Jump from Civ IV to VI? or give Civ V a try?

[LDiCesare]

I printed sulla's opinion out and used it to line my bird cage.

Well, in a way, it was useful for you

Since Civ5 is by far the best and outclasses civ4 in every aspect , I'd say you can't regret playing civ5 for two months. And I was a fan of civ4 (and 3 ,2,1 )...when it was its time that i , I hopefully didn't get stuck with no valid reason

To each their own. At least I don't pretend civ V is crap in absolute, I jsut say I think it is. Civ V is inferior to IV for me in every aspect except having hexagons. Everything else is a regression. The religion system is likely better, but not part of the base game, and yes that matters to me, as I'm not buying expansions of a game that should have pleasedme without expansions but didn't. Plus they don't change the sruff that is broken/unfun for me in the base game.
People point out that civ V is more successful than IV, but when you see advice like this one, it doesn't mean it's actually better liked by those who played both.

So, to the OP, imo bide your time. It looks more likely that you'll like VI over V since it seems to have learnt/fixed some issues, so there's really no point buying a game until you can't wait a few months.

 

[King Jason]

No matter whether one prefers Civ4 or Civ5, I think it's safe to say that Civ6 takes a LOT of its game mechanics from Civ5. There may be differences, but Civ6 still seems a lot closer to Civ5 than it does to Civ4. For that reason, I recommend buying Civ5 at a low price to try it out before diving into Civ6. If one vehemently dislikes Civ5, I see no reason to believe that one would feel much differently about Civ6.

This makes no sense. So far, civ6 seems superior to civ5 in practically every way. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who thinks civ6 and civ5 are so much alike that liking or disliking one will mean you like or dislike the other is basically saying that if you hate vanilla cake then you won't like chocolate cake because hey - they're both cake.

 

[Acken]

Depends why you dislike Civ5. If it's about 1UPT I have bad news for you.

 

[stiiknafuulia]

What they're saying about Civ VI's AI does give me great concern (based on the previews, it's as just bad as Civ V). But since every other aspect seems improved, and there are no other games like Civ out there (I hate the EU series, unfortunately), I still plan on buying Civ VI at release (after reading a few reviews ofc). I guess I might move on to multi-player for a decent challenge; although that has seemed too cut-throat as well as time-consuming to me before, there are supposedly shorter game modes in Civ VI and given that there are so many players, I will likely find a group who's more interested in role-playing history than chopping that Axeman on turn 13 to ensure proper overflow.

(Semi-rant but relevant in that if op prefers multiplayer, then Civ VI seems a much better bet, as Civ V's multiplayer is notorious for desync issues, and the devs will cater much more to multiplayer this time around (supposedly...).)

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: The OP asks whether or not he should try Civ5 in preparation for Civ6. Please provide him your advice. Please do not get into another useless argument over whether Civ4 or Civ5 is superior. They are different and people have their preferences. Recognize it and be tolerant of it.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[shaglio]

This makes no sense. So far, civ6 seems superior to civ5 in practically every way. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who thinks civ6 and civ5 are so much alike that liking or disliking one will mean you like or dislike the other is basically saying that if you hate vanilla cake then you won't like chocolate cake because hey - they're both cake.

It's more like Civ 4 is vanilla cake, Civ 5 is chocolate cake, and Civ 6 is German chocolate cake. If you like chocolate cake, then you might like German chocolate cake because it's similar, but improved upon.

As for the OP, my initial thought was to recommend buying Civ 5 Complete so you can get used to the things that are significantly different from Civ 4 (1upt, hexes, religion, trade routes, tourism, etc.). If you had asked this back when Civ 6 was first announced, I would have suggested that. But since Civ 6 is ~2 months from release, it would depend how cheap you can get it (and much that amount of money means to you) whether it is worth it to play for such a short time.

 

[King Jason]

It's more like Civ 4 is vanilla cake, Civ 5 is chocolate cake, and Civ 6 is German chocolate cake. If you like chocolate cake, then you might like German chocolate cake because it's similar, but improved upon.

Eh, I'd disagree. If I go to the store and grab two boxes of cake mix; one vanilla and one chocolate - the ingredients needed to make both cakes are exactly the same except for the mix itself. I get the argument being presented by those who see civ5 and civ6 really similar, which is why I used the cake analogy.

Those cakes using the store-bought mix require the exact same ingredients and are made the exact same way, but they taste completely different because of their flavor. Flavor, tone, style, lighting - whatever the differing mechanism you want to bring into it; these things account for a lot when it comes to the feel and presentation of something. The same person can look utterly different just by the lighting you use.

Likewise, even if civ5 and civ6 have the the exact same ingredients, they are very clearly different flavors and I personally would not recommend trying civ5 in preparation for civ6. There's really no point even if one enjoys the game.

Spoiler :

Edit: I feel the need to emphasize that nothing about what I'm saying has anything to do with civ4 vs civ5 but rather dispelling the notion that players who liked or disliked civ5 will just naturally like/dislike civ6. I think the content we've seen shows there are dramatic shifts between both games - enough that will make some people who loved civ5 dislike civ6, and some people that hated civ5 like civ6. I think the games are more different than some people give credit.

