Civilization 5 Rants Thread

[Thormodr]

The advisers in this game are worthless so much so that advisers in the Sim City franchise are more helpful/random when it comes to changes within the game. They were a waste of programming resources that could have been used elsewhere.

Yes, they were. The advisers in Civ II weren't the most useful either but damn they

were entertaining. Civilization 5's advisers just suck period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another thing that I find stupid is the preponderance of calling difficulty levels by numbers instead of name now.

King or Prince level had some elegance to it.

"I just beat level 7" sounds like crap.

Perhaps that's just on these forums and is not something official but I still find it

grating on the ears.

 

[Sonereal]

I can't even think ot the corresponding numbers to be honest. Prince is Prince, Emperor is Emperor, Chieftain is Cheiftain and so on and so on.

If the advisers were funny, they wouldn't be so annoying. I GET IT, MY PEOPLE ARE UNHAPPY. SHUT UP.

 

[Thormodr]

I can't even think ot the corresponding numbers to be honest. Prince is Prince, Emperor is Emperor, Chieftain is Cheiftain and so on and so on.

If the advisers were funny, they wouldn't be so annoying. I GET IT, MY PEOPLE ARE UNHAPPY. SHUT UP.

I would imagine that the "levels" are something that WoW players and other casual newbies could understand. So this is the lingo for them I suppose.

Just like social policies = skill trees.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting game I found:
http://www.lookatmygame.com/Games/Fantasy-Dynasty

They take a shot at Civilization 5 in their trailer. Lol. (Over 300 technologies. 4 times that of Civilization 5)

 

[logintime]

I would imagine that the "levels" are something that WoW players and other casual newbies could understand. So this is the lingo for them I suppose.

Just like social policies = skill trees.

Thing is, levels and skill trees make sense in WoW. That game is an RPG, a style perfectly suited for leveling up and gaining more abilities and powers as time goes by. It's the bread and butter of those types of games.

That's part of what I really hate about the social policy trees: they are skill trees even though it makes no sense in context. Many policies make no sense together. Why does Free Religion require Organized Religion? And why do Theocracy and Free Religion both continue to give benefits once selected, even though they obviously contradict? The social policies have a lot of issues like that. The entire system feels out of place in the game.

Also, you know, lack of flexibility and all that... sometimes I wonder why I still bother with Civ5. These problems have been hashed and rehashed, and I've about given up hope the game will get better.

 

[Thormodr]

Thing is, levels and skill trees make sense in WoW. That game is an RPG, a style perfectly suited for leveling up and gaining more abilities and powers as time goes by. It's the bread and butter of those types of games.

That's part of what I really hate about the social policy trees: they are skill trees even though it makes no sense in context. Many policies make no sense together. Why does Free Religion require Organized Religion? And why do Theocracy and Free Religion both continue to give benefits once selected, even though they obviously contradict? The social policies have a lot of issues like that. The entire system feels out of place in the game.

Also, you know, lack of flexibility and all that... sometimes I wonder why I still bother with Civ5. These problems have been hashed and rehashed, and I've about given up hope the game will get better.

Excellent points. They've tried to cram a square peg in a round hole it seems. Having the ability to run contradictory social policies makes little to no sense. The idea that you can derive the benefits from Theocracy and Free Religion at the same time is ridiculous and poorly designed, I agree.

Personally, I don't bother playing Civilization 5 anymore. I'll wait for the SDK and a total conversion mod.

 

[uat2d]

Yo Thormodr, I'm really happy for you, and Imma let you finish, but Civ3 had one of the best government systems of all time... OF ALL TIME!

Spoiler :

 

[Guardian_PL]

Excellent points. They've tried to cram a square peg in a round hole it seems. Having the ability to run contradictory social policies makes little to no sense. The idea that you can derive the benefits from Theocracy and Free Religion at the same time is ridiculous and poorly designed, I agree.

Personally, I don't bother playing Civilization 5 anymore. I'll wait for the SDK and a total conversion mod.

