Civ VI ...Huge disappointment

[Fippy]

OP opinion counts like all those who say "it's an awesome game", this forum is like dictatorship where you are not a nice or valuable poster when you say VI is not a good Civ game. Very low standards here.

 

[Leyrann]

OP opinion counts like all those who say "it's an awesome game", this forum is like dictatorship where you are not a nice or valuable poster when you say VI is not a good Civ game. Very low standards here.

You're very much free to say that, or this thread would've been closed already. But yeah, of course, if you're making a post in any forum whatshowever, if you're saying that the topic the forum is about is bad, then you're going to get a lot of resistance.

That said, I could give you a thousand reasons why both IV and VI are better than V. And then I'm listing it like the Global Happiness system on itself isn't already so bad that it's by definition a worse game than the others.

 

[LethalLeigh]

At this stage only because Civ 6 is still in it's first year I rank the game as followed

4, 6, 5, 3, 2, did not play 1

At the rate it is going I think Civ 6 will be the best Civ game by the time it has 2 expansion like Civ 4 did.
I happen to love most of the new graphics. The wonders look the best as they ever have.

 

[isau]

OP opinion counts like all those who say "it's an awesome game", this forum is like dictatorship where you are not a nice or valuable poster when you say VI is not a good Civ game. Very low standards here.

Well a negative opinion about any product is always going to not be celebrated by the fandom who spends a lot of time enjoying it. There are people who write fan fiction about Miami Vice. I'm guessing if I went on their forums and told them Miami Vice was a terrible show I wouldn't get a warm reception. More like, "Ok, why spend time talking about it then?"

 

[Shorlin]

I effeminately love Civ 6 much more than pre-BNW Civ 5.

is it gilgamesh muscles turning you into a giddy school girl?

Moderator Action: Please do not troll other posters.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

making a joke about a typo is trolling? ok...

 

[nzcamel]

OP opinion counts like all those who say "it's an awesome game", this forum is like dictatorship where you are not a nice or valuable poster when you say VI is not a good Civ game. Very low standards here.

The OP expressed opinions of why they preferred V to VI. I took issue with the claims made. I did not tell them that they weren't entitled to like V more than VI. And the first response (Victoria's) was very accommodating. It's a simple thing though - if you offer "evidence" for a claim you make, you should expect it to be scrutinised. If you don't want that, don't offer evidence. Just make it about your personal choice.

 

[sonicmyst]

While I understand that some civ players find the changes from previous civs a bit "jarring", I think these players should try to play some more. Perhaps the changes may grow on them.

On the bright side, there are changes that looks promising. Some of these are the implementation of districts, the espionage, and the civics tree and policies.
On the other hand, we all agree that this iteration of civ as of now still needs improvement. But for me, the good things outweigh the negative things.

To each his own.

 

[Unconquered Sun]

I'm playing yet another Deity game, selling my extra luxuries to the AI. Small 4-city AIs keep buying the same type again and again for ~30 gpt each in the early ADs. They get no benefit after the first one but want to give me 1,000 gold over 30 turns...Thanks I guess?

We're four patches in and the Diplomacy AI is a trainwreck. The Combat AI is a trainwreck. I get some people like VI as a sandbox, but there are better dedicated sandbox games out there.

 

[Ovidious]

I am still learning VI, so I will not say anything negative until I feel I have learned most of the game, and by then I may not have anything negative to say.

But I will say that I like a couple of things about Civ VI. I like that builders can make a farm, mine, etc. in one turn. That is neat. Also, now I do not know if it is me or what, but at least in this version when the AI declares war on me it does not mean that they have oodles of troops at my borders, all bunched together. Some AI's I will not even see (troops from) right away, not any units near me until many turns after they declared war on me. Also instead of the AI coming after me from one location, I find that they are scattered a bit, with a few near one city and a few near another. First time I saw that I was "What the dickens?". I was so used to the cloud of units barging in from one place only in the previous games.

Ok, I know that I said no negative comments, so I'll phrase this as a wish. I wish builders could make roads. I would prefer having a way to make a road between my new cities by some other means instead of a trader. I think there is a military unit that may be able to do this, but it comes later in the game for me and I'll admit that I have not used one yet, as by the time I get that tech, my roads are already in place. So when I am strapped for cash but also need roads in the early game, I have to initially send a trader to one of my own cities instead of a foreign city or city-state to make some much needed cash. But maybe there is a way I have not figured out yet.

 

[Jaybe]

Ok, I know that I said no negative comments, so I'll phrase this as a wish. I wish builders could make roads. I would prefer having a way to make a road between my new cities by some other means instead of a trader. I think there is a military unit that may be able to do this, but it comes later in the game for me and I'll admit that I have not used one yet, as by the time I get that tech, my roads are already in place. So when I am strapped for cash but also need roads in the early game, I have to initially send a trader to one of my own cities instead of a foreign city or city-state to make some much needed cash. But maybe there is a way I have not figured out yet.

