1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

First Game of Civilization 5

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by T-C, Dec 11, 2010.

  1. T-C

    T-C Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    I just finished my first full game of Civilization 5, and I was disappointed by this new version. After playing, I came here to the Civilization Fanatics' Forum, and I see that many people feel the same way I do. I don't want to pile on with complaints, and I don't want to offer suggestions for Firaxis, since I certainly don't know how to write a video game. However, I would like to describe my first impression of the game, if only to get it off my chest.

    My game started well. The map looked great, and I loved the exploration phase. Once I started accumulating cities and units, however, the user interface seemed inefficient and clunky. Near the end, it crashed a lot. The game took a long time to play, but not much happened during that time. Early on, I was attacked by China. I wasn't prepared for battle and I should have lost, but instead I won easily without losing a single unit. After defeating China, I was at peace for about 2000 years until I launched the spaceship and won the game. During that time, the only real challenge was keeping my happiness and income up. I ignored the city states. I gave orders manually to my workers. I patrolled my coastline with warships until I realized it wasn't worth the effort. When I discovered uranium, the only place I could get it was on a deserted antarctic island, so I put a city there. I purchased extra tiles, then used a culture bomb to extend my territory so that same city could get oil -- that whole process seemed very gimmicky. When I won, I was shocked to see no victory review screens. After winning, I played a few extra turns and went belligerent, conquering a few of my neighbors. Every war was just one battle, then a walk through the enemy cities. Arabia surprised me with a brilliant defense in a narrow mountain pass, forcing a retreat. I think that was just a fluke, however, because instead of holding its strong position, it inexplicably moved its units into the open where my reserves slaughtered them easily. I played the game as France, but I don't feel its unique characteristics influenced me in any way. Usually, at the end of a Civilization game, my civilization has an epic story to tell of discovery, conquest, friendship, betrayal, and strife. In this case, however, I feel there isn't much of a story to tell. In retrospect, I'm glad Firaxis is bold enough to make big changes to its flagship product, but I'm baffled why they think the switch to hex tiles and the addition of city states was more important than, say, improving the AI or creating a better user interface. I feel that someone got distracted by game mechanics and took their eye off the all-important, yet elusive quality of gameplay. I'm not eager to start another game.

    -TC
     
  2. squeebus

    squeebus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11
    I think the problem is that you didn't spend the extra $15 to get the Babylon and map pack DLCs. The game gets way more fun after that!
     
  3. PawelS

    PawelS Ancient Druid

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,803
    Location:
    Poland
    Good joke :lol:
     
  4. SuperJay

    SuperJay Bending Space and Time

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,273
    Location:
    Shacklyn
    Welcome to CFC. :)

    For what it's worth, you're not alone. The "epic journey" part got left out on the release version, unfortunately, but there may be hope that with a few more patches it'll feel a bit more like a Civilization game. For now, I agree that the whole idea of 'building an empire to stand the test of time' is sorely lacking. You don't build an empire, and there's no test of time. Your first playthrough sounds strikingly similar to all the games I played, and I wish that wasn't the case, because I really want to like this game. Maybe I will, eventually.

    Everyone seems very excited about the "untapped potential," which sounds to me like buying a car with three wheels and being excited about the potential of a fourth... someday. :lol:

    Anyway, stick around and maybe we'll all get to celebrate sometime soon. Don't let the others chase you off; they're gonna tell you to 'go back to Civ 4 since you only wanted Civ 4.5', but you can just ignore that nonsense. We're all Civ fans, and we all have a place here. Excelsior! :cool:
     
  5. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Virago

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,236
    Location:
    Climbing Kero Fin
    Well I'm sure they'd say they did try and improve the AI and create a better user interface. AI is the bugbear of strategy games. I certainly wouldn't say earlier games in the series had better AI. As for the user interface in parts I felt it better than Civ IV, in others worse. The same was true with Civ IV compared to Civ III, Civ III compared to Civ II, Civ II is the only game of the series that I felt was a near total improvement over its predecessor
     
  6. Luckystrike77

    Luckystrike77 Prince

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    549
    Location:
    Kingdom of Norway
    Hey! Go play multiplayer. Playing vs the AI is boring in every Civ-game.
     
  7. ClarenceSeedorf

    ClarenceSeedorf Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    93
    Location:
    Rotterdam, the Netherlands
    Hi and welcome.

    Play some more...to complain after one game is just silly.
     
  8. tnick777

    tnick777 Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2010
    Messages:
    235
    I thought I didn't like it until I realized it's NOT Civilization 4 and I shouldn't think it is. It's a new game with the Civilization genes in it but it's not Civ 4.