Same here, I've found Shogun 2 to be a nice refreshment - being not-so-familiar with the Total War series it is great to finally play the game in which I don't understand so many things - it's like back to Civ3/Civ4 times when playing on Prince I was struggling, oblivious to so many game mechanics.

Finding and making use of them, to slowly ascend on a difficulty tree, is a very satisfying feeling. For me this is that "journey" that old Sid was talking about on GDC 2010 - to gather experience, understand more, and increase the challenge, knowing that there's less and less people with same level of knowledge about the game the higher you rise.

I'm disgusted with how shallow Civ5 is. Shogun 2 is far from perfect, but as I said - it's cool to decide to play tutorial (haven't done that for ages) before trying to play the game, and then struggle on Normal, slowly discovering all that complexity that this strategy title has to offer. Well, after applying "less-gloss" patch, cause otherwise everything was so...shiny

 

[Tatran]

CivWorld hasn't its own ranthouse, so I do it here.

This game is very bad and braindead.
The worst part are the "social" players.
These morons are too stupid and selfish to play the game.

I've joined the stongest team a few days ago and within 24 hours they screw up the path to victory.
Losing a science era victory at 98%, while the runner up was only at 66%, within 2 hours is unacceptable.
Now today, a totally unnecessary war, which can't be won because our defense minister is off-line and theirs is on-line,
will cause the ultimate loss of a game which was a 100% win.
This game has horrible game mechanics, because as the only player of my civ being on-line, I could do nothing to change the outcome of the battle.
I can only command my own troops which is insignificant to make any difference in strength.
And everything is too expensive or simply can't be done (wonder events) for 1 person.

If players don't have the time to play then don't join a game.

Btw, I haven't played civ5 for months now. Tried the latest patch, but the damage is already done.
The game is still utterly boring and changing the rules with every new patch is very bad for a game.
Civ5 has started the downfall of the civ series and CivWorld will be the end of it.

 

[Thormodr]

CivWorld hasn't its own ranthouse, so I do it here.

This game is very bad and braindead.
The worst part are the "social" players.
These morons are too stupid and selfish to play the game.

I've joined the stongest team a few days ago and within 24 hours they screw up the path to victory.
Losing a science era victory at 98%, while the runner up was only at 66%, within 2 hours is unacceptable.
Now today, a totally unnecessary war, which can't be won because our defense minister is off-line and theirs is on-line,
will cause the ultimate loss of a game which was a 100% win.
This game has horrible game mechanics, because as the only player of my civ being on-line, I could do nothing to change the outcome of the battle.
I can only command my own troops which is insignificant to make any difference in strength.
And everything is too expensive or simply can't be done (wonder events) for 1 person.

If players don't have the time to play then don't join a game.

Btw, I haven't played civ5 for months now. Tried the latest patch, but the damage is already done.
The game is still utterly boring and changing the rules with every new patch is very bad for a game.
Civ5 has started the downfall of the civ series and CivWorld will be the end of it.

Just wait for the Civ MMO. You thought things were bad now.

 

[Sadan01]

CivWorld hasn't its own ranthouse, so I do it here.

This game is very bad and braindead.
The worst part are the "social" players.
These morons are too stupid and selfish to play the game.

I've joined the stongest team a few days ago and within 24 hours they screw up the path to victory.
Losing a science era victory at 98%, while the runner up was only at 66%, within 2 hours is unacceptable.
Now today, a totally unnecessary war, which can't be won because our defense minister is off-line and theirs is on-line,
will cause the ultimate loss of a game which was a 100% win.
This game has horrible game mechanics, because as the only player of my civ being on-line, I could do nothing to change the outcome of the battle.
I can only command my own troops which is insignificant to make any difference in strength.
And everything is too expensive or simply can't be done (wonder events) for 1 person.

If players don't have the time to play then don't join a game.

What a fantastic post. I had a friend a few days ago tell me practically the same thing about CivWorld. I would never have thought 10 years ago that Civilization would be released and directed at the "casual", "facebook" generation. Disgusting.

