Excitement Overwhelming

[XenoRufus]

Honestly so many new games coming out and after watching E3 there is much to be excited about but honestly I am looking forward to 1.3 more than anything, am I alone here?

 

[inuyashasama]

hehe, from what I've heard so far, E3 sucked this year, so no, you are not alone.

I've been wanting to play Rife for a while now, but I keep telling myself to wait for 1.3. The turn time reduction is going to be the biggest thing for me and my non-dedicated graphics card

 

[CarnivalBizarre]

It will never be released, 6 months of waiting just goes on and on an on *cries like a baby*

 

[Valkrionn]

It will never be released, 6 months of waiting just goes on and on an on *cries like a baby*

We're getting close. A week or two, most likely.

And then once 1.3 is done, other patches should come far faster... The reason 1.3 has taken so long is it's updating the majority of the civs to work with new mechanics. Other patches will be more focused.

 

[Alsark]

Hm... almost, but not quite. My order of excitement goes:

1) Civilization V
2) Dead Rising 2 (and Case Zero)
3) RiFE

However, since RiFE 1.3 will be coming out before the other two (presumably), the order works out pretty well, since the order is working upwards. If Civilization V came out first, I'd spend no time at all on the other two games.

 

[Cyrusfan]

I'm actually not that excited about Civ V, because I figure the first expansion will be released before the successors to RiFE and RoM/AND are ready to go (and the implied cessation of development of the current versions have me bummed). And Gran Turismo 5 tops my list. But of stuff coming out anytime soon? 1.3 all the way.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

I am not at all excited about CIV5.
Its not like it will contain FFH so whats the point.

 

[Torugu]

I'd like to be optimistic about Civ V but for me game releases since Rome: Total War have been I streak of disappointments, and what I've read about Civ V doesn't exactly help... (One unit per tile might help against stacks of doom but I want to play Civ, not Fire Emblem. Also, though I agree that religions in civ have been a bit one sided, removing a feature which has had such a huge impact on history is bit...)

Nonetheless I'm going to buy it as soon as it comes out (unless they pull of a steam only release like they did with Empires: TW, I'd rather go back to playing minesweeper than use Steam) and hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

I am actually thinking of not buying it at all.
I mean, they are moving so much away from CIV4 that it is just not the game I learned to love.

Does anyone else get that feel as well?

 

[Maniac]

nope!

 

[Opera]

Not me, really looking forward to Civ5

 

[Afforess]

I'm actually not that excited about Civ V, because I figure the first expansion will be released before the successors to RiFE and RoM/AND are ready to go (and the implied cessation of development of the current versions have me bummed). And Gran Turismo 5 tops my list. But of stuff coming out anytime soon? 1.3 all the way.

I suspect Civ5 will keep most people entertained for at least a month before you begin craving mods again, which should be plenty of time to build proof-of-concepts and early mods.

I am not at all excited about CIV5.
Its not like it will contain FFH so whats the point.

Looks like you need to get out and play different mods. FFH is a really awesome mod, but there are other genre's.

 

[Valkrionn]

I'm fairly excited about Civ5.

 

[Niveras]

I am actually thinking of not buying it at all.
I mean, they are moving so much away from CIV4 that it is just not the game I learned to love.

Does anyone else get that feel as well?

I'm worried more about the lack of depth and variety going from FFH back to (a) vanilla Civ. It'll be hard to go from a mod in which you have a sundry of different strategies, all viable, to a game that plays the same (to the point of micromanaging a single strategy to best effect), with the only differences between leaders being a single unique unit and traits. FFH offers a lot more replayability than vanilla Civ, despite its issue with the AI not understanding half the mechanics and its multiplayer deficiencies. This is exacerbated by FFH's mods, like RiFE, which add even more diversity to an already broad game.

For my personal estimates, Civ5's new mechanics will probably be worth about 20 hours of gameplay initially, plus the odd game now and again afterwards. But I worry that it just won't capture that same addictive gameplay that the previous Civs did before FFH; FFH has spoiled them for me, and I think Civ5 will be no different.

At least until the mods start coming out. I don't expect an FFH clone, but even a Rise of Mankind mod for Civ5 would be good - something that offers dynamic events during the game.

