Civ5-Civ4-Civ3

[Kyriakos]

Originally i was looking forward to trying civ5. Steam, and the negative publicity the game gets in this forum has put me off. Then i learned that it is quite hard to actually mod it, so i would be left with no incentive at all to get the game.

At least, i thought, civ5's gfx are better than the previous games. The LH's definately are impressive, and i like the map. The cities look like crap, but the units might be good.

A few minutes ago, though, i actually came into contact with a pic of a civ5 unit. It is the following, which i suppose is an aircraft carrier:



Well, this unit really is a disgrace. Even beginner modellers can do better than this, i mean even i (who have never made a unit, but know how to use 3d modelling programs) can make something a lot better in less than fifteen minutes... Really this carrier is not only ugly, it just doesnt look at all like a real carrier, but like someone else said it mostly resembles "a flight deck pasted onto a (random) hull".

Granted, i do not have sufficient experience with Civ4 units, since i mostly have played civ3. But i never saw a civ4 unit that looks this ugly.

And from what i know of civ3, the unit quality is wonderfull. Definately no beginner could dream of matching it. Even the original units by Firaxis look great, and it is not just that you cannot zoom in, since their civilopedia pics reveal sufficient detail.

Here is a pic of (modded) civ3:



To conclude i would like to say that it has been my (possibly paranoid, but by now things seem too weird) belief, or rather fear, that the civ companies deliberately tried to make each version lack something the previous one had in abundance, just so that all of the civ series can stay alive. It is probably a wrong idea that i have, but i cannot grasp why some things happen in this series. I cannot grasp why civ3 had no events, when events were one of the most fun features of civ2. I cannot grasp why civ4 had no long range artillery, like civ3 had, or why the gfx were (at least the unmodded ones) quite bad. And of course with civ5 it has been stressed time and again how many features that civ4 had and were an improvement, were just dropped.

I still am hopefull that the modding community can "fix" civ5. But this is not what programmers should expect from gamers. Instead they should produce a quality game, which is finished upon release, and one that modders can improve while still building onto a good basis. But this is not at all what was done, and i am dissapointed...

 

[Gort]

If Steam puts you off, you're probably an idiot.
Moderator Action: Don't insult other members, thanks.

 

[Kyriakos]

Gort, you learn to hold the mirror the wrong way: the thing in the glass is you, not the one opposite you

Reported. Now please refrain from further displays of your incapacity to communicate above the level of the common ape

Moderator Action: flaming other members s not acceptable on this forum

 

[cf_nz]

Where did you get that picture of the carrier and who managed to convince you it was from Civ V? It might be a modded version, it's not what I see though.

 

[AljayBoy]

I dislike Steam, and have been using it since it's inception (when my love for Counter Strike left me no choice) so to call someone an idiot for having reservations about it is completely unnecessary.

Nevermind the fact there are other points in the post you could have commented on, but chose not to.

 

[ruskyandrei]

 

[Tatran]

@Kyriakos
You are insulting the ape. It's a creature with intellect.

I cannot grasp why civ3 had no events, when events were one of the most fun features of civ2.

I can't remember events in civ2. Civ1 had events.

When you look deeper into civ5 then you will see how bad the gameplay really is.

 

[DysprosiumJudas]

Things look ugly at low graphics settings because people like me have shoddy computers. They're usually not indicative of how things look for everyone else.

If the esteemed gentleman two posts above me has not demonstrated this already, take note that everything looks remarkably gorgeous with good computers.

 

[Maktaka]

Also take note that your "Civ 5" image doesn't even share a model with ANY of the units actually in Civ 5. Your ONLY piece of evidence is completely false, and even the most rudimentary of searches to see if your image was actually real would have shown it was not, I have to assume you just made up this whole thread. That does, however, look about right for the model detail of a Civ 4 unit, although the texture is lower res that an actual Civ 4 unit.

 

[dagriggstar]

@Kyriakos
You are insulting the ape. It's a creature with intellect.


I can't remember events in civ2. Civ1 had events.

When you look deeper into civ5 then you will see how bad the gameplay really is.

civ 2 gave users the option to mod events into scenarios live in game. There was a drop down menu you could do it from. It came with explainations of what everything, by far the best "event" system from a civ game in my opinion, for its sheer ease of use.

 

[Nares]

Really this carrier is not only ugly, it just doesnt look at all like a real carrier, but like someone else said it mostly resembles "a flight deck pasted onto a (random) hull".

Which is historically accurate. Most early carriers were literally flight decks built atop existing hulls.

Also, I've never inspected the carrier closely, but that picture looks like it's from a graphics mod.

 

[Venereus]

A lot of bad things can be said about Civ V. But it's units being ugly is not one of them. Other stuff is hideous, like the rivers.

 

[OrsonM]

Rivers yes, they are ugly, but the battles are something Ridley Scott would be in awe of.

 

[Venereus]

Rivers yes, they are ugly, but the battles are something Ridley Scott would be in awe of.

"Gladiator" Ridley Scott, or "Robin Hood" Ridley Scott?

 

[tom2050]

It's a Civ 5 unit in the DB. Maybe someone can post a preview with highest graphics settings?

It's obvious anti-aliasing is not turned on in that game pic.

 

[Polycrates]

It's from this mod

It's not from the main game.

EDIT: And I'm pretty sure it's just a conversion of an old modded Civ IV unit to the Civ V format.

 

[Kyriakos]

Hm, it seems i was lead astray by the pic, i did think (although it seemed strange) that it was a vanilla civ5 unit

Still, the cities in civ5 are quite ugly, and other things i have read about seem to be too.

The main point of the thread was that it would appear (?) that the decisions made on new civ titles do not reflect the will of the community, or possibly even sanity, and the games are either broken, or left to the modders to fix, both of which conditions shouldnt be deemed as acceptable

 

[Andoo]

I think Civ 5 graphic feels totally different when it's on medium-low compared to ultra high. I never understood people not in love with Civ 5's visuals when I was playing on my top machine and then when I tried it on my other sub PC on medium-low, modded Civ 3 looked better on that machine.

Same thing was true when Civ 4 first came out and my PC couldn't handle the game except for tiny maps on low resolution. It improved a whole lot over time as better hardwares were released at lower price.

Edit: Wow your Civ3 buildings look wonderful btw downloading all of them right now.

 

[Iranon]

To conclude i would like to say that it has been my (possibly paranoid, but by now things seem too weird) belief, or rather fear, that the civ companies deliberately tried to make each version lack something the previous one had in abundance, just so that all of the civ series can stay alive.

Is that a bad thing? You can't simply add more and more concepts to a pile indefinitely... at some point the game would become cluttered and inelegant. The makers of the series have not been afraid to topple old concepts and risk offending old-timers since Civ3... with style OR substance.
If we just want a re-skin and a natural progression, chances are there's enough modding talent out there to do it with a base game we like already.

 

[Morgrad]

The main point of the thread was that it would appear (?) that the decisions made on new civ titles do not reflect the will of the community, or possibly even sanity, and the games are either broken, or left to the modders to fix, both of which conditions shouldnt be deemed as acceptable

So you haven't played the game, didn't research the game enough to know if your screenshot was accurate, and posted anyway about how much it sucks?

Pick up a copy of the game and play it awhile -- then you can KNOW why it sucks instead of assuming. Then you can go back to Civ IV like me.