Could Someone Please Review Civilization 5 For Me?

[Defiant47]

Greetings,

I am big fan of Civilization 4, but now I'm considering getting the 5th. I would very much appreciate if someone (probably a bunch of people) gave me their honest opinions on the game, and gave me a good overview of the changes.

I'd like to hear some reviews from some fellow gamers and CFCers, not just read a bunch of flashy features on the back of the (what-do-you-call-it) game "carton??".

You can consider me to have only played Civilization 4. I played Civ2 a while back, but it was too long ago to consider that I remember anything about it!

So for example, something like "well Civ5 uses hex grids, which are more appropriate than Civ4; this changed in this significant way, this didn't really change all that much; overall it's bad, stick with Civ4/nothing too spectacular but pretty good, pick up at your leisure/definitely worth buying, a very good improvement."

Thanks in advance, awesome people!

 

[aatami]

I wrote and quoted a neutral comparison between V and IV. (+ got angry at some people for not even wanting others oppinions and just moaning that the game is completely doomed)

CLICK

It wholly depends on what you like in a civilization game.
IV is more about thousands of tiny, inconsequential decisions (micromanagement), V about making leadership decisions, each of which is important and meaningful.
WARNING: If you love the first option, don't buy the game since it will be very boring for you.

Also a extremely good post by a V player. CLICKCLICK Will help you understand V better.

 

[NBAfan]

I wrote and quoted a neutral comparison between V and IV. (+ got angry at some people for not even wanting others oppinions and just moaning that the game is completely doomed)



It wholly depends on what you like in a civilization game.
IV is more about thousands of tiny, inconsequential decisions (micromanagement), V about making leadership decisions, each of which is important and meaningful.
WARNING: If you love the first option, don't buy the game since it will be very boring for you.

Also a extremely good post by a V player. CLICKCLICK Will help you understand V better.

That post you linked is very helpful.

 

[Defiant47]

Very helpful indeed!

Bear in mind, though, that I play Civ4 at a difficulty level that I'm happy with. So I usually play Monarch/Emperor even though I could ultra-micromanage and do Immortal/Deity; but there's no point in that for me.

So tell me, in what ways is it less micromanagement and more big-picture decision-making?

 

[lschnarch]

I would very much appreciate if someone (probably a bunch of people) gave me their honest opinions on the game, and gave me a good overview of the changes.

As a first impression, just check with the headlines of the first two pages in this very forum.


In general, the current game, sailing under the flag of "Civilization" games, has split the fanbase like no other iteration has done before.
If you like Civilization4, chances are good that you won't like the other game very much.
It mainly suffers from (in no particular order):
* very bad combat AI
* very weak overall AI (city placement, constant blocking of units due to the so-called "1upt" [1 unit per tile])
* a diplomacy which is regarded very bad by an overwhelming majority of players
* very long turn times for no apparent reason
* an UI which makes it hard to get necessary information at one glance
* an UI which may indicate unit movements as invalid, although they aren't
* an UI which sometimes doesn't display combat of own units, but of other nations somewhere else on the map
* very bad multiplayer support (online very bad; PBEM and hotseat completely missing at the moment)
* an illogical techtree
* high hardware demand for low benefit

And these are only the points which come to mind immediately.

The players who still are playing it, mainly praise it for less decisions to be made, less interaction, less options, less things to do.

 

[Soronery]

Isn't there a demo out there? If not you can try the game out via other means...*ahem. if you like it then buy it. I tried it out, I thought it was a good game so I bought it.

 

[Defiant47]

* very bad combat AI
* a diplomacy which is regarded very bad by an overwhelming majority of players
* very long turn times for no apparent reason

Which were still present in Civ4

* very weak overall AI (city placement, constant blocking of units due to the so-called "1upt" [1 unit per tile])

Say what? 1 unit per tile? How can you ever capture a city then?

* an UI which makes it hard to get necessary information at one glance
* an UI which may indicate unit movements as invalid, although they aren't
* an UI which sometimes doesn't display combat of own units, but of other nations somewhere else on the map
* very bad multiplayer support (online very bad; PBEM and hotseat completely missing at the moment)
* an illogical techtree
* high hardware demand for low benefit

High hardware demand might be a problem. I have a 2-years-old laptop that probably can't run StarCraft II and certainly runs fairly slowly with Civ4.

Isn't there a demo out there? If not you can try the game out via other means...*ahem. if you like it then buy it. I tried it out, I thought it was a good game so I bought it.

Yeah, I know, it's just I don't have all that much time in the day to try out all these games that people keep telling me about and that I know are out.

 

[Soronery]

Civ 5 runs like ass. If Civ4 is slow I wouldn't even bother trying Civ 5. Also, I think Civ 5 was rushed out to meet the release deadline or something. Multiplayer is indeed incomplete.

 

[Anthropoid]

I don't own the game. But one other thing to be noted: it requires Steam. That is why I didn't buy it, and why many of us didn't buy it. Even for those who did buy it, it seems to have been one additional irritant.

Another fact I'd point out, just based on having hung around CFC quite a bit the past couple months: Ischnarch is absolutely correct about the game having polarized opinions among the CFC membership. Some people seem to love it, and defend its merits tenaciously. Others, in apparently comparable numbers, seem very disappointed with the game.

 

[bryanw1995]

Which were still present in Civ4



Say what? 1 unit per tile? How can you ever capture a city then?



