Is this game worth playing again yet?

Yeah. Also, who the hell CARES about trickery and the risk of cheating going on?
This is not a bank account, its just a game.
Just let us play the game we bought with mods (since vanilla isnt enough) with our friends dammit!!

But no. Oh no. Someone in public games might CHEAT! *ominous music as aragorn walks up to the voice of sauron, barely uttering the word Cheat causes the entire army to shudder in terror*

We better not allow any modding what so ever in multiplayer then, its better to restrict peoples fun than to risk such a horrible fate as 1 random guy cheating in a public game..

There are so many things, so many design choices, i will never understand regarding Civ5..

 

Worth playing with mods. I agree that mods in multiplayer should have been available on release instead if this "soon" nonsense. Firaxis is like the hot girl stringing along the best friend in every teen movie ever.

 

You're somehow overreacting Baleur... i never meant to imply MODs shouldn't be allowed in MP. To the contrary i would prefer having them myself if only for the "Familiar" trends of having played almost exclusively with essentials such as CivWillard & InfoAddict (just to mention two out of many more) in SP.
The core issues of gameplay has to be ironed out first exactly because MP would benefit from a perfectly stable environment and that, logically, must sift through a solid bunch of SP features.
I have no doubt Firaxis Devs will take care of MP soon enough.
Ports opened are simple technicalities that - i'll have to admit - are even in the lowest priorities list, AFAIC. For a reason; some provisions are already in place.
It's the fact that a few (or some) people should be made aware of the continuous risk they're taking online even when only gaming.
Defeat! Oh, really? I've been crushed by exploits, live?

 

I'll wait until I see the patch notes as released. But at the moment think still maybe a year or two.

 

I think Civ5 is the best of the entire series.

And yes, I'm a hardcore fan since the first days of Civ1 on the amiga

Some changes are rather drastic, and unflexible players dislike them. But then, If I didnt want the game to change I'd still be playing civ1.

Dont get distracted by the high number of negative votes and posts. The inet is made for two things: porn and bi tching.

 

click Next Turn. wait. click Next Turn. wait. click Next Turn. wait. click Next Turn. (repeat thirty times).

I don't remember any game experience providing such a boring experience. Nothing happens. There's no drama. No excitement. It takes forever to build anything.

If you like REX games without the REX, this is the game for you.

 

I actually do want this game to be playable, but considering my dislike for 1 upt, I'm not sure it will happen. But I do hope the game will turn into more of a builder game. It looks like they are going in the right direction there.

I could maybe deal with 1upt if I only play defensively. For me, offensive wars take too long to plan out and implement. I don't like to spend 3 or 4 hours on one war. What I want to see is cheaper (free would be nice) buildings, and cheaper in terms of hammers.

 

I think its worth playing right now as it is I love this game, I think its funny most of the people who dont like the game stated that they wanted it to be civ 4.5 , they ment for this to be a new version of civ and thats what it is if you want 4 sliders, and to have to plan out every turn play civ 4 if you want a relaxed game play civ 5 I love civ 5 gives me the civ feel without the civ 4 headace.

 

The problem is that while simplifying the game makes it easier and faster, it makes it FAR less engrossing and addictive. I've already managed to accomplish feats that would be nigh-impossible for me in IV, and there really has never been that feeling of investment as there was. In IV, I loved spending hours on a game really thinking about strategy and what to do next. In V, I find myself just winging gameplay as long as I follow some very basic patterns. I know that if it ever gets messy, I can simply pump out a small army and win a domination victory without a sweat. The biggest challenge is trying not to take advantage of the blatant human capabilities, like selling luxuries, taking loans, directing research agreements to a certain tech, etc. I should not have to self-impose rules to find myself challenged. The game should make it a challenge itself.

 

how do you take loans now? also I like that this game is simpler if you prefer civ 4 you should play that then.

 

You give the AI GPT for a flat gold amount. Instant buy-a-CS cash. Instant buy-units-to-attack-a-civ-with-its-own-money cash.

