Sorry if this has been done to death on here but i havent played any civ for ages so am out of the loop. I got back into it with Civ4 this week and have been loving it. I was thinking i might give Civ5 another shot but wanted to know if it was improved much with patches since launch when i played it last?
-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
Civ4 or Civ5?
- Thread starter Ronan
- Start date
I would suggest u to use the search feature next time. 
Back to your question. ciV is improved alot by patches & it is really fun. Still it lacks the complexity of cIV but it has more immersive warfare, better graphics & many interesting new elements like Natural wonders, City States, more interesting Unique attributes for civs (UAs, UUs, UBs & UIs). I would reccomend u to try it. BTW what things do you love & hate about cIV ?
Back to your question. ciV is improved alot by patches & it is really fun. Still it lacks the complexity of cIV but it has more immersive warfare, better graphics & many interesting new elements like Natural wonders, City States, more interesting Unique attributes for civs (UAs, UUs, UBs & UIs). I would reccomend u to try it. BTW what things do you love & hate about cIV ?
SemperFi2382
Mitten Marauder
Well, I just played the game for the first time ever on a lower level once through to see how it was and I had a great time. Compared to CivIV, I missed some things, but I definitely think that my next serious play through and Hotseat game is going to be CiV.
So, to answer your question from my opinion, I cannot wait for the Hotseat game my wife and I are playing on CivIV to be done so we can play CiV.
NOTE: I had originally held out until hotseat was a feature so I could play with my wife.
So, to answer your question from my opinion, I cannot wait for the Hotseat game my wife and I are playing on CivIV to be done so we can play CiV.
NOTE: I had originally held out until hotseat was a feature so I could play with my wife.
Lord Chambers
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,004
Babri pretty much nailed it. The things that are new are interesting, but ultimately it's less complex and so I feel like I'm floating when I play it, not driving a car. In 10 years I suspect I'll look at Civ5 as an interesting iteration for the series, whereas Civ4 will be the standard by which others are judged.I would suggest u to use the search feature next time.
Back to your question. ciV is improved alot by patches & it is really fun. Still it lacks the complexity of cIV but it has more immersive warfare, better graphics & many interesting new elements like Natural wonders, City States, more interesting Unique attributes for civs (UAs, UUs, UBs & UIs). I would reccomend u to try it.
There's been a lot of these threads, and at this point, most of the people who like Civ V are in these forums, and most of the people who like Civ IV are in the Civ IV forums. Anyway, I'd give it a shot if you haven't played it recently, the last patch made a lot of changes (almost all of them very good ones). The game's in a much better state than it was at launch.
OMG I don't mean to sound rude but this exact thread comes up every 2 days. I honestly start to think it's a conspiracy now.
Anyway, obvious answer is, why don't you just try? The time spent thinking about it you could have tried a game. Try GOTM17 that's pretty intense.
Anyway, obvious answer is, why don't you just try? The time spent thinking about it you could have tried a game. Try GOTM17 that's pretty intense.
seasnake
Conquistador
I think it Civ V is a better game, it's just a ton of fun. I love the hexes, I love the combat (ranged, 1UPT), I love the social policies, I love the music mixes, the leader screens are awesome, natural wonders are great, city-states always provide an interesting challenge and I think having truly unique civs are strong points. The great wonders are much better balance now too, every wonder is worth prioritizing based on your strategy whereas in Civ IV some like Pyramids and Great Wall were simply OP, while others like Chichen Itza were practically useless.
Civ IV had some things better, however. First, the Diplo AI was more complete. The AI behaved in a rational (albeit not always competitive) way, you could make and keep friends all game. Civ V really needs a Diplo AI overhaul. Further, AI combat is about the same in both iterations but combat in Civ IV was steer a large group of folks toward the nearest civ, see who had the most catapults, and good luck. Combat in Civ V is so much more in depth that it needs an AI that can really evaluate and make good strategies, and that is where it suffers. Modding was much easier in IV as well, all of the source was released and simple programs like Nifskope could create new buildings/units that would work in game. The tech tree in Civ IV made more sense, it allowed for limited bee-lining but understood that you would of necessity know how to make a train before a mechanized infantry, or having Infantry without ever learning "Rifling" was impossible. Finally, the loss of espionage is a serious detriment, you could do a lot with a good espionage system, especially since tech trading is out, so stealing a tech could be huge.
Finally, I preferred the cottage system in Civ IV to the trade posts, the upgrading nature coupled with the little towns dotting my landscape was nice to look at. However, roads are much, much more important and better done in Civ V.
Civ IV had some things better, however. First, the Diplo AI was more complete. The AI behaved in a rational (albeit not always competitive) way, you could make and keep friends all game. Civ V really needs a Diplo AI overhaul. Further, AI combat is about the same in both iterations but combat in Civ IV was steer a large group of folks toward the nearest civ, see who had the most catapults, and good luck. Combat in Civ V is so much more in depth that it needs an AI that can really evaluate and make good strategies, and that is where it suffers. Modding was much easier in IV as well, all of the source was released and simple programs like Nifskope could create new buildings/units that would work in game. The tech tree in Civ IV made more sense, it allowed for limited bee-lining but understood that you would of necessity know how to make a train before a mechanized infantry, or having Infantry without ever learning "Rifling" was impossible. Finally, the loss of espionage is a serious detriment, you could do a lot with a good espionage system, especially since tech trading is out, so stealing a tech could be huge.
