Is CiV up to snuff yet?

[vonSharma]

I am a grizzled civ vet going back to civ3.. I withheld from getting Civ5 because of the negative reviews (mainly the poor AI performance) on this forum despite the glowing computer game industry reviews. I was wondering if any of those who were disappointed with the initial incarnations of CiV now feel after patches and expansions that it has once again become a game worth throwing one's job and life away to play again.

Sorry if this is addressed in another thread but I searched and couldn't find anything of that sort

 

[Socratatus]

Without knowing exactly what you like I can`t say for sure.

I think the patches and GK made it better from the original in many parts. At least now there are a few more things that can be done in game than before...

 

[Camikaze]

The G&K expansion is a big step above vanilla (see the link in my sig for an introductory guide). The game isn't perfect, but you won't find nearly as many people who think it's terrible. The AI is largely competent, though not genius. Reviews of G&K on this forum have been almost universally positive.

 

[Lucid_Interval]

I personally think the game is amazing right now. Some people had some stability problems with the last patch but its running smoother than ever for me. If you haven't played since release or shortly after, you will be blown away by Gods and Kings. If you haven't played at all, right now is the perfect time to give it a shot, especially with all the sales going on.

 

[vonSharma]

well that is what I want to hear... I should have specified that I actually love (and sometimes still have dreams about) Civ3 and that although Civ4 was fairly awesome, it just didn't create that sense of wonderment of owning an empire. I've read that CiV is actually more like Civ3 in many regards which is why a lot of people seemed turned off by it and why I am hopeful.

I suppose the thing I am most concerned about is if the AI can put up a challenging, somewhat realistic fight at this point. I enjoy not being able to win (I usually played Emperor in 3 and 4) and having to maneuver and fight.

Also, any of you guys know if the Mac version is very different to the PC or is it comparable enough that I don't need to do PC? Thanks, friends.

 

[Socratatus]

The only real difference is steam.

I don`t know if you have an issue with Steam or even what steam is, but if I had known the Mac version came without Steam, i would`ve bought a Mac computer.

Steam is a drm-type utility that does far more than it should and is actually a strait-jacket on gaming freedom. You have to have the internet or no game. Patches are quicker with steam, but you have the freedom to choose patches with the mac.

Hoping to get a mac eventually.

p.s. On AI difficulty, well I`ve never been an expert, but it is a challeneg since the last patch. I do find the single stacking easier than the multiple stacking since now I know what`s happening.

 

[docbud]

I never played Civ prior to Civ V. Several months back I saw it on Apple's App Store, and the reviews looked good. I checked out a few forums (mostly this one), and bought it and the DLCs. I really liked it and when G&K came out I grabbed that.

Like I said, I have no experience with the previous Civ games, but I do this Civ V/G&K.

No steam issues because I'm on a Mac

 

[Nyanko]

I am a grizzled civ vet going back to civ3.. I withheld from getting Civ5 because of the negative reviews (mainly the poor AI performance) on this forum despite the glowing computer game industry reviews. I was wondering if any of those who were disappointed with the initial incarnations of CiV now feel after patches and expansions that it has once again become a game worth throwing one's job and life away to play again.

Sorry if this is addressed in another thread but I searched and couldn't find anything of that sort

To be fair, I think many of those who were initially disappointed haven't bothered to come back and give it another shot after time; even though Civ IV was a horrible mess at release too.

Its a much better game in my opinion; The AI is much better, however the weaknesses of the AI are still evident; particularly because of one tile per turn, which shows its weaknesses far more obviously than the stack 'o doom. And its on steam sale now; so its the perfect time to get it

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Really? I still think CivIII is the worst of the series.