Your second statement just doesn't hold water. Like many, I was very excited about this game, marketed as a sequel to Civ IV. It advertised better A, B, and C, etc. I shelled out money for a game with an AI that cannot properly use its own diplomacy, combat, or pathing systems. It is a complete game with incomplete features. If the game did well what it does do, there would be far less complaint in these forums. The problem is that it does not perform well in handling its own features. 1UPT, human-like AI, etc.

 

ok first off the loan thing is crazy they need to fix that,
second my statement does hold watter I see people complain all the time in these forums that civ 5 is basicaly just not civ 4.5 , what features did you not get? also did you not play the demo before buying, or read reviews I almost never buy a game before doing these two things. as for the people complaining in the forums I have never seen a forum for a game so populated with people that dont like the game 5 months after its relase I dont know what to think of that most people would have moved on by now.

 

I actually enjoy it, I'm waiting for the upcoming patch though.

 

Then after that, the next patch will have Steam hitting 'Next Turn' for you

 

One distinction that should be made is that this is not the game's forums. It is an independent forum about the game and its franchise. Being as such, it should absolutely be expected for each and every iteration to be compared to its formers, because chances are the forum population has played those versions as well.

Once again, I was reiterate the point that many of the complaints have nothing to do with Civ IV. They are complaints that Civ V is bad at being Civ V. It is a 1UPT game without an AI that can use 1UPT. It is a human-like AI diplomacy game with an AI that does not understand diplomacy. It is a highly textured game with an engine incapable of rendering those textures and AI pathing at an efficient speed.

None of those complaints are about Civ IV. None of those complaints are about the concepts behind Civ V. They are complaints that a 4X game should be released in a finished state, and that this game does not feel finished. 5 months in, and there has yet to be a significant AI patch. Most games within a series like this have a lifespan of 4-5 years before the next iteration, and only about a year between expansion packs. If Firaxis follows this trend, we only have 6 months to a year left to decide whether it is worth buying an expansion to this game.

 

Hear hear!! Well said, sir. Very well said.

 

your incorrect again this is a game forum for civ 5, also most of the complaints I see here are Im upset this is not civ4.5

 

yes because the normal thing to do if you dont like a game is frequent a forum for it and complain about it for 5 months instead of moving on and finding a game you like to play.

 

dudedellrocks

It seems you have opinions as set and immovable as those you complain about. As for my game forum explanation, there is a very big difference between an official forum for a video game an a subforum on a web site focused on the entire agglomeration of the Civilization series. Civ V exists as a subforum for CivFanatics, meaning that its postings in this section are General Discussions about Civilization V by CivFanatics members. Since CivFanatics easily pre-dates Civ V, most CivFanatics users will also pre-date the game, and their opinions and thoughts will be shaped as such. As members of this community, they have as much right to post their thoughts on the game as anyone else. I would say that at minimum 50% of the complaints are about problems within Civ V as it exists now. Those problems, however, often lead those same users to point out in past iterations (Civ IV, Civ II) similar things that were done right. I will not defend the small minority of users that continuously belabor the point of their animosity towards Civ V, but most of the complaints seen in this thread and others are not that. If the goal is to find a Civ V subforum to discuss the gameplay itself in a more tactical sense, or to recount games, there exist forums for that as well. This is the place for complaints lodged against this game to be posted.

If I make a statement that this title did not live up to the banner of Civ IV, you are free to disagree with me, dissect my argument, etc. However, it is simply not beneficial to any discussion to simply tell those with opposing views to go play another game and move on. You certainly have the right to say it, but once again it tends to leave this all or nothing feeling where customers faithful to the series feel alienated by this venture.

 

Well said!

By any chance would you ( dudedellrocks ) leave your country if you didn't agree with the government actions, or would you stand up and tell people how you feel about those actions?

We don't agree to what Firaxis did to Civ series with Civ5, so we have the undeniable right to stand up and tell other users how we feel about it.

This forum isn't a church devoted to Civ5, there won't be just praise and hallelujah for this game.