Maybe the problem isn't Civ4 it's Civ in general.

[Nilrim]

The whiners have gotten really old. Just like they were when Civ3 was released. Just like they will be when Civ5 is released. They will whine, piss and moan. That's all some people know how to do because they are a victim of their own bloated expectations.

I will tell you what I am getting tired of, is the whiners whining about the whiners. At least most of the people who are posting on here that take a different view aren’t personally attacking the people who have problems with this game, instead in a mature fashion they respond to why they think we are wrong and why they like the game.
Why is it so hard for you to accept that some people might have problems with a game you like? We aren’t talking about your wife or your mother, we aren’t telling you that you dress funny we are just taking issue with a game! Also we aren’t just knocking it to be knocking it, we are trying in a logical way to discuss what problems we have with it. If you can't do so then please, 'don't go away mad, just go away.'

 

[Pvblivs]

At least I think so. I cannot exactly tell. I think Civ4 to be a quite perfect TBS game. Ok, it has its minor bugs (like Civilopedia as a whole ) and some people (like me) don't like the performance-wasting 3D as it adds nothing to the gameplay but "beautiful". But who needs beauty in a game where he is to think...? But all in all, it seems to be perfect. Mostly.

Ok, I will stop this here and add some contents:

Civ1 was not perfect. The AI was not, nothing really was. But for us, that never saw such a game before, it created an amazing emperor-like feeling. Civ2 was great, it was the first one that I could play forever and even longer. Civ3, at least C3C was much the same. You wanted to last a game forever and it gave you the feeling it would.

What I now, playing Civ4 hell a lot, do not like is the pace. Civ4 somehow introduces a stress into this game that wasn't before. Every technology must make sense, in every turn (except the very first ones) it seems to force you to take action. Especially in the late game. In Civ2 you always had a lot of time. You could build upt your city and when you thought to be ready you would strike.
When you now take your time and think you could be ready in some turns you usually read "Montezuma built the Apollo Program" and you think "err, didn't I recently invent some Rifle"?

The other thing is that battle tactics are very much specialized on "keeping the units" in Civ1 and Civ2 I experienced some wars forever where you easily could battle from 2000 BC until 1500 AD with the AI.
This has now also gone. Everything is about efficient wars. About doing everything right and making the other doing everything wrong. The AI losses everything and you loose nothing. That's all facts about promotions. You of course may loose some tank, but you never have to worry about loosing anything important unless you make some wrong decision. In Civ2 enemy stacks could do some serious damage even if you were "overpowered".

Concluding I must repeat that I think Civ4 to be perfect. Perfect in presenting the player decisions many different but important to make. An experienced player may conquer the whole world now without loosing too much. The only thing to be bothered about is the maintenance costs.
When Rome finally overcame Carthage it suffered very very many hurtful defeats. In Civ4 you either have no chance (difficulty too high) or you win by far without loosing too much.

That leaves not much room for real struggles where two equals fight each other quite long what I consider to be one of the real fun things in Civ.

I think that Civilization 4, though it is perfect in your game decisions, should not have gone the way towards unit promotions. Now, your wars are perfect, as the game is

 

[Kaleb]

Ever try and start the game, and decide what victory condition you will go for around the middle ages? Just about impossible to achive, unless it is the ho hum space race. The space race has no fun to it. Might as well just let the clock run out at 2050.

yes, that's how I generally play every game on monarch at the moment and doesn't seem to cause a problem. In fact I would even argue that even more so than in Civ III you have to try and go for a BALANCED approach. If you want to go on a period of conquest you have to plan what your objectives are, when you will stop, and how you will consolidate on your position. Personally I really enjoy playing the game in phases like this - every phase of strategy has it's own challenges, and every game is different and I havn't tried a single mod yet either!

do agree about space race though - I've never liked it in any version of civ.

If there is a problem with Civ IV it has to be the AI foremost...

The AI...every civ has the same way of doing things. What they should have done is create several AIs that somehow mix it up and do things like combat and military differently, that don't always build in the 'sweet spot', but build at an interesting strategic situation.