Btw, I haven't played civ5 for months now. Tried the latest patch, but the damage is already done.
The game is still utterly boring and changing the rules with every new patch is very bad for a game.
Civ5 has started the downfall of the civ series and CivWorld will be the end of it.

Agree. I cannot even bear to look at the game now. I see it in the list of games in Steam and get as I wasted money on the piece of <snip>.

You have lost me Firaxis as a customer. You will now have to prove yourselves again that your product is actually worthy of my money which means I'll never pre-order again and I will not be buying a Firaxis product upon release.

If only more people did the same to send you, and Take-Two Interactive a really damned strong message.

Moderator Action: Watch the language, please.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Thormodr]

Firaxis/2K Games do need to be sent a very strong message.

Boycotting X-COM Abomination (the crap FPS) would be a good start in showing that idiot CEO that he doesn't have a clue.

 

[MoonFlare]

Firaxis/2K Games do need to be sent a very strong message.

Boycotting X-COM Abomination (the crap FPS) would be a good start in showing that idiot CEO that he doesn't have a clue.

Fat chance. Console kids will buy that crap = money = stupid CEO wins.
Even if we lose - i'm with you on this matter. Let's recruit people

 

[Brichals]

CivWorld hasn't its own ranthouse, so I do it here.

This game is very bad and braindead.
The worst part are the "social" players.
These morons are too stupid and selfish to play the game.

I've joined the stongest team a few days ago and within 24 hours they screw up the path to victory.
Losing a science era victory at 98%, while the runner up was only at 66%, within 2 hours is unacceptable.
Now today, a totally unnecessary war, which can't be won because our defense minister is off-line and theirs is on-line,
will cause the ultimate loss of a game which was a 100% win.
This game has horrible game mechanics, because as the only player of my civ being on-line, I could do nothing to change the outcome of the battle.
I can only command my own troops which is insignificant to make any difference in strength.
And everything is too expensive or simply can't be done (wonder events) for 1 person.

If players don't have the time to play then don't join a game.

Btw, I haven't played civ5 for months now. Tried the latest patch, but the damage is already done.
The game is still utterly boring and changing the rules with every new patch is very bad for a game.
Civ5 has started the downfall of the civ series and CivWorld will be the end of it.

I just tried it and I think it looks great.
You must bear in mind a) its beta and people don't know how to play, b) you could get your friends to join you and make a coordinated team (presumably)

 

[Sonereal]

Firaxis/2K Games do need to be sent a very strong message.

Boycotting X-COM Abomination (the crap FPS) would be a good start in showing that idiot CEO that he doesn't have a clue.

This.

 

[logintime]

CivWorld hasn't its own ranthouse, so I do it here.

This game is very bad and braindead.
The worst part are the "social" players.
These morons are too stupid and selfish to play the game.

I've joined the stongest team a few days ago and within 24 hours they screw up the path to victory.
Losing a science era victory at 98%, while the runner up was only at 66%, within 2 hours is unacceptable.
Now today, a totally unnecessary war, which can't be won because our defense minister is off-line and theirs is on-line,
will cause the ultimate loss of a game which was a 100% win.
This game has horrible game mechanics, because as the only player of my civ being on-line, I could do nothing to change the outcome of the battle.
I can only command my own troops which is insignificant to make any difference in strength.
And everything is too expensive or simply can't be done (wonder events) for 1 person.

If players don't have the time to play then don't join a game.

That's depressing to hear. I didn't have much hopes for a facebook version of the game, and the early screenshots of it looked unappealingly cartoony, but I was still hoping it might turn out to be something worthwhile. Sad to see the franchise continuing to slum.

Btw, I haven't played civ5 for months now. Tried the latest patch, but the damage is already done.
The game is still utterly boring and changing the rules with every new patch is very bad for a game.

Fully agree. Patches only seem to put a bit of gloss on the huge problems that this game still has. And I think your second point is especially excellent- changing gameplay rules constantly means either a lack of direction or a tacit admission that something is deeply wrong.

Civ5 has started the downfall of the civ series and CivWorld will be the end of it.