 

[Haggbart]

Yes! With the sale deals you can get on CiV with expansions these days it's crazy not to if you like civ-games. I love both Civ 4 and 5, got over a 1000 hours in each of them. And the great thing is, you don't have to chose between the, like some people here seem to believe, you can actually enjoy both for being great games that are very different.

Just don't expect Civ 4.1 and do remember to get the GOTY-edition with both expansions.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

While I think Civ IV is far and away superior to Civ V, the latter is still a decent enough game. Eventually some of Civ V's flaws (especially the interaction between the AI and 1UPT) made me stop playing it, but not before I had spent a good amount of time with the game. Not an all-time classic like Civ IV, but still worth checking out, and it won't cost much.

 

[rastak]

Well, in a way, it was useful for you

Glad you have a sense of humor. I do wish you happy civving, whatever version you play.


To the OP, I'd buy it if money isn't tight. I found it a great game and just passed 3k hours playing (most of it real hours).

That said if you like stacks of units it might not be for you.

 

[Graethyenne]

Exposure to the core changes introduced in 5 and refined in 6 can't really hurt. And six is still three months away. Having recently messed around with Vox Populii and currently playing with the NQmod I think you will be able to both enjoy 5 and also gain a basic familiarity with the new concepts (hexes, 1upt, trade routes, religion and so on).

This is coming from someone who played a ton of 4 (though mostly Fall From Heaven 2) recoiled from 5 at release, and post BNW has logged over 1200 of 5. For whatever that is worth.

 

[Lucius_]

It's more like Civ 4 is vanilla cake, Civ 5 is chocolate cake, and Civ 6 is German chocolate cake. If you like chocolate cake, then you might like German chocolate cake because it's similar, but improved upon.

Did you know German chocolate cake has coconut? Surely you did not, otherwise you would not be saying that it's similar to chocolate cake, but improved upon. It certainly is not improved upon.

 

[Thormodr]

I don't think it's necessary to have played Civilization 5 in order to enjoy Civ VI. However, if you are to give it a try, the Vox Populi mod would be the way to go as it makes the game decent.

Civ VI should be significantly different from Civilization 5, I am happy to say. Just over 2 months to go.

 

[krasny]

I can't play Civ 5 because of the long processing times for the AI. So if waiting time in Civ 4 is an issue, stay well clear of Civ 5.

 

[Lord Lakely]

if you're a fan of the franchise, why not give Civ 5 a try? Sure, buy the game and its expansions and enjoy ^__^

I don't think you NEED to play Civ 5 in prep for Civ 6 tho. The game's been overhauled for 6, so it will play quite differently.

 

[NukeAJS]

I've played Civs 3, 4, and 5. And I think Civ5 vanilla was disappointing for a variety of reasons; however, I think Civ5 Brave New World is the best Civ ever.

As far as buying Civ5 to prepare for Civ6 ... I'd buy Civ5 just because it's (now) a great game. There does seem to be some carry-over from Civ5 to Civ6 (religion, 1 unit per tile), but there are also a lot of other systems that don't have an equivalent.

So, I'd recommend Civ5 just because it's fun.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Did you know German chocolate cake has coconut? Surely you did not, otherwise you would not be saying that it's similar to chocolate cake, but improved upon. It certainly is not improved upon.

Maybe it's more of a Black Forest gateaux, it's like chocolate cake, but with cherries. Besides, I would thoroughly recommend having your cake and eating it too. If someone is offering you two cakes then you take the two cakes

 

[Hakan-i Cihan]

By the way if you were going to ask the same question about Beyond Earth for whatever reason, my answer would be skip that one for sure.

 

[shaglio]

Did you know German chocolate cake has coconut? Surely you did not, otherwise you would not be saying that it's similar to chocolate cake, but improved upon. It certainly is not improved upon.

I most certainly do know that it has coconut. That's what I like about it so much.

As King Jason said, I'm not here to discuss whether or not I like Civs 4 & 5, but rather to contrast the differences in mechanics between the two and how Civ 6 is seeming to compare. I think Civ 6 has some major mechanics that are more similar to 5 than 4. For one, the switch to hexes removed the diagonal movement exploit. Like it or not, 1upt is significantly different from 4 (although 6's corps/armies and support units might make it less harsh).

There are some melds of 4 & 5, though. The Civics system seems to be a hybrid of 5's Policies and 4's Civics - which are nothing like 1-3's simpler Governments. Oh well, I would say more but dinner's ready and my wife is yelling at me

 

[Lucius_]

I most certainly do know that it has coconut. That's what I like about it so much.

As King Jason said, I'm not here to discuss whether or not I like Civs 4 & 5, but rather to contrast the differences in mechanics between the two and how Civ 6 is seeming to compare. I think Civ 6 has some major mechanics that are more similar to 5 than 4. For one, the switch to hexes removed the diagonal movement exploit. Like it or not, 1upt is significantly different from 4 (although 6's corps/armies and support units might make it less harsh).

There are some melds of 4 & 5, though. The Civics system seems to be a hybrid of 5's Policies and 4's Civics - which are nothing like 1-3's simpler Governments. Oh well, I would say more but dinner's ready and my wife is yelling at me

Just to be clear, because I can't tell by your response, my point was, I don't like coconut, literally. It was a joke and completely unrelated to Civ.