You obviously don't play ...
For the Senate and People of ROME!

My experience is actually quite limited, as I have played only 2-3 games since Civ2 as any civ other than Rome.

 

[nzcamel]

SPQR! SPQR! SPQR! SPQR! SPQR!

(Now to actually get a proper leader from said Republic )

 

[MyOtherName]

Now u can spam units with just one copy of a strategic resource... That breaks the whole concept of strategy... Civ VI was the sequel of Civ IV I would definately like it.

You do realize that Civ 4 also has the system where you only need one copy of a strategic resource?

Also, one copy is not enough to spam units in Civ 6: you additionally need either:

• Two copies
• An encampment in each city building units
• Obsolete units to upgrade

IMO the problem with civ 6 isn't the game systems; it's the UI and AI. I dunno about the AI today, since the UI issue has kept me from trying it out.

 

[Ovidious]

You obviously don't play ...
For the Senate and People of ROME!

My experience is actually quite limited, as I have played only 2-3 games since Civ2 as any civ other than Rome.

Wowzers heh heh heh. That is cool to have that dedication to one civ. I'll be working my way towards playing as them. What I am trying to do is play a game as each civ. I just finished playing as Germany and started a game as.. umm cannot remember, but whomever was next on the list. I remember in Civ 5 that one of the Roman units could also build roads, etc.. So maybe it is the same in VI? I'll find out when I get to Rome.

 

[gettingfat]

I sometimes wonder if these clowns get paid by competitors to come here and write this stuff.

VI is great. Coming from someone who despises change, VI is great. Plenty of things need to be ironed out, but the game is awesome. Gets better every update. The numbers will change.

With so many flaws, it's not great. Good intention bad implementation is not great.

 

[MkLh]

So you don't consider the district system, dual tech trees, unique great people, unique city states, amenities/happiness system, movement rules, AI being able to walk and shoot in one turn, variable policies, traders building roads, the builder system instead of workers, the agenda system (even if annoying, at least you know why someone hates you) and the unique-ness of every civ better than Civ V? Not even one of them?

None of those means nothing as you can just cruise to victory by simple warmongering. Well, maybe if you take it as a sandbox, but as a game Civ VI is just a simple war game. Everything else is needless and underwhelming.

 

[Balkans]

OP opinion counts like all those who say "it's an awesome game", this forum is like dictatorship where you are not a nice or valuable poster when you say VI is not a good Civ game. Very low standards here.

Civfanatics is a fan site for civilization series, so certain percentage of posters act as defenders of Civ VI game. Like there is actually something to defend. And they take it personally.
Also there is a problem of having people who played civ from civ i, and you have new generations who started with civ vi so they don't know any better.

A lot of different factors make this forum site especially difficult to have a valid discussion or opinion exchange. Did i mention that Firaxis don't communicate with it's fan base? I guess someone has to defend the magnificent perfect and worth every dollar game and its even better and cheap DLCs. I also salute the fact that they implemented everything that they had planned into the base game. Otherwise it wouldn't be a 95 A+ game.

 

[Fippy]

Yep you are right, they do not have to communicate with their fanbase anymore.
I remember when Civ (and other awesome series) had 100-200 pages manuals, like a book you get together with your game..

Now it's all about hype, quality of games only matters after that hype goes away and peoples realize "hello, why does this game not interest me for years like those previous classics"..

That's when we will see the value of games like VI.
Those releases are a disgrace anyways, Sid Meier would never have released such a mess.
Now we have a really low tolerance treshold, if it's advertised on youtube and peoples can cheer for it on their smartphones it's already the beeeest game ever.

 

[nzcamel]

Yep you are right, they do not have to communicate with their fanbase anymore.
I remember when Civ (and other awesome series) had 100-200 pages manuals, like a book you get together with your game..

Now it's all about hype, quality of games only matters after that hype goes away and peoples realize "hello, why does this game not interest me for years like those previous classics"..

That's when we will see the value of games like VI.
Those releases are a disgrace anyways, Sid Meier would never have released such a mess.
Now we have a really low tolerance treshold, if it's advertised on youtube and peoples can cheer for it on their smartphones it's already the beeeest game ever.

Why do you want a hard copy manual in the days of broadband internet? Half the information in it would be inaccurate at best by now, after 4 patches. And the cost of the manual has to be covered somewhere. Either the game costs more, or something else isn't included.
Meier did release this "mess". While we know he isn't hands on anymore, he still has oversight (Beach said he and Sid met up weekly during design/production) and no doubt interacts with 2K over it's release etc.
I think you need to take your rose coloured glasses off

 

[MaximusPlatypus]

This thread is going great

 

[c4c6]

Also there is a problem of having people who played civ from civ i

Would you please be so kind to specify why there is a problem related to people who played CIV from civ1?