And sure, that is a challenging task for the programmers who make the AI, but an interesting and 'multi-headed' AI would be a great boon to any strategy game. Easier said than done of course..

the AI has always been the achilles heel of every version of CIV, but I do certainly think this AI is significantly better than in Civ III. Although I would like AI to be a bit more strategically aggressive

Let me paraphrase you: a god game is one that is fun, period. I too like a challenge, and even though I'm a builder, I ocasionally do my warmongering. I like a game that forces me to think, but I don't like a game that forces me to work. I want to enjoy the few spare hours I have, I want to relax, I want to have fun with my wife (yes, she plays with me) and for this I want to enjoy every moment of my game; I don't want to work hard 5-6 hours in order to be happy for 2 minutes with the final victory. I need some rewards for my accomplishments during the game, not just at the end. I'm not saying there aren't any rewards, but there are 10 times less than civ2 had.

In civ4 you choose a final goal (conquest, UN, whatever) and then you work toward this goal. There are no intermediary checkpoints, moments in which you stop and enjoy what you've accomplished. This is why some people find it "boring": because the "one more turn" feeling is gone; ok, not gone, but faded. There are no immediate goals to enjoy. The small projects that were so rewarding in previous civ games and were the basis of the one more turn feeling are of much less importance, they are just small pieces in the big, primary goal, the final win against the AI.

I sympathise with this view a lot, wish is why I am bashing my brain at how there can be some kind of 'Economic Victory' which more accurately matches how nations really compete with each other in the modern era - something which is conspicously lacking in Civ 4.

And oh man, what I wouldn't give for my wife to enjoy Civ 4 - she sees it as her arch rival!

I believe that features need to be included as options rather than deciding to either leave a feature in or out. Most complaints seem to be from missing features from previous Civ games. I think that rather than complaining among ourselves, we need to let Firaxis know what features we want added back to the game as options that can be turned on/off.

Maybe some of the powers that be here at Civfanatics can come up with a poll-like question (made by the Civfanatics mods only, otherwise everyone and their family will be making a list) in which we can choose to click on the features we want from a list of missing features that can be added back to the game. That way, Firaxis can get a good idea of the most important features we the end users want added as options into the game.

Of course, in order for the poll to work, it would have to show up on the main screen so everyone can see it. Also, only the mods can add to the list, otherwise, we'll see everyone adding/commenting on every little aspect of the game. The important thing here is for Firaxis to be able to just click on the results of the poll (after a reasonable amount of time has passed, say a month or so) so that they can get a good idea of the features we want from the list that was presented to us and whether or not they can add them as an add-on pack or patch in the game.

Does anyone agree or even like this idea? If so, let one of the mods in this site know.

YES! My thoughts entirely. That way you can have the game with all the 'trimmings' (like advisors, wonder movies) or not, and can have the game run at the complexity level that you want (personally I would like to see the game being MORE complicated, but I'm sure this would lose some people)

maybe that way Firaxis can catch as many rabbits as they want!

 

[Oggums]

In civ4 you choose a final goal (conquest, UN, whatever) and then you work toward this goal. There are no intermediary checkpoints, moments in which you stop and enjoy what you've accomplished.

We must be playing two completely different versions of this game, because I've never played one like this.

 

[Kaleb]

ditto that Oggums

 

[Huszar]

We must be playing two completely different versions of this game, because I've never played one like this.

Care to elaborate? If you have something to say, say it. If you don't have anything to say, then don't say anything.
There is nothing easier than posting a

 

[TLHeart]

Expectations are just that --- things we would like to see in the game --- Take2 fell short of my expectations. My problem to deal with now.

I would totally get immersed in SMAC, I do not have that happen in CIV. One large thing that is missing in CIV is random events. Yes there are barbs, that wander around in the fog of war, may pillage now and then, and will attack your city if it is weakly defended. So what, easily countered. In SMAC you had the ever present fungus, that would grow, and destroy your improvements, would spawn native life forms, (barbs), hail storms that destroy solar coloctors, New Volocanos forming,...Things totally out of your control, that you would have to respond to. Global warming... that would melt the polar ice caps, and cause the sea levels to rise, indangering cities, improvements, and having to build pressure domes to save cities.

Global warming in CIV, does what???? comes late in the game...causes some minor incovience in a few locations, but the game is over anyway at this point, as I press space space enter to achive my victory.

