I have watched a few videos now, and sometimes it is way too difficult to distinguish a hill from flatlands. As this could lead to a misjudgement and a wrong move, it is not just a taste issue. Anyone else noticed the same thing?
Also, speaking of the style and graphics, I suppose there have been too much general statements and too little specific points raised. In particular, I do not like how the trees are drawn (look somewhat like tents, very artificial), the rivers are just as bad as always (starting from Civ III), and I am very curious about road connections because it was an aesthetic nightmare in Civ V.
There is one thing I still do not understand regarding the way the game looks. It has been said multiple times that the general style was supposed to be the Age of Discovery, will all that neat hand-drawn map in the fog of war etc. This is fine, but how do the cartoon-ish leaders (I guess we agree on that whether we like it or not) fit into that story? I mean, during the Age of Discovery an artist would probably be killed for making the kings look like that...
I am not ranting here, just trying to understand the logic behind this choice