Is anyone besides me happy with the game?

[ZimbuTheMonkey]

MOST people are happy about it.

But just like with any other product, the ones that aren't as the most vocal and they come to represent the community.

 

[SomethingWitty]

People who enjoy this game aren't spending much time here posting about it.

Been playing since the original, and this is by far the best version yet.

 

[Swift777]

I'd say most (if not all) of the people complaining about it either are complaining about thier own ignorance/incompetence, (OMFG I bought it from Walmart and I have to install Steam which is full of bugs and malware!!) making a big stink about minor issues (OMFG rivers look kinda crappy the whole game is ruined!!) or just plain old trolling (Everything else).

 

[Diplomat32]

I am loving the game as well. War is finally interesting. I am so happy the stack of doom is finally dead. City-states and strategic resources add a very interesting layer of geopolitics. I also love that the AI seems to act much more like a real civ leader might rather than just to win.

 

[Doskias51]

Overall I absolutely will play CiV over cIV anyday. I was extremely against the stack of doom and all for a more tactical combat. I do agree that once all the tiles gets improved and you have troops everywhere the maps looks very cluttered, that is the only drawback. Yes it has a few problems with various things technically but all that stuff can be fixed without a expansion. After 18 hours of playing and one victory and still playing through the second, I can not think of one time that I said I wish this was here or I miss this from cIV.

Back to CiV

 

[WeneedmoreCivs]

I'm having a good time with the game, out of the metaphorical, steamy, box. Am I alone in this?

I like it, but am not convinced that it's better than CTP2 or Civ 4 with Civ Gold as of yet. I like the ability to load mods from in the game, but will need to see how the game plays out first before I can make any judgements.

What I like:
Improved Graphics
Ranged fighting (not 100% sold on the 1UPT, but I love the tactics of having an archer bombarding a barbarian camp from a safe distance while my spearman flanks from behind and takes it.)
I'm enjoying the social policies
City-States
EMBARKATION!

What I don't like:
Slower loading times for each turn
Not enough Civs, Units, Buildings, Wonders or Techs
Not enough different natural resources
Still no future era like in CTP2

 

[jagdtigerciv]

I'm having a good time with the game, out of the metaphorical, steamy, box. Am I alone in this?

Nope, i'm having a lot of fun. My only criticism is diplomacy (in some ways) and a clearer demonstration of game mechanics within the game.

 

[Vandraad]

Has anyone noticed the AI doesnt like to expand much? How about the harder levels? Have they built any decent sized cities?

I've experienced mostly the opposite with the AI spamming cities every 3 hexes but never really developing any of them. In my last game, I had 6 cities (populations all ~10) and France had 14 cities all with populations below 5. Whereas I had my cultural borders loaded up with mines, trading posts, farms, etc, France had basically a clean slate yet will outproducing me militarily by a huge margin.

So far, I'm really enjoying ciV. I first tried to play it as I would cIV (every city has granary, barracks, walls, etc) and learned quickly cIV requires a whole new approach. What that approach is I haven't figured out yet, but going to be interesting.

A few oddities have shown up: "Standings" with some AI swing wildly from one turn to the next. Elizabeth in England would go from neutral to hostile and back to neutral every other turn. The "Route To Mode" where you have your workers build roads doesn't work well. Every time I'd tell it to build a road connecting one city to the next, it would always stop 2 hexes short!

 

[Hsinchu]

Reserving judgment.
Demo is sitting at home waiting for me. Credit Card is sitting at the ready to rush out and grab the box version. I haven't played CivIV in ages since I lent my CD out and cannot seem to re-obtain it.

Since I've been away from C-IV for so long, I think a new experience with CI-V will be less tainted with the harangues of a desire for familiarity. We'll see. Will come back with remarks later.

However, vocal minority is very likely in effect. The old customer service numbers are that if someone sells you a product you like, you tell three other people. If someone sells you a product you hate, you tell ten other people. The advent of the Internet has only exacerbated the situation. If you want to complain, you twitter it and facebook it out to 500 of your 'closest' friends. If you want to rave about it, you blog it to the nine friends that actually read your blogs. Kind of unfair, but at least the overall dedication to service and product polish is increasing over time as a result.

Don't let the one troll under the bridge put you off when thousands of pedestrians have crossed it before. Everyone knows that panning gets more attention than cheering if we're taking a passive stance. ACTIVELY trying out a product gives you a much fairer estimation.

 

[JP1]

I would say a lot of people are enjoying the game, probably even the majority. It's just that the people who don't like it are always a lot louder right after release.

 

[acm2033]

the people who are enjoying the game are the ones that arent posting yet.
the people who are disappointed are the most active ones so its pretty obvious what the majority of the new threads contain.

You rang?

That would be me--sorry for not standing up for Civ V on here... I was too busy enjoying the game.

Now I'm at work, so I'll leave a quick note.

