Civilization V has been nominated for Best PC Game by the Spike VGA Awards!

[charon2112]

At least Civ5 tried to mix up the formula. Starcraft is practically a reskin. Its gameplay is completely unevolved to the point that I couldnt even be bothered finishing the campaign.

I absolutely agree!

 

[Maniacal]

Eh in the case of Starcraft people play it for its specific type of RTS (hope people find it fun I don't know, I'm horrible at those kinds of RTS because if you stop to actually watch the pretty battles you'll miss the fact that a small enemy force is raping your base).

I'm glad the Civ series evolves and tries new ideas. Though it seems like a lot of people expected Civ4BTS.5

 

[Billy Bob Joe]

People have opinions. Civfanatics goes into uproar.

ME2 clearly is victim to EA picking apart content and creating more unnecessary micro-transactions instead of creating a base game with content equal to its predecessor pre-EA.

Okay, first problem: EA hasn't "picked apart content" in ME2. As far as DLC goes, there are new weapons, which you don't need at all, and three new quest packs, which aren't in any way "micro". The rest can be obtained simply by buying a new copy of a game rather than a used one, because, you know, the developers and publishers would like to receive at least SOME money if you buy it. Second problem: ME2 is about the same length as ME1, and guess what? Both games were developed under EA. There is no "predecessor pre-EA".

 

[Maniacal]

Some of the DLC, like the Lair of the Shadow Broker, is really good too. They still charge way too much though.

Bioware did, however, screw up the Dragon Age DLC< ugh, what a waste of money (and thankfully I didn't buy all of it). The Gold Edition is a great deal because it includes all the DLC and the mediocre expansion pack.

 

[turboraton]

While I really like Civilization 5, I will be voting for Fallout: New Vegas .

 

[Vordeo]

This thread has not produced the expected meltdown.

I am disappoint.

 

[charon2112]

This thread has not produced the expected meltdown.

I am disappoint.

Wait until page 5 or 6...

 

[Arsenic Steel]

People have opinions. Civfanatics goes into uproar.



Okay, first problem: EA hasn't "picked apart content" in ME2. As far as DLC goes, there are new weapons, which you don't need at all, and three new quest packs, which aren't in any way "micro". The rest can be obtained simply by buying a new copy of a game rather than a used one, because, you know, the developers and publishers would like to receive at least SOME money if you buy it. Second problem: ME2 is about the same length as ME1, and guess what? Both games were developed under EA. There is no "predecessor pre-EA".

ME1 was developed under Microsoft games and EA only came in around the time ME1(a finished product) was ported to PC.


There is 3 armor/weap packs@2bucks per(micro), 1 appearance pack for alternative outfits for 3 out of 12(?) squadmates@1dollah(micro), and the quest packs are 7-10 bucks for anything as small as 1 character + 1 mission(30min of gameplay) to a few more cookie cutter missions that don't exceed expected playtimes of 2hrs per.

If you think the content that is on Cerberus Network(Zaheed, the Beta Hammerhead, planet find some tags, etc) were not content from the base game then EA has done their job in pulling the wool over you eyes. Project $10 is how EA is trying to incentivize buying new retail games and the content that fills up that card is not new or unique. Buying any product second hand does mean that the maker was paid at some point, whacky I know. For EA games it is content taken from the base game.

 

[Blacklanner]

civ 5 actually reminds me very strongly of temple of elemental evil a lot of ways. You play it, and you want to love it because it gets so much right, but there are so many crippling problems and things that are obviously unfinished that it ends up being as much infuriating as fun. (hopefully) the difference here will be a lot of good post release support instead of the quick abandonment of toee. So far the game seems to be slowly being fixed by patches.

I read a review for nvidea's latest and greatest video card the other day, and was horrified that one of the games they picked for testing was civ 5. When any civilization game can be used for a meaningful graphics card test, something is deeply fundamentally wrong with the engine its using. I still think it was a poor choice, because even civ 5 is heavily cpu bound, and you could see that on the test results. But a game of civ's nature has no business implementing resource intensive graphics.