Finally, I preferred the cottage system in Civ IV to the trade posts, the upgrading nature coupled with the little towns dotting my landscape was nice to look at. However, roads are much, much more important and better done in Civ V.
The balancing on civ5 with regards to buildings etc. is the best thing the patches did imo. Now you can open Liberty, Tradition or Honour and they lead to vastly different games. It's far less 1 dimensional than it was. That made a massive difference. It's gone from being boring same old game everytime to something very complex. It's got that easy to learn, hard to master aspect. Civ4 I would say was harder to learn as there are more variables, which is fun in a different way. but the core game of Civ5 is very good now.
Civ5 is still terrible slow. Just look at let's play videos on youtube. The Civ5 ones takes forever, like 13-14 hours or so while the Civ4 videos takes 2-4 hours. In Civ4 things are happening. In Civ5 lots of time is wasted by watching the worker slowly travel from one tile to another, watching AI moves, waiting for the in between turns and just extra clicks needed to navigate the UI.
If Firaxis could sort this stuff out the game would be a lot more playable. Some UI tweaks and a "fast moves" option would help a lot.
If Firaxis could sort this stuff out the game would be a lot more playable. Some UI tweaks and a "fast moves" option would help a lot.
Playing in "quick combat" will save you a lot of time...
Late game can be quite annoying and static if you're not at war because of the lack of stuff like spies, some buildings, cottages (I mean cottages evolved through time changing your income while trading posts don't, your cities were developing as the game progressed), etc... But overall it's not so bad. I just want the late game to be as good as the first part.
But all the Civ4 stuff that Civ5 doesn't have were brought through expansions so Civ5 will have new stuff too in the future.
I was around when Civ IV released. It was in not much better shape than Civ V was. Arguably, it was worse.
Civ V post patches has evolved into something like I was hoping for after Civ 3. It's not a radical departure from the basic Civ formula, economy wise, but it's a great evolution. At the same time, it takes a lot from Civ IV as well - like 3 and 4 had a baby and it grew up.
I especially like how far the Social Policies have evolved. It was limiting to think of be only as the Governments mechanic in Civ IV, especially as that mechanic wasn't nearly as well thought out. The way it plays now, it's more like a palette of old Civ IV traits. You can choose to be a "Charismatic" Japan or a "Creative" Japan, totally without modding. It plays significantly differently, too, with neither one being overly powerful over the other.
Civ V post patches has evolved into something like I was hoping for after Civ 3. It's not a radical departure from the basic Civ formula, economy wise, but it's a great evolution. At the same time, it takes a lot from Civ IV as well - like 3 and 4 had a baby and it grew up.
I especially like how far the Social Policies have evolved. It was limiting to think of be only as the Governments mechanic in Civ IV, especially as that mechanic wasn't nearly as well thought out. The way it plays now, it's more like a palette of old Civ IV traits. You can choose to be a "Charismatic" Japan or a "Creative" Japan, totally without modding. It plays significantly differently, too, with neither one being overly powerful over the other.
I believe the general consensus is that, who strongy disliked the game (I really was shocked...) at first try wont like it now either, since there were no significant changes, from this point of view. But if you just stoped playing because of bugs and balance issues, then you should try it now again, since in these fields there were huge imporvements, as far as I heard...
cIV was in much, much, much better shape shortly after release. The only significant issues it really had were with a small percentage of people not being able to run the game. (Me being one of them.)
Civilization 5 still doesn't have functioning multiplayer, awful combat AI and psychopathic AI. The game mechanics keep flip flopping every patch as well. It's quite obvious that the game was released at least a year too early.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as gameplay and the enjoyment factor goes, cIV is a far, far, far superior game.
I'd recommend cIV any day of the week. Perhaps when the source code finally gets released 6 months to a year from now and modders get to fixing Civilization 5, then it might be worth picking up. Should be dirt cheap as well by that time.
Shurdus
Am I Napoleon?
If you refer to a specific post then please specify which, otherwise we have no idea what comments are tollerable and which ones aren't. I honest to god do not understand what is wrong with any comments above your post, and I take it it is unclear for others as well... Please note that I do not challenge or comment on the moderator action, I just ask you to be clear about what is and what is not permissable.
Moderator Action: Please ask this via PM, not in public
.And it was also meant in general, so if you don't see a specific post mentioned, then it's about all the posts
. Anyway, with the latest patches I found even civ5 to be enjoyable, so I would say both civs are good. If you mean to ask which one is in a better state and the more enjoyable game right now, then I would go with civ4 + BtS hands down.
Mitibitibigabot
Chieftain
I'm not living in the past : Civ V.
Kerosene31
Prince
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
- Messages
- 402
I play both.
Nobody can tell you if you will like something. Just try it and form your own opinion.
Nobody can tell you if you will like something. Just try it and form your own opinion.
Mitibitibigabot
Chieftain
Sorry if my poor frogg english skills made me be misundestood ...
I wanted to mean that as a man living in 2011 i try to drive a car up-to-date, have an up-to-date hardware, with up-to-date drivers, and an up-to-date Civ release that goes well with ... I don't criticize people who taste things differently . ..
I thought the question was Civ IV or V, and to me it's quite natural playing the last release ... that's all I wanted to say ...
Well, i's beginning really hard, being my 4th post only ...!
Similar threads
- Poll