    Play it more and challenge yourself.

    I actually love this game once I got over the Civ 4 reference.
     
  9. CivFanaticMan

    CivFanaticMan Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Messages:
    249
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    I bet you had a game where through the whole game you felt contented but empty. You would have already quit because a Civ game is suposed to leave you completely full, but you looked at the glass as half full and you continued on into victory. By the end of the game you felt that you didn't waste your time, but you knew you could have been doing something else. Your left without an epic journey to think about as you go to bed, you only just played an average game.

    Welcome to the club... :sad:
     
  10. hardcore_gamer

    hardcore_gamer King

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    672
    It baffles me how people can play the multiplayer in the Civ games more then the single player. The single player feels like a story unfolding in front of your eyes as you play the game (well in earlier Civ games anyways), multiplayer is just a bunch of kids launching nuclear warheads at each other for the lulz.

    No immersion, no sense of a story unfolding, just some players backstabbing each other for the mildest reasons with all diplomacy being worthless.
     
  11. Morningcalm

    Morningcalm Keeper of Records

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,079
    Location:
    Abroad
    I don't know... in multiplayer games I played, my friends were reasonable diplomatically...though we did have some unfair deals on both sides. It's true multiplayer doesn't have that story unfolding feel, but part of that is due to multiplayer looking and playing like a stripped down monkey.

    None of the visuals and voice-acting of the leaders in the SP CiV make it through to multiplayer, too, which is disappointing when you're playing against the AI with amigos.
     
  12. CivFanaticMan

    CivFanaticMan Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Messages:
    249
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Multiplayer can be fun because your trying to beat other players who are trying to win also. (much like in Civ5 single player, however I only play single player for the immersive effect you just described, and Civ5 doesn't offer that).

    This means that you are going to have to ally with someone durring the game, even though in the end they will become your enemy.
     
  13. Celevin

    Celevin King

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    919
    ...What?

    How many cities did you have? Try a game as a non-France civ and see the policy difference.
     
  14. lschnarch

    lschnarch Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,296
    Except for the fact that he felt, what many others have felt after the first game, too.
    And after the second.
    And the third.
    And the fourth.
    And the fifth.
    And...
    And...
    And...
     
  15. Honorable_Pawn

    Honorable_Pawn Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    153
    And...Can you tell me where I can buy some Aztec warrior action-figurines?
     
  16. lschnarch

    lschnarch Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,296
    Can't you get those as DLC?
     
  17. charon2112

    charon2112 King

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    I agree with this 100%.

     
  18. Aristos

    Aristos Lightseeker

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,575
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Deep inside...
    me too. That's why we need an immersing, deep, fun and challenging single player.
     
  19. InsertNameHere

    InsertNameHere Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    Chicago
    I just 'finished' (read: played until I knew I was going to win) game and felt much the same way. Admittedly, I was on Prince difficulty (figured I'd just figure things out first), but I was slightly disappointed. I randomed Gandhi, was on a continent with only Caesar. He has all the good city spots (I waited probably a little too long on settlers). Plus, I had just teched to my UU. Figuring these two together were as good a reason as any to DOW, I DOWed on him. He proceeded to fling all his units at me in a disorganized mass -- I was attacked by one unit probably every other turn. They mindlessly flung themselves into the range of my archers/elephants, not even bothering to head for the nearby hills. Needless to say, I defeated them all quite easily despite my army being slightly smaller. I then proceeded to pwn his base and his d00dz. Then I chilled on my continent by myself until I got an entire era ahead of everyone else and decided to call the game.

    I'm thinking I should probably try higher levels and larger maps (I played cIV on immortal) before making an ultimate judgement, but the first game, at least, was a bit of a disappointment.
     
  20. Mad Hab

    Mad Hab Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    São Paulo, Brazil
    Probably the best phrase I've ever read in these forums. Should only add that Firaxis' marketing made me think that car had five wheels. And that it also could fly like an helicopter. Heck, even GameSpot corroborated with those lies (9.0 review? They played it like what, 15 minutes?).

    On the thread topic, I also felt the same way. On my first game, I won with a cheap diplomatic victory even if the Greeks crushed all their neighbors and dominated the game in all aspects. On the second, I had a cheap culture victory. Then a domination victory, after that a science one. None of them were satisfying. Not a single one... :(

    Hopefully Civ 5 will be a great game someday. But until then, I'll be playing something else...

    Cheers,

    Mad Hab
     

Share This Page