 

[joncnunn]

Looks like original poster mostly concerned about AI:
Which aspects were most annoying too you? If combat related, G&K is somewhat better. The GEM project intention is to further improve that.
However if your comparing against Civ III, during wars, it was easy to use Civ IIIs AI perfect knowledge of the map against them via rope-a-dope. (And for all the Civ 5 tactical AI's faults its never fallen for that)
If its Civ V AI keeps money around: The latest patch just taught the AI to be much more aggressive buying military units with spare cash in the base game.
If its Civ V AI so bad at happiness that it needs massive happiness bonus: Doesn't appear to be fixed yet in the base game; however the GEM mod already has it fixed there. (May have already been fixed in their earlier VEM mod)

 

[SnowKomodo]

I love Civ 5. My complaints are outshone by the positives. It's my favorite game right now. Not much else I can say

 

[Zenstrive]

Since I have been playing CiV almost daily raking up aroun 970 hours....I'd say CiV is good and addictive game.

 

[vonSharma]

Looks like original poster mostly concerned about AI:
Which aspects were most annoying too you? If combat related, G&K is somewhat better. The GEM project intention is to further improve that.
However if your comparing against Civ III, during wars, it was easy to use Civ IIIs AI perfect knowledge of the map against them via rope-a-dope. (And for all the Civ 5 tactical AI's faults its never fallen for that)
If its Civ V AI keeps money around: The latest patch just taught the AI to be much more aggressive buying military units with spare cash in the base game.
If its Civ V AI so bad at happiness that it needs massive happiness bonus: Doesn't appear to be fixed yet in the base game; however the GEM mod already has it fixed there. (May have already been fixed in their earlier VEM mod)

Well I have not played CiV yet so I'm not at anything in particular but I really just want an AI that is not terribly predictable, doesn't need a ton of bonuses and most importantly can challenge me to keep me interested in the game.

And yes, I know many people didn't like Civ3 but I just loved it.. it seems that people who played Civ 1 and 2 tended not to like Civ3 so much but I started on Civ3 and fell in love. I feel its kind of how people only like the James Bond actor that they first watch.

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

I feel its kind of how people only like the James Bond actor that they first watch.

#&%@ YOU ROGER MOORE! I'M JAMES BOND!!!!

Overall, I like this game better than 4. The UAs really are unique, which definitely adds to the replay value as opposed to the previous iterations. Plus, no more slider! I hated that thing

 

[knight508]

After logging in almost 100 hours in CIV BTS I decided to try out CiV again since the new patch came out (I didn't even realized they had a post patch for said patch either). At any rate I got the latest version with Vanilla CiV and since it was months since my last play I started my first game as King, Pangaea (to give the AI a micro boost though I heard their sea worthiness was improved) rest pretty standard/default. I was victorious with not too much of a struggle so I decided to give my prior sweet spot Emperor a go. The game was definitely a tad bit more challenging but overall when I checked the end game scores (another domination victory for me) the charts were still hilarious. That is, you get to see exactly what kind of bonuses the AI gets and compound that into some of the rather stupid moves they do (sending lone artillery or other units right into my core to get wrecked without the slightest setback for myself) and I feel just like I felt when I left last time. Now, I did try Immortal several times but was unable to win. From here my cognitive dissonance kicks in and I just blame that it doesn't matter anyways since the AI gets such hilarious boosts to even begin to become competent. Unfortunately Emperor gets a bit too boring and Immortal too frustrating. Still.

 

[Funky]

The OP says his biggest concern is a decent AI, and nobody gives an honest comment on this matter? This is downright misleading. Like Civ 5 or hate it, but that the AI is a total catastrophe isn't opinion, it's fact. It's so bad that it is basically impossible to lose, regardless of difficulty. Enemy units dance around your cities till they get shot to pieces, settlers, workers and great generals get sent to the front line, naval combat is non-existant; there is no resistance from the combat AI on any meaningful level. That's not even going into how the AI can't win strategically either, because it hoards its gold instead of going for the so-called diplomacy win, doesn't build spaceship parts when it could and a domination victory is obviously out of the question.

If you like the game, fine and good. But at least be honest enough to mention the problems it has, especially to someone looking for advice who asks specifically about these problems and how they matter to him.

 

[Greasy Dave]

The game is the best in the series (I'm going to get shot down in flames for that).

People complain about the AI....but it's a computer programme, not a human...and I honestly don't know what they are expecting. I've played a fair number of pc strat games and I can't say that the AI is any worse in V than in any other game. I personally believe they've improved it over the last couple of years. It's certainly no worse than any other civ game. And I'd say it's better than what I rememeber III to be like.

