Is this game worth playing again yet?

[Vasire]

What's really irritating is that we all know that this game will come close to playable only after 2 expansions. And we all know that at least the first expansion as well as DLCs are probably ready. And Firaxis knows that we know it. But we still have to watch this marketing song and dance for a couple of years before they release them all.. And then we'll have to act like we are surprised by them.. And then there will be an argument again as to the high price of the expansions... But we will still buy them.. Such a waste of time...

 

[DalersGaming]

And we all know that at least the first expansion as well as DLCs are probably ready

Politely disagree. I think they were caught by surprise by the ultimate failing of CivBE and we had a rushed Civ 6. While some say it was more polished than civ 5, I disagree. Not only was Civ V more radical change from Civ IV than VI is to V, but there are core features missing from the game (like teams). Nope, I think this was rushed. That being said, I am upto around 200 hours on Civ VI, although much of that is trying to get my mods working. I've played about 3 games and think it has huge potential - but that doesn't change the fact it was rushed.

 

[gfeier]

For some reason, I'm playing and enjoying the game for what it is, not for what it isn't yet. I play on King level and I find it pretty reasonable.

 

[Zuizgond]

What's really irritating is that we all know that this game will come close to playable only after 2 expansions. And we all know that at least the first expansion as well as DLCs are probably ready. And Firaxis knows that we know it. But we still have to watch this marketing song and dance for a couple of years before they release them all.. And then we'll have to act like we are surprised by them.. And then there will be an argument again as to the high price of the expansions... But we will still buy them.. Such a waste of time...

I don't think expansions can save the game. There are too many bad concepts in Civ 6 that it would need a complete overhaul to start being fun to play. I'll pass.

 

[God of Kings]

Civ VI was Christmas-rushed: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChristmasRushed

 

[Vasire]

Politely disagree. I think they were caught by surprise by the ultimate failing of CivBE and we had a rushed Civ 6. While some say it was more polished than civ 5, I disagree. Not only was Civ V more radical change from Civ IV than VI is to V, but there are core features missing from the game (like teams). Nope, I think this was rushed. That being said, I am upto around 200 hours on Civ VI, although much of that is trying to get my mods working. I've played about 3 games and think it has huge potential - but that doesn't change the fact it was rushed.

Yes, the game was rushed. And yes, the failing of CIVBE was surprising. But huge concepts that make the basis of expansions are planned at the very begining of the design process. And then they are let's say cut out from the game before release. Everything is already there. They are just following the the release schedule of their marketing department.

 

[Joch]

the game is not bad, I am currently playing a lot. Initially was not sure about it, but I find it is more complex, entertaining and has more options/staregies than Civ5.

I was unsure about the new district system, but now think it is the best new innovation in the game.

The only real issue for me is that the AI does not seem very competent at building its armies and waging war (King level).

I may try the AI mods and up the difficulty on the next game.

 

[Jonathan]

For anyone that wants a decent fight, 6 is a complete joke

If you are a builder or explorer then I think the game is just fine.

I more or less agree with this. If you want to go to war, don't buy any of the Civ series, buy a proper wargame.

The annoying thing is that, although Civ isn't a good wargame, it nudges you into wars in various ways. The main way to get a high score seems to be to go out conquering. And, if you don't go out conquering, soon or later someone will attack you and force you into war.

What I've always liked best about Civ is exploring and deciding where to found cities. I could do without the other aspects of the game.

Nevertheless, I'm still playing Civ 6 as it comes, with some interest. I think it's the best of the series so far, though it still has the same kind of defects that characterize the whole series.

 

[Tabarnak]

Vanilla civ4 and 5 were crappier than civ6. Let expansions give the real notoriety. Personnally i find civ 6 as the best vanilla game of all civs so far. Multiplayer is so much stable too its really fun.

 

[ThunderLizard2]

It's not about military "tactics" against a dumb AI. It's about everything. The feeling when you hear the drums of war in civ4 in amazing. My heart beats fast every time because I know that a Sod is coming. And The feeling when you destroy the other SoD that have being threatening you for centuries it's very good. In civ5 and 6 it's..." yeah why did u declare war In first place? U gonna loose anyway AI."

Agree completely with this sentiment. Civ IV is engaging from start to finish. I find on Monarch level the challenge is very high and I have yet to win on Immortal. On Civ VI, the AI is so poor it gets dull real fast. What I'd really love is a re-issue of Civ IV with updated graphics.

