Civ V taste test.

OzWiz

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
22
Location
The Deep North, Australia
Remember how Civilization used to taste?

Mmmmm, I do!

Rich, intricate flavours tantalized the senses. The interactions of myriad layers of subtle, and not-so-subtle ingredients were always new and interesting. By carefully selecting morsels each mouthful could be made unique. As I consumed, in a very real way, I also helped create that great Civ experience.

Surprisingly no matter how much one gorged there was always room for just one more bite.

And so, with great anticipation, I ordered the all-new Civ V. It looked delicious even if the presentation was a little crude: while the new shape of the components was superior to the simple square-cuts of the past, and I loved how combat units were presented in chunks, rather than tall layered-pancakes, the plate was decorated with large, distracting blobs of colour and the utensils felt a little unwieldy. I remembered that this was the work of new chefs, and that the taste was what really mattered. The hype of the critics reassured me too as, with trembling hands, I placed the first morsel onto my tongue.

Immediately I knew something wasn’t right. Sure it was unmistakably Civ-like, but it was just ... insipid. The complexity was gone. Frantically I tried mixing different elements but unlike before it made no difference. Regardless of my choices it always seemed the same – bland and with a slightly acrid aftertaste.

Quickly I was satiated and could eat no more. I took time to observe my fellow diners, who seemed to fall into two camps. There was profound disappointment on the faces of the diners who like me, felt the new Civ was lacking. And I felt envious as I saw the gusto, the passion, I too had once felt as others could not help themselves, try as they might, from having that just-one-more-bite. I could not help wonder how long their enthusiasm would last – but was this real concern or the bitterness of loss ... I could not tell.

The chefs weren’t interested in my criticisms. “That’s how it was planned”, they stated. But I knew, both from the list of ingredients they had carelessly left in my menu and from the lack of herbs and spices, that much had been omitted. Why this would be I couldn’t be sure, although I did note that the number of kitchen staff had been recently reduced.

And so, even as I sit here dreaming with melancholy of that glorious old-style Civ, I wonder if they will ever take the best of the two recipes and combine to create a hearty, delicious successor for me - and other grief-stricken diners? Or are my tastes too old fashioned, never to be catered for again?
 
I'd give it time, it needs fixes and certainly a deal of expansion, but there is a good game underneath I believe. I also miss alot of the complexity, and I don't think it's as forgivable as some, because there is no reason to go back to square one with Civ5 when Civ4 was at square 28, but they did. It will get there.
 
Civ 4 sucks the more you look at it. I couldnt play it until I got the revolutions mod. Even then it was pretty annoying. And that is with several years of patching and 2 expansions. Civ 4 was all about war, which is quite ironic since the war system was so bad compared to Civ 5. Size=strength. Nobody gave a damn about maintenance after currency. You make it sound all so deep when all you had to do was war. The game was so easy that even after spending half your early game fighting off your own people (rev mod) and be eras behind, I could jump strait back up to lead with a couple wars which were so easy to win with siege spam. It was one dimensional; not complex.

Sure, I wish Civ 5 couldve been better, but many of the problems would be fixed easily with patches or quick mods, while the problem with Civ 4 war dominance wasnt something fixable without changing the core game. So I say give Civ 5 some time.
 
tl;dr. Actually I read most of it, but..

It seems like you took a lot of time to write an eloquent rant about unfounded (or at least unexplained) opinions. Are you going to go into a little more detail about what bothers you, or are you just super hungry and killing time til food's ready?
 
Civ 4 sucks the more you look at it. I couldnt play it until I got the revolutions mod. Even then it was pretty annoying. And that is with several years of patching and 2 expansions. Civ 4 was all about war, which is quite ironic since the war system was so bad compared to Civ 5. Size=strength. Nobody gave a damn about maintenance after currency. You make it sound all so deep when all you had to do was war. The game was so easy that even after spending half your early game fighting off your own people (rev mod) and be eras behind, I could jump strait back up to lead with a couple wars which were so easy to win with siege spam. It was one dimensional; not complex.

Sure, I wish Civ 5 couldve been better, but many of the problems would be fixed easily with patches or quick mods, while the problem with Civ 4 war dominance wasnt something fixable without changing the core game. So I say give Civ 5 some time.

The game was not all about war; you just chose to play it that way. The actual empire-building aspects of Civ4 were far more rewarding and complex. Civ games have never been 'difficult' for power gamers, so of course you can trivialize the whole game by exploiting AI weaknesses in fighting wars, but in Civ 5 there is nothing *else* to do.
 
My post merely intended to convey, in a hopefully entertaining way, that many Civ-fans feel Civ V has lost some of its yumminess. And even if I failed I learnt some big words.

There are heaps of threads that go into the nitty-gritty of what is good / what needs work. I didn't want to go there.

What I have seen, more than once, is the perceived deficiencies expressed as an "intangible" ... that it just doesn't have "it" anymore. I agree and wanted to say that Civ V doesn't JOMT me anymore.
 
Top Bottom