Civ Vets, what do you think?

[nukehumvee]

I'm no experienced Civ fan. I first started with IV (which I played sparingly) and only played with Civ V the most.
But of course, this place is teeming with veterans who played civ since Civ I or II, maybe even III.

I want to ask these more experienced ones out of all of us: What do you think about Civ VI?
Is it a refreshing, interesting take of a strategy game classic to you?
Or do the strange, unfamiliar new features alienate you?
What new stuff/concept do you like/dislike?

 

[Lillefix]

I've wanted to spread out my cities since civ1, so I'm happy. And we have multiple leaders. Now if we can have a picture of two people talking in a tavern every time we hear a rumor.

 

[Bibor]

This poll has too few options to express my opinion.

 

[ProMeTheus112]

If nothing goes wrong I can't see Civ VI not being better than Civ IV, the design has potential for quite a bit (lot?) more depth overall imo!

 

[Ikael]

I have not been so excited for an strategy game in ages. Everything revealed so far shows a far deeper understanding of game design and balance than most strategy games. I am confident that Civ 6 will utterly rolfstomp Civ 5 vainilla, and that it might dethrone Civilization 4 as the best entry of the saga... and that's without expansions (!).

 

[Mustakrakish]

Ok. Played since II. Overall I didn't like the route V took from IV and I never was as immersed in the game as in IV, but I since long ago accepted the route they went nor gone back to IV. I also know exactly what changes I'd do to V for it to be as good as possible for myself, those are not impossible changes that would go against the game itself, but alas I'm no modder.

That said, I see no reason whatsoever for VI to NOT be better than V. It's virtually impossible as it is not a revolution with its risks as in IV > V, it's an improvement in every aspect (civ 5.6 if you may, in not at all negative light). So yeah, I'm excited, very much so, but not at all yet decided if I'm gonna risk it buying on release. Don't want to be beta tester, but I'm also an impatient human and I can't imagine being able to wait till a few patches.

 

[nukehumvee]

This poll has too few options to express my opinion.

Suggestions are welcome.

 

[Svip]

I don't get why people are calling Civ6 stuff like Civ5.6. Isn't Civ3 just Civ2.5 then? Hell, even Civ4 is also mostly improvements upon Civ3.

With amenities, housing, districts, civic tree, casus belli, etc., Civ6 is definitely worth of its own number. Hell, moreso than Civ5. Or Civ2 in particular.

Add to the fact, that Civ6 is built on an entirely new engine (unlike Civ5 which uses the same engine as Civ4), even from a technical standpoint, Civ6 is its own version.

 

[SJSerio]

I've been playing since 2. Civ has risen to be one of my top go-to games. It has sparked many interest in history to the point that I am now going to school with a history major.

That all said, when Civ V came out, I was turned off by a number of changes. 1UPT, a stress on smaller empires, etc. Still, I gave it a chance. While certain things did pull me into the game, it really did fall flat. Subsequent DLC and expansions did help me get used the system and improved the iteration greatly. It was not great... But it was playable.

With Civ VI, I am looking forward to it with great anticipation. I am interested in the district system, multiple leaders, and many of the other features that are making a return and seeing how they have adapted. I also love the look with its vibrant design that makes it feel alive. A great contrast to the hard, dull look off Civ V.

Sent from my LG-H345 using Tapatalk

 

[VicRatlhead5199]

I don't get why people are calling Civ6 stuff like Civ5.6. Isn't Civ3 just Civ2.5 then? Hell, even Civ4 is also mostly improvements upon Civ3.

With amenities, housing, districts, civic tree, casus belli, etc., Civ6 is definitely worth of its own number. Hell, moreso than Civ5. Or Civ2 in particular.

Add to the fact, that Civ6 is built on an entirely new engine (unlike Civ5 which uses the same engine as Civ4), even from a technical standpoint, Civ6 is its own version.

IV to V felt like a more drastic change than V to VI looks like it'll be. At least I assume that's why people say that.

 

[Svip]

IV to V felt like a more drastic change than V to VI looks like it'll be. At least I assume that's why people say that.