G and K takes the original vanilla to a whole new level. Religion allows multiple, and I mean MULTIPLE different growth, military, economy strategies. Just when I think I've done everything with religion that I can, I read a post here where someone talks about a different way of using it.

Buy the game. It's on sale. (At least it was)...it's alot of fun.

 

[Funky]

The game is the best in the series (I'm going to get shot down in flames for that).

People complain about the AI....but it's a computer programme, not a human...and I honestly don't know what they are expecting. I've played a fair number of pc strat games and I can't say that the AI is any worse in V than in any other game. I personally believe they've improved it over the last couple of years. It's certainly no worse than any other civ game.

Noone's going to shoot you down for having an opinion (even if your opinion is wrong ). However, be ready to dodge the bullets for your comment on how the AI isn't worse than in any other civ game! Seriously, in all past civ games the AI was a real threat. Most of all in Civ 4, when due to the ability to stack units, the AI could actually use its numerical advantage and wreck havoc in your lands if you weren't prepared. The actual artificial intelligence (i.e. the coding) may not have been more advanced than in Civ 5, but the AI greatly profited from the rules of the game. Civ 5 on the other hand is the first Civ I have played (and I've played them all, Civ Rev aside) in which I have never felt threatened in any form whatsoever by the AI. It doesn't (and perhaps cannot) understand the 1-unit-per-tile concept and literally falls apart in any war against even the most tactically inept human players.

This may not bother some people, which is fine. But it should be pointed out to the OP who said the following:
"the thing I am most concerned about is if the AI can put up a challenging, somewhat realistic fight at this point. I enjoy not being able to win"

Civ 5 is obviously NOT the game he will enjoy.

 

[kamex]

Noone's going to shoot you down for having an opinion (even if your opinion is wrong ). However, be ready to dodge the bullets for your comment on how the AI isn't worse than in any other civ game! Seriously, in all past civ games the AI was a real threat. Most of all in Civ 4, when due to the ability to stack units, the AI could actually use its numerical advantage and wreck havoc in your lands if you weren't prepared. The actual artificial intelligence (i.e. the coding) may not have been more advanced than in Civ 5, but the AI greatly profited from the rules of the game. Civ 5 on the other hand is the first Civ I have played (and I've played them all, Civ Rev aside) in which I have never felt threatened in any form whatsoever by the AI. It doesn't (and perhaps cannot) understand the 1-unit-per-tile concept and literally falls apart in any war against even the most tactically inept human players.

This may not bother some people, which is fine. But it should be pointed out to the OP who said the following:
"the thing I am most concerned about is if the AI can put up a challenging, somewhat realistic fight at this point. I enjoy not being able to win"

Civ 5 is obviously NOT the game he will enjoy.

Agreed. The AI still uses its unit's last movement point to park them in front of a citadel, even if the have less than a 3rd HP remaining....

 

[Civking5]

The OP says his biggest concern is a decent AI, and nobody gives an honest comment on this matter? This is downright misleading. Like Civ 5 or hate it, but that the AI is a total catastrophe isn't opinion, it's fact. It's so bad that it is basically impossible to lose, regardless of difficulty. Enemy units dance around your cities till they get shot to pieces, settlers, workers and great generals get sent to the front line, naval combat is non-existant; there is no resistance from the combat AI on any meaningful level. That's not even going into how the AI can't win strategically either, because it hoards its gold instead of going for the so-called diplomacy win, doesn't build spaceship parts when it could and a domination victory is obviously out of the question.

If you like the game, fine and good. But at least be honest enough to mention the problems it has, especially to someone looking for advice who asks specifically about these problems and how they matter to him.

So everyone in this thread is wrong and u know it all. And how the f*** u know the game is bad since u don't even playing it. When was the last time u played? Instead of repeating bunch of lines in every of your post, 1st play it then trash the game . Beside, if u don't like game's AI, there is always an option of playing multiplayer games. In fact, I mostly play online, and in my opinion multiplayer aspect of civ5 is far better than previous civ games. Join groups like NQ in steam, and try it.

Moderator Action: not exactly a nice post, and also please watch your language.