For those who don't play the game anymore... Is Civ5 salvageable?
- Thread starter Minmaster
- Start date
- Status
To quote The Heavy: "Maybe. Maybe."
Of course, it doesn't need salvaging; it's perfectly enjoyable for many (most?) current players. Some of us don't like it because we just wanted Civ4.5, so--OH CRAP YOU CAUGHT ME
Just kidding. But "is it salvageable" isn't the question, because tons of people like it just fine and it sold well. The implied question is more "can it be made fun for you" and I have a hard time answering that. For me, there's just not much to do. It's not very engaging. I could make it challenging on Immortal or Deity (at which point it becomes work, not fun) but at the moment I fear that the foundations of the game have been streamlined to the degree that it just won't appeal to me that much even after patches, mods, and expansions. But hey, I could be wrong - it happened once before - so here's hoping that mods and patches are able to add enough balance and replayability to the game that I'll find it as enjoyable as I originally hoped.
Whether or not I'm going to pay $20-40 USD for expansions is a whole 'nother issue. I'm not happy with the value I received for my $60, so I'm going to have a hard time spending more money to get the game I thought I'd already bought.
Of course, it doesn't need salvaging; it's perfectly enjoyable for many (most?) current players. Some of us don't like it because we just wanted Civ4.5, so--OH CRAP YOU CAUGHT ME
Just kidding. But "is it salvageable" isn't the question, because tons of people like it just fine and it sold well. The implied question is more "can it be made fun for you" and I have a hard time answering that. For me, there's just not much to do. It's not very engaging. I could make it challenging on Immortal or Deity (at which point it becomes work, not fun) but at the moment I fear that the foundations of the game have been streamlined to the degree that it just won't appeal to me that much even after patches, mods, and expansions. But hey, I could be wrong - it happened once before - so here's hoping that mods and patches are able to add enough balance and replayability to the game that I'll find it as enjoyable as I originally hoped.
Whether or not I'm going to pay $20-40 USD for expansions is a whole 'nother issue. I'm not happy with the value I received for my $60, so I'm going to have a hard time spending more money to get the game I thought I'd already bought.
Peregrine
The Swift
Not salvage-able. Like III. I'll wait for 6 and cross my fingers, continuing to play CIV in the interim. Much like I did w/II while waiting for something like IV. No point buying a bad game--sends all the wrong messages. I second every criticism cited in this thread so far. All of it is on target, all of it makes sense. No mods will make this game something I want to spend my time with, and no amount of patches/expansions will improve it sufficiently.
Countmonte8242
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2005
- Messages
- 191
I voted possibly but I'm leaning heavily towards no. They just made too many changes to fun core concepts which resulted in making the game less fun. Since a number of those changes are sort of the foundation of the identity of this game, I don't see them ever being changed back through expansions. Mods? Maybe, but then whats the point? I'll play mods that make a good game more fun, I'm not going to go seeking mods that are a must just to make an average game fun at all.
Akka
Moody old mage.
By the way, a "funny" thing : the next patch actually destroys one of the fundamental concept of the game ("hidden" diplomacy).
It tells volume at the level of the failure, when something that was hailed as a core concept is simply patched out.
Ugh.
Misdiagnose of the core issue by the devs... It's not "hidden" diplomacy that was at issue, it's the schizophrenia. I don't need see to an attitude in words or numeric values -- I need the AI to recognize that if we've been trading peacefully for generations, if our borders don't abut, and if I sign and keep sacred every pact you offer me -- the AI damn sure shouldn't turn on me because I have success against a common enemy in a war IT INVITED ME INTO!
I agree, some more consistency in AI diplomatic behavior is needed.
Edit: Sorry for posting in this thread, I forgot that it's for those who don't play Civ5.
Well there are obviously some who feel the game in it's current state doesn't need "salvaging", and that's cool, I'm glad they are having fun with it.
As for me, there just isn't enough strategic variability. No matter what, the game is predictable. Once you've played more than 5 games, you learn very quickly that every one of the AIs WILL attack you no matter how friendly the relations, which makes it pretty much impossible to suffer a "surprise attack" or a backstab (since you always know it's coming). There really isn't much satisfaction in defeating an enemy, because if the outcome isn't in doubt then the conquest is really more tedious work than fun. The social tree while an interesting concept has the side-effect of "locking you in" to a strategy or victory condition and making it very impractical if not impossible to change strategies halfway through and pursue another victory condition.
I could go on and on, and some people do. Like I said it's cool that lots of folks are happy with the game, but I just think it's fundamentally incapable of delivering interesting strategic choices, sacrificing depth for simplicity has led to a very formulaic game.
As for me, there just isn't enough strategic variability. No matter what, the game is predictable. Once you've played more than 5 games, you learn very quickly that every one of the AIs WILL attack you no matter how friendly the relations, which makes it pretty much impossible to suffer a "surprise attack" or a backstab (since you always know it's coming). There really isn't much satisfaction in defeating an enemy, because if the outcome isn't in doubt then the conquest is really more tedious work than fun. The social tree while an interesting concept has the side-effect of "locking you in" to a strategy or victory condition and making it very impractical if not impossible to change strategies halfway through and pursue another victory condition.