1. User Interface is extremely intuitive. Of course, it's different, so it takes a while, but it's way better than Civ IV.
2. All the nuts & bolts are there. It's just much nicer to look at and find them. I didn't feel the game was "dumbed down" at all. In fact, I've had to make my decisions much more carefully than Civ IV.
3. All this talk about a "more combat-oriented Civ" is just talk. I found that combat doesn't become a huge, monstrous pain in the neck that it used to be. Very understandable, yet lots of detail as well.

It's a great game. If you just have to complain, hey--there's always another version of Civ for you.

 

[Crezth]

What has happened is everyone who hates the game played 10 turns and said "what the hell, the AI on Settler sucks - I call CASH COW" or "what the hell, I miss road spaghetti - I call CASH COW" or maybe "what the hell, why can't I spam units to one tile anymore so I don't have to think whenever I go to war - I call CASH COW" and ran to the forums to cry, while the people who actually enjoy rainbows, puppies, and Civilization are playing the game and too busy to talk about it. Playing the game and all.

 

[xxxlambo]

The one thing I hate is my co-workers and friends don't have it yet and while it is fun telling them the differences with the game and how cool I think it is so far, they can't really relate yet as they are still in Civ 4 world. I really hope MP is better from what I've heard by the time they do get it. A couple of them need to get new machines or pray that the demo actually works so they can buy it.

 

[lietkynes]

Civ5 is awesome and even if it's only vanilla it's already better then Civ4 BTS

 

[Eyeoftiger]

I haven't read through the whole 4 pages, but some of you will recall how much people LOVED Civ III, and when Civ IV came out, there was much angst about it and much of the same reaction. Some things were justified, but over time, people began to see that Civ IV was a much superior game to Civ III (got rid of stupid wack-a-mole pollution).

I'm sure that given enough time to properly digest, Civ V will be there too. I love the game, and I've just scratched the surface. I'm sure there will be balancing issues that arrise, there always is.

 

[Smips]

I've put about six hours in to the game so far and have nothing but good things to say about it.

I'm nowhere near the Civ fan that many of you are here, but I see no issues with this game. I started playing CivII quite some time ago, but never grasped the full understanding of it since I was a bit young at the time. Awhile after CivIV was out, I remembered the game and after reading some rave reviewed I went out and go the game and its expansions. I played it quite a bit, however I didn't enjoy it all that much. As a newcomer, the game was beyond intimidating. The game was micromanaging to the max and there were so many concepts to learn so quickly, it was impossible for me to wrap my head completely around it. Now, I'm not saying this was a problem with the game. If I had bought CivIV when it was released, I likely would have had an easier time because all the additional content the expansions brought would not be there.

This is where I think CivV comes in. If FireAxis made a game with the same features as CivIV and more they would have been blocking out new players. To me, CivV is essentially a fresh start. They created a great base game for players to get accustomed to and then their going to release expansions to fill in the areas that CivIV is superior in. This allows for a quality game to be developed over a few years in order to widen their fan base even more.

 

[Boris Godunov]

Considering I was up until 3 AM this morning playing it (and I have to be up by 7), it's safe to say I'm already addicted.

Honestly, the feeling I have playing it reminds be of when I first sat down and played Civ I back in 1992. I also lost track of time and stayed up waaaay to late playing that one, because I was fascinated and utterly engrossed.

It seems to me most of the complaints fall into the "IT'S NOT CIV IV!!!" category, basically people afraid/hating big changes. I look at it as a new game to be enjoyed in its own right, and it's great. Perfect? No, there are definitely things that need to be fixed. But that was true of Civ IV as well, and don't get me started on how bad Civ III was on release (and it honestly never got better than "decent" with the expansions).

As has been said, those who are mad will be the most likely to say something, so you'll always have a disproportionate sampling of unsatisfied people versus those who are too damn busy enjoying the game to come here and say so.

 

[Boris Godunov]

Nope, i'm having a lot of fun. My only criticism is diplomacy (in some ways) and a clearer demonstration of game mechanics within the game.

Definitely agree. The diplomacy is the absolute weakes thing in the game so far, IMO. There is just way too much obtuseness, and no way to really know what your relationship is with another AI power and what effect your diplo decisions have.

What does the Pact of Cooperation do? Does it boost relations? If so, do you get an extra hit to them later if you refuse to go to war with them against someone else?

What about this Pact of Secrecy? No idea what it does. Will it harm my relations with the target civ? If so, why, since it's *secret*?

While I agree with doing away with the number modifiers from Civ IV, which was lame, there needs to be at least SOME indication of where our relationship stands. Why not an advisor option on the diplo screen that can inform me of such things?

 

[DaviddesJ]

Definitely agree. The diplomacy is the absolute weakes thing in the game so far, IMO. There is just way too much obtuseness, and no way to really know what your relationship is with another AI power and what effect your diplo decisions have.

These seem like superficial complaints. These things weren't obvious in any previous version of Civ, either. It's only that we had years to work out the details. I'm sure that will happen here, too (or even faster than years, although longer than a few days).

 

[lemmy101]

It's gorgeously awesomely amazingly brilliant. <3<3<3