There's also Elemental: War of Magic that should be out in a year or so. It's a different perspective, maybe not 4X, but in the same ballpark as an empire-building game. Though I don't expect great variety from the vanilla release, it is supposed to be highly moddable. We'll see if a community emerges to make good use of it.

 

[CarnivalBizarre]

I'm looking forward more to Civ5 than I ever did for Civ4. All changes seems very interesting, except the Steam crap. But enough about that.

I played Civ4 for only a little, before getting bored with the same old game I have played since I was in highschool. Now they are spicing things up, removing the stacks of doom, making warfare interesting, adding city states and so much interesting stuff. Maybe Civ 5 will be interesting out of the box? And the engine seems to really be something to build on, for a long time to come!

The thing that bugs me most about this site is that everybody whines about what civs are in the game or not, as if that is even remotly important? We want spain, the game sucks without spain.
Talk about not getting the point....

Sorry about the rant

 

[Celeborn]

There's also Elemental: War of Magic that should be out in a year or so. It's a different perspective, maybe not 4X, but in the same ballpark as an empire-building game. Though I don't expect great variety from the vanilla release, it is supposed to be highly moddable. We'll see if a community emerges to make good use of it.

Projected release date for that is October, I believe.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Am I the only one here who finds the SODs absolutely perfect?
And am I the only one here who absolutely hates steam, unit per tile limits, no religions and in essence all the things that go against the perfection of CIV4?

 

[Opera]

I don't see the issue with Steam
As for the UPT, I find this perfect as I loathe SODs. Nothing more boring than SODs.

 

[Afforess]

Am I the only one here who finds the SODs absolutely perfect?
And am I the only one here who absolutely hates steam, unit per tile limits, no religions and in essence all the things that go against the perfection of CIV4?

This has already been discussed to death in the Civ5 forums, but the general consuses was this:

• SODS reward production over tactical strategy
• Steam, while admittedly is DRM, it is not the worst DRM possible
• Religions in Civ4 were a poor mechanic, just for randomizing diplomacy

So 2 out of 3 changes are positive in my mind.

 

[Valkrionn]

Am I the only one here who finds the SODs absolutely perfect?
And am I the only one here who absolutely hates steam, unit per tile limits, no religions and in essence all the things that go against the perfection of CIV4?

I believe you are in the minority for the SoD issue, yes. In my opinion, they:

1. Remove tactical planning. There is no strategy to your unit placement; Biggest stack wins. That's pretty much the entire strategy, and it is extremely unsatisfying IMO. UPT may not be the best solution, but it IS a solution, and DOES introduce tactical planning.
2. Rewards quantity vs quality. Granted, this particular issue isn't too present in FfH, but that's because of the doubling of the promotion strengths. In vanilla Civ4, zerg rushing nearly always wins.

So I'm of the opinion that UPT is a good change. Naturally, we have to wait and see how it plays.

As for your other points...

I dislike Steam on anything non-Valve. However, there is FAR worse DRM out there, and if a game is going to have it (which Civ5 must, due to 2K more than Firaxis), Steam is a decent method. I sincerely hope there are non-Steam versions available, though.

With Religions, it's a fairly complicated issue. The vanilla game must be 'politically correct'; Therefore, religions become a fairly complicated subject, and end up being identical and boring. Yes, mods are free to be as politically incorrect as they wish, and make religions into an interesting mechanic.... But if their function (enhanced diplomacy) can be done in a better way for Civ5 (which by all accounts it has), then Firaxis has no need to include them. Nor should they, IMO. Religions can ALWAYS be modded back in to the game in some form, as we know we will have DLL access... And honestly, the RifE team has already come up with multiple possible ways to do this.

Really, the biggest draw that Civ5 has on me is it's modding support. Vanilla Civ4 held my attention for maybe 10 games, and I have never once finished a game of BtS; Hell, I've never even hit the Middle Ages.

This has already been discussed to death in the Civ5 forums, but the general consuses was this:

• SODS reward production over tactical strategy
• Steam, while admittedly is DRM, it is not the worst DRM possible
• Religions in Civ4 were a poor mechanic, just for randomizing diplomacy

So 2 out of 3 changes are positive in my mind.

Like I said above, religions are a poor mechanic in the vanilla game. Not so much in mods which emphasize them. Still, I understand why they were cut and likely would have done the same in Shafer's position.