High hardware demand might be a problem. I have a 2-years-old laptop that probably can't run StarCraft II and certainly runs fairly slowly with Civ4.



Yeah, I know, it's just I don't have all that much time in the day to try out all these games that people keep telling me about and that I know are out.

I loved cIV, it is one of my top 3 games of all time, but I'm really enjoying civ5 now as well. however, I have an i7 @ 4.0 and a gtx 460 to game with. if your 2 yr old laptop struggles with cIV then you need to wait on civ5 until you have a better system.

I don't own the game. But one other thing to be noted: it requires Steam. That is why I didn't buy it, and why many of us didn't buy it. Even for those who did buy it, it seems to have been one additional irritant.

Another fact I'd point out, just based on having hung around CFC quite a bit the past couple months: Ischnarch is absolutely correct about the game having polarized opinions among the CFC membership. Some people seem to love it, and defend its merits tenaciously. Others, in apparently comparable numbers, seem very disappointed with the game.

actually, what has happened is that there are 10-15 hardcore civ5 haters that for some reason spend all their time trolling in the civ5 forums. same thing happened with the cIV launch, but cIV was such a huge leap over c3 that the haters were mostly drowned out.

steam has definitely been controversial, though many of us actually prefer it to having to worry about dozens or hundreds of cd's lying around/taking up space/etc.

Moderator Action: Please try to avoid calling those who dislike the game haters and trolls. Thanks.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Brian Shanahan]

If you want a fair and balanced view of the game read Sullla's reports and editorialising here. Despite what some people have said (i.e. that all he wanted was "civ 4.5") he clearly wanted a fresh new game which would have been a lot different than IV in a loth of ways (but retaining the stuff that worked well). He was clearly disappointed.

 

[bryanw1995]

sulla, like the rest of us, was spoiled by cIV. if you go back and read his c3c comments they were similarly bad, though many of us liked that game as well. I don't agree with aatami that micro was the only way to enjoy cIV, but I still really enjoy civ5 and would strongly recommend it to the OP.

 

[Thormodr]

I have been playing the Civ series since its inception.

Frankly, I found Civilization 5 to be extremely dull. There is very little immersion at all compared to cIV. Don't be fooled by posters that say the "haters" merely wanted cIV. We merely wanted an interesting, entertaining game experience and the latest iteration of the franchise utterly fails to deliver that.

While there are some things which are better such as hexes and some nice graphics, it's not enough to save this game. 1UPT is actually a very good idea in theory but it utterly fails due to pathetic AI that just can't handle it. I doubt they'll ever get the AI up to snuff in order to fix it. City States are another good idea but they are very poorly implemented.

City placement matters less and there are a lot less interesting decisions to make. All cities seem to feel the same.

Honestly, I'd advise against anyone buying it. It breaks my heart to see what they've done to this franchise.

 

[aatami]

@ OP: Also keep in mind, that the game will be made better little by little, as IV was. (yes yes, you can come on complaining how can I be sure, but how can we be sure of anything..?) IV wasn't that great in the beginning either, and frankly I think V is now in a better state than IV was four months in.

 

[cf_nz]

If you want a fair and balanced view of the game read Sullla's reports and editorialising here.

Whilst I wouldn't necessarily consider Sulla's writings either fair or balanced I do recommend reading them simply to see if the issues raised are the sort of things that will be of concern to you.

 

[Thormodr]

@ OP: Also keep in mind, that the game will be made better little by little, as IV was. (yes yes, you can come on complaining how can I be sure, but how can we be sure of anything..?) IV wasn't that great in the beginning either, and frankly I think V is now in a better state than IV was four months in.

Also keep in mind that the situation with Firaxis is nowhere near the same as it was before with cIV. Who is running the ship there now? Who really is in charge? It's a rudderless ship afloat on a vast ocean.

Do you honestly think 2K Games is going to let Firaxis hire a competent, experienced person to fix this mess? That would cost money and the shareholders would get angry.

 

[Brian Shanahan]

sulla, like the rest of us, was spoiled by cIV. if you go back and read his c3c comments they were similarly bad, though many of us liked that game as well. I don't agree with aatami that micro was the only way to enjoy cIV, but I still really enjoy civ5 and would strongly recommend it to the OP.

Actually I have read nearly all his comments on C3 using the way back machine at archive.org to get them (about half the pics are missing but text all there), and my impression of what he said was "good game, pity about the bugs and imbalances". And also he was as sick (from his writings) of Civ 4 when Civ 5 was announced as he was in the same period between Civ 3 and Civ 4.

Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't allow you to (inadvertantly in your case, not so in others') colour their views in a way that is both fallacious and unfair.

 

[Frozensky]

Civ5 makes an amazing first impression, because at the surface it's a great game. However, the further you attempt to explore its depth, the more frustrated and disappointed you become.

Is it hopeless? No, but it may be a while before the game makes a good impression on people again.

 

[Ankh]

Ignore the people here. Download the demo and try it yourself to see if you like it or not.

Build your own opinion about the game, ignore what others tell you to think about it.

 

[cman2010]

Civ5 makes an amazing first impression, because at the surface it's a great game. However, the further you attempt to explore its depth, the more frustrated and disappointed you become.

Is it hopeless? No, but it may be a while before the game makes a good impression on people again.

this is well put.