Kotaku names Civ V one of the best 12 PC games

[fat_tonle]

http://www.2kgames.com/blog/civilization-v-expansion-pack-announced

Are we still friends ?

Is that a sick joke????

Edit: Nm..... glad they had something in the works. Still cautiously optimistic.

 

[Derpy Hooves]

My bad, considering the amount of things they screwed up I was expecting them to follow this trend, let's hope they don't continue this like the first time they "fixed" the diplo and combat AI.

And ofcourse we're still friends, I stomped yout arguments so badly you could only resort to a really bad attempt at trolling Moderator Action: Such accusations are not allowed here. , so as far as I'm concerned I have no reason to dislike you, as a matter of fact, I wouldn't even have remembered this discussion if you had not revived it to dispute a single argument in a fairly substantial list that you, dissapointingly, still have not responded to.

 

[Ex.plode]

First off, if you don't like it, don't play it.

I don't have much experience with the MP part of the game, but I do enjoy it and agree that its pretty good, but I think top 12 may be pushing it.

 

[galahadba]

You are right. But they are talking about the majority of the old time civ players. Not the majority of all the newcomers.
I could never get my friends to play older civs. It was too complicated for them. But now they are playing civ5.

But i would say that the majority of the players who loved civ since civ 1, miss the things that made civ4 complicated

Old players don't like changes... when civ4 was launched the same thing had happened, with arguments like "taking out atack and defense status is stupid", etc.. ...For me the complication of civ4 is only aparent... ...the mecanisms that got out were not so important after all and they added improved and combat that makes the civ5 much more "complicated" than the 4. Civ 5 had the potential to be the better civ without arguments if only they had added an AI that could use the new amazing combat system...

 

[Ex.plode]

I don't understand the whole complicated thing, none of the CIV games (save maybe civ1) have been really complicated.


Tactics essentially boiled down to who could have the bigger SoD

 

[gingerbill]

CIV 5 is one of my favourite game's of all time . Played it a hell of a lot. Looking forward to the new DLC.

 

[Putmalk]

CIV 5 is one of my favourite game's of all time . Played it a hell of a lot. Looking forward to the new DLC.

You mean expansion?

 

[spider1]

LOL, here we go again! It sucks! No, it's fantastic! No, it sucks! No, it's a great game, you suck!

The game most certainly has it's faults, and it is a major departure from previous Civ games, but at least the franchise is still very much alive and kicking. Which is more than you can say for Age of Empire fans.

 

[Sonereal]

1. Yeah, they called it a real-time strategy game and its a shallow review coming from a website most of you aren't familiar with and we all like to hate.

Like to hate? No. Good reason to hate? Yes.

But, this is something we should all celebrate here instead of dismising cause the writer had a few mistakes in.

A "few". Calling the game a RTS counts for a "few" just by itself.

This article has the potential to bring in new players, or spark the fire with players that stoped playing.

Who? If I was someone who has stopped playing (I actually haven't played in a while since, hurdur, waiting for the DLL), the article would actually convince me to keep the game on a shelf. Potential to bring in new players? How likely is it that someone read this very shallow, stupid review is going to get on Steam and spend $29.99-$49.99 on the game?

This article is good for the game, the community and this very website. If a random gamer sees this article, sees the game is listed as one of the best PC games around and goes on to buy it of steam, its a win for all of us. If you cant see that, you're just selfish.

Maybe if that gamer is slow and doesn't see that the list includes nothing but recent games and Be-friggin-jeweled. If you can't see the major flaw in your thinking, than you're being obtuse.

Moderator Action: Hitting back doesn't help. Trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

2.Please please please, stop with rant posts.

Please please please, stop expressing your opinion.

Moderator Action: Fighting fire with fire doesn't make your fire any more acceptable.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Just because you have issues with the current itteration of the franchise doesnt mean you have to be bitter about it on its dedicated discussion board.

"Just because you have issues doesn't give you the right to express your opinion on the game."

It helps no one, its counter productive, and it lights the whole community in a bad light.

You know what really lights this community in a bad light? That CivV GD was the second most infracted board next to Off-Topic.

Moderator Action: So please stop being a primary contributor to that.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Think about the potential new members, the random un-educated player coming here to find new information, and has to browse through negative comments about how this game ruined the franchise.

I'm not being paid to bring new members to the game. No one is. If Firaxis/2K (mainly 2K) is worried about negative comments, then all they have to do is sit down, scrap the diplo code, and plug in BAI from CivIV and tweak it to the game.

I played all the games on this franchise starting with the first civ ( i still remember editing the text files to alter the opening "cinematic"), and i had problems with some of them. It never crossed my mind to go to the civ 4 forums for example and go on about what i dont like.

Cool?

The game will not change any time soon. It will have expansions and more DLC coming our way. There are areas to improve and im sure someone is already working on that.

Cool. More patches to buy.

A consolidated thread with the changes the community wants is what will help the devs in the long run, not a huge rant thread or some sporadic off-topic hate posts.

The devs should know what the major demands are by now. If they don't, they are also being obtuse.

Moderator Action: Please do not publicly discuss moderator actions, and please do not call other people 'haters'.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

[/QUOTE]

Oh hello random mod warning.

Moderator Action: Here's another one. Pro-tip: don't quote moderator warnings with such comments. General rule is to not quote them at all under any circumstances, let alone when you've been trolling, and then meet it with a .
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Thormodr]

Originally Posted by Kotaku
The legendary real-time strategy series changed things up significantly with Civilization V to make would-be world domination tons more streamlined. Maps are easier to navigate, crucial information flows easier and it's the best-looking entry in the family tree.