Well... all Civ5 did was make the tiles hexagons and introduce 1UPT. I admit those are big changes, but then you could make the point that Civ5 was the biggest upset ever to Civilization.

But calling it Civ5.6 also seems disrespectful of the game designers, as if they are required to have revolutionary ideas. But once you've done hexagons and severe stack limits, what else is there to radically change about Civilization?

 

[wotan321]

I've played Civ from the beginning, but I did not buy/play Civ V due to the 1UPT. Even though it remains in Civ VI, I like almost everything else about the upcoming game. I just hope maps can be big enough for historical scenarios, and that it is easy to mod.

 

[ZenSpider]

I'm very much encouraged by what I've seen so far. The new features look like they'll add some much-needed depth but also breadth in terms of the flexibility to build out your civ in the way you want while not sacrificing the ability to adapt to changing circumstances.

The key I guess will be making sure these new (and revised) systems are well-balanced so that all of that wonderful complexity doesn't end up being reduced to a small handful of viable or clearly optimal strategies.

 

[Mustakrakish]

I don't get why people are calling Civ6 stuff like Civ5.6. Isn't Civ3 just Civ2.5 then? Hell, even Civ4 is also mostly improvements upon Civ3.

With amenities, housing, districts, civic tree, casus belli, etc., Civ6 is definitely worth of its own number. Hell, moreso than Civ5. Or Civ2 in particular.

Add to the fact, that Civ6 is built on an entirely new engine (unlike Civ5 which uses the same engine as Civ4), even from a technical standpoint, Civ6 is its own version.

Did you read my post in its entirety? Or you just enjoy taking stuff out of context?

I basically explained why I think it CAN'T fail... oh well...

 

[Shafi-is-back]

This poll has too few options to express my opinion.

I think the poll is only for those who liked and played civ V extensively

 

[Kirejara]

I have played so far Civ I to III. I was very dissapointed of Civ IV (Graphics, overloaded techtree, lack of a usable editor and nearly every other change from III), so I have never finished a single game in IV (to be accurate: I have never played past the ancient age! ).

I have also never played Civ V as I am unable to make out whats happening even on screenshots. This may be caused by being partly colorblind. Also I dislike the liveless display dummies as leaders (who also cross into the uncanny valley).

But I like so far, what I have seen from Civ VI. The graphics are much clearer and nicer and provide more easy information than in IV and especially V.

The changes in gameplay also look promising.

And I like the new cartoon leaders.

 

[JimmyBanks]

I've played Civ since the original although I think I got it a couple of years after it 1st came out. I even played the original Colonization. I am really looking forward to the next iteration of the game. While there are some things that have disappointed me, they are mostly superficial. I am annoyed that there are not enough variety with civs from different parts of the globe and I am sick of Gandhi as the leader of India. I imagine both of these can be fixed by modders.

As I said superficial changes. I like the unstacked cities concept and am really looking forward to seeing how it all goes. I've pre-ordered so clearly I'm hoping it's a great enjoyable game.

 

[Svip]

Did you read my post in its entirety? Or you just enjoy taking stuff out of context?

I basically explained why I think it CAN'T fail... oh well...

I did read your post in its entirety. I was not attacking you per say. I concur with most of your post. I just take issue with referring to Civ6 as Civ5.6, even if you meant no offence. That's all. I suppose, I should have made it clear that it was more the fact that you brought this trend up, because I've seen seen it elsewhere, and not in particular your usage of it.

I am very excited about Civilization VI.

 

[raen]

I believe its Better then civ V but I dont really know, but making 25 years I have to buy it, I am 25 years playing this! Only game I still play and buy.

But I didnt buy civ 5, too many changes and problems from one version to another. Now they must know better.

 

[Lexicus]

I voted the second option for the hell of it. Did not like the direction V took, haven't played V in nearly three years but still regularly play IV.

Will wait and see what the IV-loyalist crowd has to say about VI before I get it, and will absolutely under no circumstances be paying full price (ie will wait until a Steam Sale where the game is $20 or so, which may take a while).