 

[LDiCesare]

Vanilla civ4 and 5 were crappier than civ6. Let expansions give the real notoriety. Personnally i find civ 6 as the best vanilla game of all civs so far. Multiplayer is so much stable too its really fun.

Vanilla civ 4 was great. Civ 6 may be good if you're into multiplayer. The main gripe is ther abysmal AI. The UI is also bad, but it's manageable.

The annoying thing is that, although Civ isn't a good wargame, it nudges you into wars in various ways. The main way to get a high score seems to be to go out conquering. And, if you don't go out conquering, soon or later someone will attack you and force you into war.

What I've always liked best about Civ is exploring and deciding where to found cities. I could do without the other aspects of the game.

The problem is civ focuses half of its production and tech around the military. If you try to be peaceful, it gets boring quickly because you don't have much to do and the rate at which your buildings get completed means you may spend a lot of time doing nothing but waiting.

 

[God of Kings]

Better yet, there should be a version of Civ IV with a hex grid and updated graphics, along with leader voice acting (in their native languages), while retaining the SoD and much better AI.

 

[Zuizgond]

along with leader voice acting

Do people really care about voice acting in a strategy game? That's the first thing I turned off in my first game.

 

[Horace]

Lol at some of these comments. I have not been lurking here for a while, it is good to see the same old Civ IV was amazing stuff is getting recycled again, same as the previous release.

Civ IV was not great vanilla. Civ V was also not great vanilla. Both were fantastic by the end of the expansions and both required mods to get the most from. Expecting anything else from VI was deluded.

Everyone saying they have played one game and not again over and over, perhaps try some mods, readjust your expectations and stop spamming the forums with the same AI whine that seems to pollute the place.

Firaxis/2k really need to get a grip on their communication though, the complete silence is not helping anything

 

[LDiCesare]

Civ IV was not great vanilla. Civ V was also not great vanilla. Both were fantastic by the end of the expansions and both required mods to get the most from. Expecting anything else from VI was deluded.

To each their own. Vanilla Civ IV was a challenge. After a few patches, Civ V was also somewhat challenging (not really hard to beat, though). Civ VI is nowhere near these games in terms of challenge.
So expecting Civ VI to be a challenge doesn'tsoundlike delusion. It might even be one with an AI patch. AI+is supposedto make it more challenging, but I would rather the devs did their job rather than relying on people to do it for them for free.

 

[Jonathan]

Do people really care about voice acting in a strategy game? That's the first thing I turned off in my first game.

Ha. I play with the sound off.

 

[PopeShaggy]

I'd say, if you are waiting for a major patch which really patches up the problematic parts of the game, give it another patch or 2. It is improving with the patches, but nothing groundbreaking yet. Also, try to remember that V had some major issues, especially with AI very early on. It is a common theme with later Civ games. They release, it's not perfect, but fun for a few plays, then several mods later, it gets better. Then first expansion truly opens the game up, and final expansion makes a game that people just can't stop playing for a couple years, and everyone eagerly awaits the next game. It is a pattern I have come to expect.

TL/DR - If you were not interested enough to keep playing after launch, give it until next patch or the one after, depending on which one is the major patch.

 

[Gorbles]

To save three pages of people debating over what boils down to personal preference:

If you own the game, check it out after each patch. If it still doesn't interest you, wait for the next patch. You lose nothing but half an hour or so. Don't rely on people with different opinions to give you an accurate rating that you'll agree with, because that's never going to work out.

 

[PopeShaggy]

To save three pages of people debating over what boils down to personal preference:

If you own the game, check it out after each patch. If it still doesn't interest you, wait for the next patch. You lose nothing but half an hour or so. Don't rely on people with different opinions to give you an accurate rating that you'll agree with, because that's never going to work out.

Probably the best answer on here, yet.

 

[TaxCorp]

Doubt it, the forum seems dead. The Civ3 forum seems more active than this one. All I've seen are a handful of 'fans' that are here defending any post against civ6. The game has potential, but let's see if they can be bothered to (1) fix the ai, (2) improve some of the existing mechanics that dont work so well, e.g. eurekas, (3) fix naval combat - horsemen cant be killed by a war galley... and then (4) add something extra without trying to charge us for it.