I could go on and on, and some people do. Like I said it's cool that lots of folks are happy with the game, but I just think it's fundamentally incapable of delivering interesting strategic choices, sacrificing depth for simplicity has led to a very formulaic game.
Minmaster
Prince
To quote The Heavy: "Maybe. Maybe."
Of course, it doesn't need salvaging; it's perfectly enjoyable for many (most?) current players. Some of us don't like it because we just wanted Civ4.5, so--OH CRAP YOU CAUGHT ME
Just kidding. But "is it salvageable" isn't the question, because tons of people like it just fine and it sold well. The implied question is more "can it be made fun for you" and I have a hard time answering that. For me, there's just not much to do. It's not very engaging. I could make it challenging on Immortal or Deity (at which point it becomes work, not fun) but at the moment I fear that the foundations of the game have been streamlined to the degree that it just won't appeal to me that much even after patches, mods, and expansions. But hey, I could be wrong - it happened once before - so here's hoping that mods and patches are able to add enough balance and replayability to the game that I'll find it as enjoyable as I originally hoped.
Whether or not I'm going to pay $20-40 USD for expansions is a whole 'nother issue. I'm not happy with the value I received for my $60, so I'm going to have a hard time spending more money to get the game I thought I'd already bought.
that's why i asked the question for the people who don't play the game. obviously, the people who like the game and are enjoying it won't see the need for salvaging.
ond_magiker
Chieftain
Possibly, but I doubt Firaxis will manage. If they do, it's in the form of an expansion.
The various excellent civ-modders, on the other hand, are bound to make it into something fun eventually.
The various excellent civ-modders, on the other hand, are bound to make it into something fun eventually.
Minmaster
Prince
guys, this poll is for people who don't play the game anymore.
i get a feeling a lot of people who like the game and still play it are voting...
i get a feeling a lot of people who like the game and still play it are voting...
jeffreyac
Mostly Harmless
You know, I voted possibly - but I have to say I'm getting more doubtful. As many have said before, most of my issues are tied in heavily to what the designers seem to have as the core of this particular iteration - so to fix the game, for me, would require a major overhaul.
I am aware, of course, that there are those who like this one - not trying to start any flames here. Just saying this one, for me personaly, missed the mark.
In my mind - well, I'm already starting my wait for Civ VI, and going back to Civ IV mods to bide my time.
I am aware, of course, that there are those who like this one - not trying to start any flames here. Just saying this one, for me personaly, missed the mark.
In my mind - well, I'm already starting my wait for Civ VI, and going back to Civ IV mods to bide my time.
of course, but i don't see firaxis being the one salvaging it
their recent patchnotes and focus really show that they don't understand what the real strategy is.
from a very very high level design standpoint it is the best civ so far, but they screwed up pretty hard on the specifics and they're not getting better
their recent patchnotes and focus really show that they don't understand what the real strategy is.
from a very very high level design standpoint it is the best civ so far, but they screwed up pretty hard on the specifics and they're not getting better
jagdtigerciv
Prince
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2007
- Messages
- 468
This is all too depressing.
NubianMercenary
Warlord
I guess having to actually pay to get more Civilizations is just ridiculous.
I mean come on, isn't that what an Expansion set is for?
I mean come on, isn't that what an Expansion set is for?
Cinderspark
Chieftain
I am not holding my breath for 2K to do anything substantial, but voted 'yes' as I have plenty of faith the modding community will not only fix the game but transform it into something a hell of a lot better.
I am sure this is why it was released in such an abysmal state, knowing that the actual polishing of the game would be done by the community. At present it feels like a bare bones distant cousin to Civ.
I am sure this is why it was released in such an abysmal state, knowing that the actual polishing of the game would be done by the community. At present it feels like a bare bones distant cousin to Civ.
Although I disliked the game from the very first moment on, I continued to "play" it. Better, I continued to check and experience certain game mechanics.
Since almost two weeks now, I have some savegames on the HD. Each of them looking "good" so far in terms of my success in the game.
Yet, I cannot force myself to fire them up again since I know what is waiting for me: tediousness, shallow, simple, uninspiring gameplay.
And as I've said previously in this thread, it's the core mechanics which make it unsalvagable.
People are putting hope in patches (which are meant to solve bugs and maybe misbalancing), modding and expansions.
Now, first.... would I buy (aka: pay for) a game which which already has disappointed me beyound my ability to express my disappointment? Would I buy an expansion created by the same team which messed this incarnation?
Second: This game plays slow. Playing on a huge map makes you playing with 12 civs in total. Each of them is going to have only that many units. People defending the game say that there are 24 CS, too. But those are just sitting around, waiting for being bribed, checking for when it is time to issue a new "quest" and except for this, moving one or two units back and forth.
In a vey early moment of the game it already slows down considerably, because the core engine doesn't work well.
And now since expansions are expected to ADD something, people think it would become any better? No way.
The same it is with modding. Yes, maybe the core engine can be completely re-written over the course of time by the combined efforts of many modders.
But that literally means turning Firaxis' Civ5 into a new, *different* game.
Conclusion: Civ5 cannot be salvaged. It's a stillborn child by design and implementation. By putting more money into it, you can mummify it more nicely, but it won't come to live. A corpse is a dead body, may it be nicely looking or not.
- Status
Similar threads
