First Game of Civilization 5

[SuperJay]

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?).

Well, thanks. I never question the people that express that sentiment in their posts because I don't want to be a downer, but every time I read something like that ("it may suck right now but I have faith it'll be a great game someday!") I just don't get it. Maybe it's just cheery optimism; their own attempt to make the best out of a bad situation. I'm obviously more skeptical than most, and whether Civ5 is great "someday" or not, the problem for me is that I already bought it, it's lousy right now.

I guess most Civ fans don't mind buying a car with three wheels, as most everyone seems really excited about that potential for the fourth. Obviously it was my own fault for having the wrong expectations, and I need to learn to think about it differently as it's a new direction in car design.

Anyway, RE: the thread topic - I don't think it's so silly to draw some conclusions after a single game. Why not draw conclusions? Does it somehow get better later if you try not to think about whether you enjoyed that playthrough or not? I played two or three games before my initial trepidation set in, and then two more basically confirmed my fears that I was indeed getting bored after scarcely two weeks. Reading a lot of the posts here (including Sullla's great RB3 succession game) helped me clarify what I was missing. I did go back and start another game with my brother, but we never got around to finishing it... every time we've both been online to do some multiplayer gaming, we end up choosing to play something else. We haven't even really acknowledged it directly, but I think we're both just too bored to continue it.

 

[Flexmaster]

This game gave me an empty feeling beginning with the opening scene (the old man welcoming his son). It was just boring. And then I knew something was wrong when it took forever to load the first game. But what made me realize that this game was a turkey besides the atrocious AI was how long it took the computer to crunch the AI's turn. At first there was a small but noticeable few seconds delay. I am now at 1 minute 15 seconds wait in between turns. The game is unplayable. I am back to playing Civ IV.

 

[CornPlanter]

Hi and welcome.

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

But he got it right after the very first game, it seems. I played quite a few civ5 games and I agree with everything OP have said.

 

[CHEESE!]

Well.

My first game was as the Songhai, on the third level (Warlord?). I was so happy to get the new game! I founded my city, met the CSs, met the leaders, and all the while thought, 'This is awesome!'

Well, I won that game, through a domination victory. All the while I felt contented. Even that anticlimactic ending could not faze me.

I was happy. Still am.

Love Civ V!

 

[BryceC]

Good to know Cheese. Seems like I'm the only one that likes 5 around here. Of course I also didn't like Civ 4 so I don't have that in mind when playing.

 

[SuperJay]

No, you're not the only one. Probably most people here like Civ5. Thing is, there's no obligation to be a cheerleader in order to participate here, so yes, you will run into some opinions that differ.

The fact that you disliked Civ 4 but enjoy 5 is interesting. I liked 4 - in vanilla - and so far remain disappointed in 5, though I haven't tried the new patch yet.

 

[Malkaviel]

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

no one asked game difficulty...

 

[Geddy]

Civ 5 is NOT an new game, it's a sequal to and develpoment of Civ 4. It should be better. It's not. It's worse.