PC exclusive release with absolutely no plans to extend it to other platforms.

 

[Le Sage]

Excuse me, Macadami, but money may be flowing in the console industry, yes, but there is still a very much substantial market fpr regular old PC-gaming with intelligence and thought as well. And modding. The fact is that PC games live for an eternity, as compared to console games die after six months. Not all gameplayers are little kids. Some of us actually demand way more than the consoles can ever supply us with.

 

[Me,myself,and,I]

Right sure with you all the way.

 

[GIO888]

Avec le force, Le Sage!

Or, I agree with you. Consoles remind some of us of wasted youth in Mall Arcades!

My only worry with Civ5 is if defending units "merge" into cities defense "points", how can we use them to counterattack?

 

[Savoir10]

Avec le force, Le Sage!

Or, I agree with you. Consoles remind some of us of wasted youth in Mall Arcades!

My only worry with Civ5 is if defending units "merge" into cities defense "points", how can we use them to counterattack?

Best not to counter attack with defensive units. Let them recover. Attack the flanks with offensive units after weakening them with ranged units and air units in modern era.

Unless your back is to the wall. Never attack with defensive units or defend with offensive units.

 

[Charles555nc]

I agree that the "features" of Civ 5 seem huge steps backwards in terms of fun and reasonable complexity. The one unit one square thing sounds REALLY REALLY BAD and is almost a deal breaker (no more epic fights). Cutting out religion and espionage also sounds REALLY REALLY BAD. The one leader per civ leads room for an expanson to farm us outta more money for ready to go "extras"-but this hardly a "feature" than A STEP BACKWARDS. Add in the fact the civilization series never had a challenging AI that didnt insanely cheat (no bragging about the ai so far, so it will most likely be stupid like before)...so really what are we looking forward to, a extremely dumbed down, less real features version of Civ 4? O but the new twist on the civ leaders speaking a foreign language will make up for all the other feature reductions (heavy sarcasm).

What other kind of evidence were you looking for, about it being "dumbed down", wimpy fanboys

 

[jungleroomx]

No more epic battles? Are you crazy?

If anything, Civ 4's endless Stack O' Doom® made combat simple as all hell. Counters always went in favor of the defense.

Having actual terrain and room to engage in battles could make this one of the most strategic Civs yet, at least on the battle front.

 

[Buccaneer]

Speaking of taking a step backwards, the "screenshot" of the user interface in the recent Russian interview shows advisor. Some perked up saying that was cool to see. Why? If I recall correctly, Civ2 had advisors in which everyone turned off. They neve said anything useful ad nauseum. I guess we have recommendations in Civ4 but everyone turns off Sid's popups. Tell me how anything the AI could say to you that would mean anything useful, esp. compared to many of you expert civers?

 

[Savoir10]

I agree that the "features" of Civ 5 seem huge steps backwards in terms of fun and reasonable complexity. The one unit one square thing sounds REALLY REALLY BAD and is almost a deal breaker (no more epic fights). Cutting out religion and espionage also sounds REALLY REALLY BAD. The one leader per civ leads room for an expanson to farm us outta more money for ready to go "extras"-but this hardly a "feature" than A STEP BACKWARDS. Add in the fact the civilization series never had a challenging AI that didnt insanely cheat (no bragging about the ai so far, so it will most likely be stupid like before)...so really what are we looking forward to, a extremely dumbed down, less real features version of Civ 4? O but the new twist on the civ leaders speaking a foreign language will make up for all the other feature reductions (heavy sarcasm).

What other kind of evidence were you looking for, about it being "dumbed down", wimpy fanboys

Real evidence after actually playing the game for a few months. Not just your opinion, based on the small amount of details we have now.

My Opinion of Civ4 after playing it for many months. Stacks of Doom, had zero strategy. Religion sucked. The AI was an improvement on the earlier Civs. Spies were badly implemented. This is still just my opinion. Others will most certainly disagree.

I think the wimpy fanboys remark was brutal. (REALLY REALLY heavy sarcasm)

 

[ori]

Moderator Action: Please keep the discussion civil - that includes no flaming or trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Zeiter]

Am I one of the only ones to think that Civ4 espionage was actually pretty good? I mean, it was better than SMAC's system by leaps and bounds. In Civ4, all of the things that you used to get in one fell swoop with an (overpowered) probe team infiltration (which necessitated the micromanagement of probe teams in every base), you now get incrementally with passive espionage points that don't require any micromanagement to assign to individual cities. Brilliant!

Personally, everything I hear about Civ5 doesn't really thrill me. My only wonder is whether Civ5 will allow for the modding flexibility to eventually bring it up to the level of modded Civ4. If I see that there are good mods coming out for Civ5, then maybe I'll buy it. That's what I did with Civ4. I waited until BTS had been out for about 6 months and bought Civ Complete for pretty cheap, just when all of the good mods were ready to go for BTS. Looking back, unmodded Civ4 without BUG, BetterAI, RevDCM, etc. seems to me now well nigh unplayable...which is probably how Civ5 will seem to me at first.

 

[Thormodr]

I agree that the "features" of Civ 5 seem huge steps backwards in terms of fun and reasonable complexity. The one unit one square thing sounds REALLY REALLY BAD and is almost a deal breaker (no more epic fights). Cutting out religion and espionage also sounds REALLY REALLY BAD. The one leader per civ leads room for an expanson to farm us outta more money for ready to go "extras"-but this hardly a "feature" than A STEP BACKWARDS. Add in the fact the civilization series never had a challenging AI that didnt insanely cheat (no bragging about the ai so far, so it will most likely be stupid like before)...so really what are we looking forward to, a extremely dumbed down, less real features version of Civ 4? O but the new twist on the civ leaders speaking a foreign language will make up for all the other feature reductions (heavy sarcasm).

What other kind of evidence were you looking for, about it being "dumbed down", wimpy fanboys

Wimpy fanboys? Believe it or not, calling other people names does not add to your argument but actually diminishes it.

ciV is going to be fine. 1 UPT is going to make warfare much more interesting. Religion is going to be changed but since we don't know what form it will take it is not prudent to pass judgment on it at the moment. 1 leader per Civ isn't a big deal. If the expansions have lots of content, I'll happily buy them.

Sorry you have such a low opinion of the game. On the bright side, you'll save some money and you can spend it on something you enjoy.

Oh and welcome to Civ Fanatics Forum.

 

[Me,myself,and,I]

And then we can play the game while you waste away on the cIV forums.

 

[Sparthage]

And then we can play the game while you waste away on the cIV forums.

Old civ games NEVER go obsolete. I play Civ III and am proud of it. Am I wasting away? No.

 

[Le Sage]

There are lots of excellent units coming out every week for Civ III too, units, maps and mods that make me jealous, and sometimes wish I was modding Civ III instead. The old Civ games are alive and kicking and I wouldn't be surprised if I myself was creating additions for Civ IV five years from now, while also modding the fiver.