I can get behind civ 5 as goty for 2012. Assuming it continues to get support, it should be done sometime around then.

 

[Maniacal]

There is 3 armor/weap packs@2bucks per(micro), 1 appearance pack for alternative outfits for 3 out of 12(?) squadmates@1dollah(micro),

You're not forced to buy any of it neither is any of it really required in any way shape or form for the gameplay. I bought the 2nd weapons pack but only because the three weapons it adds are really nice to have. Couldn't care less about the others.

and the quest packs are 7-10 bucks for anything as small as 1 character + 1 mission(30min of gameplay) to a few more cookie cutter missions that don't exceed expected playtimes of 2hrs per.

Kasumi is a fully voiced companion you can take along with you for the rest of the entire game and you can get her very early on in the game, though her mission is pretty short. Lair of the Shadow Broker adds a kind of friendly base for Shepherd and has a couple hours of gameplay. I forget the name of another one but its kind of neat. I do agree that none of them are worth the price they are charging but if it was a few dollars cheaper it would be an excellent deal.

If you think the content that is on Cerberus Network(Zaheed, the Beta Hammerhead, planet find some tags, etc) were not content from the base game then EA has done their job in pulling the wool over you eyes.

Which if you buy the game new you get it.

Project $10 is how EA is trying to incentivize buying new retail games and the content that fills up that card is not new or unique. Buying any product second hand does mean that the maker was paid at some point, whacky I know. For EA games it is content taken from the base game.

The reason they put it in is because a second hand sale does mean no money for them, that person is very unlikely to go out and buy the game new now that they have it second hand which results in a lost sale. By now though the ME games are pretty cheap anyways and utterly worth just buying new.

 

[PieceOfMind]

I must admit I've never even heard of these awards before.

 

[ID_Fox]

Problem, Civ V haters?

Perfect. <3 trollface.

 

[Arsenic Steel]

You're not forced to buy any of it neither is any of it really required in any way shape or form for the gameplay. I bought the 2nd weapons pack but only because the three weapons it adds are really nice to have. Couldn't care less about the others.

I am not commenting that the DLC is mandatory or that I am forced the buy them, clearly I am not forced to purchase anything. I called them what they were, micro-transactions. EA micro-transactions represent DLC that is cheap in price but even cheaper on content.

Which if you buy the game new you get it.

Not the point. The point was that in order to implement Project $10 content has to be taken from somewhere. The frugality of EA takes the content from the base game. Project $10 puts the content into a unique which is then locked into one profile. This discourages used sales but also negatively impacts households that have multiple people playing under different profiles, meaning everyone that wants to have equal access to the game will have to play under the same profile or buy their own access cards for their profiles.

The reason they put it in is because a second hand sale does mean no money for them, that person is very unlikely to go out and buy the game new now that they have it second hand which results in a lost sale. By now though the ME games are pretty cheap anyways and utterly worth just buying new.

A publisher not getting money again for a used sale makes sense and in a free market is perfectly acceptable. The new and used market for every product represent different needs and demographics which don't represent lost sales. Bad accountants and managers at EA would like their investors to believe that every red cent that is made on ebay or the used game sales at Gamestop would have been money they made but that is simply not true.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Because unlike you, not everyone believes it's an "unfinished product". The truth hurts, doesn't it?

There is absolutely 0 way you can quantify the civ V gameplay experience as a "finished product". Not with these issues:

- It's possible to play fast enough to spend more time waiting on the game than actually giving it inputs. In a TBS, that's sour, especially on machines above the advertised recommended specs. NONE of the competing games on this list shares this issue.

- Take a quick glance into the CONFIRMED BUGS section for this game on this very forum. Then take a glance into the CONFIRMED BUGS for sc2 and ME2. If you can count, you can probably figure out a pattern here that doesn't favor civ V.

- For example, right now, in the current public patch, it is possible for the governor to show a food surplus and then swap tiles to starve you between turns. THAT represents a complete game in your eyes? I suggest you use those eyes a little.