A Good Match for: Event planners. Like a wedding or a milestone birthday party, Civilization V's all about knowing your guests and what they need to have a good time. Of course, those "guests" are rival nations and "a good time" is submitting to the power of your empire.

Not for Those Who Want: Older Civ games. Civilization V is no incremental sequel, and the difference could alienate die-hard fans of the historical franchise.

Interesting take on things and it could go a long way to explaining why the game is so dull and frustrating. Your role is to facilitate the AI guests having fun. Lol. In older titles it was all about you having fun. How times have changed.

They were spot on in who the game was not for, however. Die hard fans didn't want a streamlined, pretty looking game. (At the expense of substance.) In that aspect, Firaxis delivered that in spades.

Also, to call it one of the 12 best PC games ever is absurd. It's barely the 12th best title in the Civ universe. (ie. Including Colonization, Alpha Centauri, Civ Rev, etc.)

 

[trueblue]

Die hard fans didn't want a streamlined, pretty looking game.

I did.



but then again, what makes a 'die hard'.

 

[gozpel]

CIV1 was the best I ever played when it came out. Sure it had it's flaws and was slightly limited, but still, what an awesome game for that time.

Civ2 was so and so, then comes Civ3 and I spent 10000 hrs on that game.

But the game has to evolve and they gave us Civ4, I felt just awkward with that game in the beginning, but I probably spent 2000 hrs on it. It was very different as a game of Civ, but still playable. No succession games survived long though. Too much boredom.

Civ5, 1300 hrs clocked, 33 games finished. Already that speaks for itself. I start game after game and only play to around turn 200, then I get so bored I give it up. Yesterday I deleted another 50 saves on my list.

Compared to Civ1 not comparing the age-difference, Civ5 suck Big Time.

 

[Rub'Rum]

I don't know how someone can say a game is anything other than awesome after they've spent over 1000 hours playing it. That's like 6 months of a full time job. This is not a comment about spending too much time playing a game. It's a comment about being able to spend so much time on a game that apparently isn't good. Baffling.

 

[jeffah3539]

I don't know how someone can say a game is anything other than awesome after they've spent over 1000 hours playing it. That's like 6 months of a full time job. This is not a comment about spending too much time playing a game. It's a comment about being able to spend so much time on a game that apparently isn't good. Baffling.

Some games, like Civ games, are just better time sinks than others, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are good.

I spent thousands of hours playing WoW but I still could see its deficiencies and knew when it had evolved to the point where it was no longer as good as it once was. It still has millions of subscribers, though, and many of them say they also don't like it as much now but keep playing it because it is the game franchise that they love more than any other. It was sad seeing my longtime guild members who had been playing WoW for years just logging on and going through the motions out of habit even though they no longer enjoyed the game.

That is how many people feel about Civ. It is hard to just quit a franchise that you have been playing regularly for a decade or longer. I think many of the haters and ranters on CiV are so militant and rabid because Civ was a huge part of their lives and they really wanted CiV to be great. It is hard to just resign yourself to that crushing disappointment and keep your mouth shut. It is like yelling at the TV: it doesn't accomplish anything, but it makes you feel better.

At least that is how I feel. I have been playing Civ games for 15 years, since I was 10 years old. I wanted CiV to be great, but I was incredibly disappointed with what it ended up being.

 

[Rub'Rum]

Let's say WoW was better at one point, I understand that somebody who wants that goodness to still exist doesn't have anywhere to go. The game is what it is nowadays, and you can't go back to what it was.

In the case of Civ 5, if you don't like it, you actually still have access the the iterations that you cherish, and you can go back to them. I understand the need to complain and be vocal about the problems of Civ 5. But that's not the same as spending 1000 hours playing it anyway.

 

[jjkrause84]

"Koatku names Civ V one of the best 12 PC games"

And rightly so!

Just goes to show how the nay sayers are -despite what they might think - not in the majority.

Whenever I see rants and discussions about how Civ5 sucks so hard, I see statements like "as most of us" or "the overwhelming majority" in the same sentence. It makes me chuckle.

Sorry chaps, but an overwhelming majority likes and plays Civ5 and - here's the important part - shuts up about it! Just because the nay sayers are louder in voicing their opinion, doesn't mean they are the majority. It is always the same. Those who are unhappy with something sure put more effort in expressing their unhappiness than those who are happy. It's simply human.

So Kotaku (besides others, btw) having high praise for Civ5 only reflects a popular opinion and will reinforce further acceptance of Civ5.

I, for one, am glad this is so.

Lots of things are or have been very popular with 'the majority'....like Nazism and Crocs. Both were very broadly supported in their time. That doesn't make either of them a good idea....

 

[jjkrause84]

absolutely right. There are also those who realy liked Civ5, but now since they are pretty much borred of playing it, only rant about all the flaws that were not that much appearant when they started.

And, there are those like me. My first Civ was Civ5. Now that i know that i like civ's gameplay and everything, i'd also like a "deeper" game, such as civ4. I bought it, played it about 10 turns, and uninstalled it. Why ? Somewhat poor graphics, and ugly interface. I realy would like to play, but i just cannot. And it's not like i can't stand poor graphics, i started pc gaming somewhere around 1998, and there are those old games that i still play from time to time.. it's just that civ4 never had a chance to leave a good mark on me.

So, if i had to vote somehow, i'd be obligated to vote for civ5 over the others, althought i'm absolutely sure that civ4 was a much better game.

The first 10 turns of Civ 4 pass in under 5 minutes. You couldn't hang on for more than 5 minutes with a game that takes hours to complete?

 

[Mods]

It's just a list of 12 mainstream popular titles