Well, Civ5 is definitely the precipice at which it became impossible to deny that things were going wrong, but I'd place the beginnings of the series' downfall a bit earlier. Civ4: Colonization was broken (and Shafer's first stab at designing a Civ game), and Civ Revolution wasn't much better. But from the sounds of it, it does seem like CivWorld will be a final nail in the coffin for those of us still hoping the franchise will get back on it's own two feet.

 

[uat2d]

These are all well thought-out posts and I agree with most of what as been said.

However, how I really feel about the current state Civilization series is best described by the following song if we replace every word 'love' by the word 'fun'.

Spoiler :

Link to video.

Fun is gone.

 

[Thormodr]

These are all well thought-out posts and I agree with most of what as been said.

However, how I really feel about the current state Civilization series is best described by the following song if we replace every word 'love' by the word 'fun'.

Spoiler :

Link to video.

Fun is gone.

Lol. You nailed it.

Even as a simple wargame, it utterly flops.

 

[Drakarska]

Fat chance. Console kids will buy that crap = money = stupid CEO wins.
Even if we lose - i'm with you on this matter. Let's recruit people

Not entirely true. All four of my boys are basically console kiddies ( well, My 22yr old is half and half), and they all decided together to mail back their copies of the fine work of console ingenuity called Duke Nukem Forever back to 2K/Take Two. 3 of my 4 boys actually rember The Duke in his glory ( the 4th is to young), and when you get a universal " Dad, this blows (insert favorite profanity)", you know there is a problem.
Unfortunately it seems all about just how much the game industry can milk out of the consumer, with no regard what so ever to a little something called " customer satisfaction". Hope you enjoy those Rolex's Mr. Corp, because one day you may have to hawk it to pay for an attorney.

 

[Thormodr]

Not entirely true. All four of my boys are basically console kiddies ( well, My 22yr old is half and half), and they all decided together to mail back their copies of the fine work of console ingenuity called Duke Nukem Forever back to 2K/Take Two. 3 of my 4 boys actually rember The Duke in his glory ( the 4th is to young), and when you get a universal " Dad, this blows (insert favorite profanity)", you know there is a problem.
Unfortunately it seems all about just how much the game industry can milk out of the consumer, with no regard what so ever to a little something called " customer satisfaction". Hope you enjoy those Rolex's Mr. Corp, because one day you may have to hawk it to pay for an attorney.

Wow! What is it about 2K Games and destroying games that used to be awesome with their own vision of the future?

We all know about Civilization 5 sadly and the bait and switch they did to the long time fans of the franchise.
Duke Nukem Forever was another disaster.
Finally, we've got X-COM Abomination the POS FPS coming out soon.

...and the winner of the award for 2011 is...2K Games!!!

 

[Thormodr]

Interesting blurb on Apolyton Civilization Web site with Dennis Shirk talking about how the Civ community feels that Firaxis has delivered another great game.

The comments are quite interesting to read.

This one in particular gave me a chuckle:

Can there be any other conclusion that this game is the worst flop since barbed-wire covered candy?

Civ community euphoric about Civ5?
by
Zoetstofzoetje
Published on March 20, 2011 13:43
132 Comments Comments

Our forum has seen plenty of debate on the subject of overall game experience with Civ5, often leading to heated discussions. Firaxis' Dennis Shirk finds that fans had "high expectations", and he is happy to conclude that the Civ community "feel [that] we've delivered another great Civ game." (p.25).

This quote comes out of this month's issue of "Game Developer", which narrates the development of Civ5 from perspective of the lead producer, Dennis Shirk. He explains which issues Shafer's team faced, and some of the solutions that they came up with to counter these. We will be covering varying aspects of this issue later, in the spotlight.

We find ourselves exactly six months since the release of Civilization 5. Following this event, several patches, hotfixes, and DLC's have emerged to improve on and extend game functionality. Do you agree with Shirk's assessment? Which gameplay aspects are urging you to go 'one more turn'? Which overall changes might improve on that experience?

http://apolyton.net/content.php/463-Civ-community-euphoric-about-Civ5?#comments