- The game advertises multiple victory condition, but there's really only 1 way to actively pursue them. Once again, if you're capable of reading, check out strategy and tips and tell me that isn't the case. Once again, the competition does not fall flat in the same way.

- In mass effect 2, you generally know all the rules. In sc2, you know all the rules. In civ V, you do not know all the rules.

- Look up the definition of "fake difficulty", and notice how once again how a certain game on the list tends to have more of it...by a lot.

- Of the 4 games, there is only ONE title with a laughingstock terrible UI. Hmmmmmm, I wonder if we've the pattern yet? Whether it's attempting to skip a turn in a city and being unable to do it, being able to use hotkeys with city queues, lagging on valid unit orders (saying you can't do them when you can, and then on repeated attempts letting you do it), units being displayed somewhere different from where they actually are, invisible units, incomplete information, or simply the requirement of more micro than should be necessary, civ V loses soundly. I have never seen such bad UI for TWO GAMES STRAIGHT in a major game franchise. Controls are design 101, and we've put up with this garbage for years and years.

The terrible thing is that I could go on, but the above are all proven and already paint civ V as being far from a complete title.

Frankly, if what you're saying is the "truth", the only thing that hurts about it is the degree of ignorance that went into the evaluation of what makes a finished game...which borders on the absurd. People who think civ V is a finished title fall into several broad categories:

- Have not played it more than a very short time.
- Were bought off by somebody (this includes many reviewers)
- Haven't played any actually finished games (IE loyal to exclusively the civ franchise and doesn't play other games), and haven't had any coursework/training on what makes a game a complete experience
- Willfully ignorant
- Are so biased based on the genre and past experience that they are blinded to reality
- Maybe I'm missing one

I don't know which category you fall into, or maybe you were playing devil's advocate and snickering at a semi-troll post meant to get a rise out of people...but the simple fact is that civ V is OBJECTIVELY an incomplete game and anyone who believes otherwise has 0 ground to stand on when it comes to making a case otherwise.

 

[jprc]

Best ?

definitely not.

Exellent potential?
Probably.

 

[Maniacal]

- Take a quick glance into the CONFIRMED BUGS section for this game on this very forum. Then take a glance into the CONFIRMED BUGS for sc2 and ME2. If you can count, you can probably figure out a pattern here that doesn't favor civ V.

ME2 has been out since Febuary iirc and SC2 has TEN YEARS of development, Civ5 was just released (though a little buggy yes).

- In mass effect 2, you generally know all the rules. In sc2, you know all the rules. In civ V, you do not know all the rules.

You're comparing 3 different genres and sometimes not knowing the rules isn't a bad thing, this isn't Never Gonna Give You Up. I have little idea about what anything in SC2 does though I've watched it get played once. ME2 is pretty simple, if you couldn't figure out the "walk around, talk to people, choose a response, walk around, point your gun and pull the trigger to someone" gameplay you have issues mentally.

Frankly, if what you're saying is the "truth", the only thing that hurts about it is the degree of ignorance that went into the evaluation of what makes a finished game...which borders on the absurd. People who think civ V is a finished title fall into several broad categories:

I think you are confusing people whom you think think Civ5 is a perfect finished game with people who actually enjoy/like it while waiting for patches and expansions to improve it.

- Haven't played any actually finished games (IE loyal to exclusively the civ franchise and doesn't play other games), and haven't had any coursework/training on what makes a game a complete experience

Are you saying only people who have played the Civ games know a finished game or people who only have don't know one? Because there are a zillion games that are not complete, no dev has time to put every feature into the games they had hoped to do (for whatever reason, time, money, technological constraints, etc).

EDIT: Civ5 might not be completely 'finished' but its not nearly broken like say Empire: Total War or S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Clear Sky were upon release.

 

[charon2112]

nah, you're wrong. Civ V is awesome!

There is absolutely 0 way you can quantify the civ V gameplay experience as a "finished product". Not with these issues:

- It's possible to play fast enough to spend more time waiting on the game than actually giving it inputs. In a TBS, that's sour, especially on machines above the advertised recommended specs. NONE of the competing games on this list shares this issue.

- Take a quick glance into the CONFIRMED BUGS section for this game on this very forum. Then take a glance into the CONFIRMED BUGS for sc2 and ME2. If you can count, you can probably figure out a pattern here that doesn't favor civ V.

- For example, right now, in the current public patch, it is possible for the governor to show a food surplus and then swap tiles to starve you between turns. THAT represents a complete game in your eyes? I suggest you use those eyes a little.

- The game advertises multiple victory condition, but there's really only 1 way to actively pursue them. Once again, if you're capable of reading, check out strategy and tips and tell me that isn't the case. Once again, the competition does not fall flat in the same way.

- In mass effect 2, you generally know all the rules. In sc2, you know all the rules. In civ V, you do not know all the rules.

- Look up the definition of "fake difficulty", and notice how once again how a certain game on the list tends to have more of it...by a lot.

- Of the 4 games, there is only ONE title with a laughingstock terrible UI. Hmmmmmm, I wonder if we've the pattern yet? Whether it's attempting to skip a turn in a city and being unable to do it, being able to use hotkeys with city queues, lagging on valid unit orders (saying you can't do them when you can, and then on repeated attempts letting you do it), units being displayed somewhere different from where they actually are, invisible units, incomplete information, or simply the requirement of more micro than should be necessary, civ V loses soundly. I have never seen such bad UI for TWO GAMES STRAIGHT in a major game franchise. Controls are design 101, and we've put up with this garbage for years and years.

The terrible thing is that I could go on, but the above are all proven and already paint civ V as being far from a complete title.

Frankly, if what you're saying is the "truth", the only thing that hurts about it is the degree of ignorance that went into the evaluation of what makes a finished game...which borders on the absurd. People who think civ V is a finished title fall into several broad categories:

- Have not played it more than a very short time.
- Were bought off by somebody (this includes many reviewers)
- Haven't played any actually finished games (IE loyal to exclusively the civ franchise and doesn't play other games), and haven't had any coursework/training on what makes a game a complete experience
- Willfully ignorant
- Are so biased based on the genre and past experience that they are blinded to reality
- Maybe I'm missing one

I don't know which category you fall into, or maybe you were playing devil's advocate and snickering at a semi-troll post meant to get a rise out of people...but the simple fact is that civ V is OBJECTIVELY an incomplete game and anyone who believes otherwise has 0 ground to stand on when it comes to making a case otherwise.

 

[kaltorak]

1. never heard of this awards

2. most everybody agrees civ5 is better for non civ fanatics

3. about sc2 just beeing a reskin, sc1 has a professional league, you don't change such game totally or the players will stay in sc1. They still added big changes in gameplay, like protoss warping units instead of building, and similar changes for the other races. Sounds like small changes gamewise, but the changes in the tactics (and thats what sc is all about) are huge

 

[Warspite2]

What??!

For unfinished product I am surprised to learn that Civ5 is nominated for best Pc game of the year by VGA Awards:
http://www.2kgames.com/blog/2k-receives-seven-spike-vga-award-nominations

Games nominated for best PC game by Spike VGA Award:

- Fallout: New Vegas

- Mass Effect 2

- Civilization V

- StarCraft 2

I pick Mass Effect 2 for sure, one of the best and most enjoyable games I have ever played.

Well, biggest jokes there are Fallout and Mass Effect 2, games like that should never even be in a best pc game list. Lucky if they have a 1 month shelf life, unlike Starcraft 2 or Civ V both with a solid 10+ year shelf life.

 

[Maniacal]

Have you even played Fallout New Vegas or Mass Effect 2? Sure Mass Effect 2 probably for the avg user has maybe 100 hours or less but its still a pretty damn good story. People still play the original Fallout 1 and 2 today (not many, but some) and they are highly revered. New Vegas itself has dozens of hours of gameplay plus a very talented (and by now very experienced) modding community which can further extend its life.