In CTP there was rudementy terra forming, which could make an unproductive city, productive. In SMAC there was total terra forming, you could create your own world while playing. Plant a forest, and watch it grow and spread. Create rivers, raise land from the sea, or lower the land to create more sea. The seas were areas of production, in SMAC, and CTP, now they are just there, to separate you from the other civilizations... something you have to cross, but can do nothing with.

CIV is not a progression of the series, building upon what the previous games had that worked, but an attempt to draw the 90 minute attention span group into buying the game. Many things were dumbed down, with the stated intention of removing micromanagement, the generic buildings across all civilizations, the generic cities across the ages. I miss the palace/throne room, it was irritating at times, but it was a pat on the back when I got to add to it.

Sid has always advanced the series, CIV advanced into the realm of 3D, at the cost of many game elements, that were in previous games. I certainly hope (expectations) that some of these game elements are brought back in the expansion packs, or I will not buy the expansion packs.

 

[Oggums]

Care to elaborate? If you have something to say, say it. If you don't have anything to say, then don't say anything.
There is nothing easier than posting a

Hey, that was easy!

I didn't post , and I believe I did say what I had to say? In fact, you just quoted it!

Wait, hang on....










It's not only easy, it's fun!

OK all teasing aside, what I mean is this. I've been playing this game after work, just about every night, for weeks, as well as some on weekends. I started with Monarch and when I was winning too much, I moved up to Emperor. Sometimes I don't finish a game, usually now I lose to space race. But the point is this:

I've never, ever, started a game and chosen a final goal. Each game is dynamic, and victory conditions are never set in stone. I may think I'm going for domination, and then find that it's just not practical to invade the other continent, where every civ is friendy, and I win a diplomatic victory. Usually on Emperor, the end result is losing to space race, but that's a different topic.

I've never, ever, "worked" toward that goal (that I didn't set). I've "played" toward the end, with the hand that is dealt along the way.

I've never, ever, had no intermediary checkpoints. There are always moments in which I stop and enjoy what I've accomplished. Usually, the first moment is right after I've wiped out my first Civ with swordsmans, taking over the Pyramids or a nice holy city. Or perhaps it's after you've just finished settling your own island continent and you've made contact with other civs overseas. You sit back, analyze your domain, and create a plan for the next era. That plan usually changes, and is unrelated to the possible victory conditions, because Civ4 is dynamic (and fun) like that.

I've played countless other games in my time, and never have I played a game like Civ4 that has the potential to be significantly different, every time you start and new one. Pick a new civ, choose a different research path, shoot for a different wonder... all that and the random factor of which AI's you're up against, thier placement in the world, and it's just not going to come out the same. Hell I still just hit "Play Now" and my games aren't the same.

 

[BirraImperial]

I've played countless other games in my time, and never have I played a game like Civ4 that has the potential to be significantly different, every time you start and new one. Pick a new civ, choose a different research path, shoot for a different wonder... all that and the random factor of which AI's you're up against, thier placement in the world, and it's just not going to come out the same. Hell I still just hit "Play Now" and my games aren't the same.

Amen on that. Civ4 is a whole different world everytime you start a new game. However, I hate it when the A.I always looks to win the space race, instead of trying some other path such as domination or diplomatic victory. I mean they never even try to build the U.N.!! Is there a way to tweak the AI to do something else other than building the damn space ship?

 

[Kaleb]

hehe ditto to Oggums again (<= note use of a different smiley this time, it was in fact even easier than a )

two wins on monarch under my belt so far, with third on it's way. it's 1860 and I'm leading in score after being near the bottom until about 1000 AD. And I still havn't decided how I am going to win. I can go for diplomacy, conquest, or space race at the moment. Maybe even cultural but I doubt it.

I think TLHeart makes a good point though. surely a great idea for an expansion pack would be to actually go beyond 2050 and include some of the features he describes??

 

[Sherkon]

In general, I'm disappointed and sad. Why? Because I no longer feel like I'm building a "Civilization".... just a handful of cities. Add to that the fact that generally, warfare is not really relavent for at least 5000 years... that just doesn't seem right. The game just feels slow and plodding.

I want to love it...I really do. But I find myself getting bored after a couple of weeks of playing.

 

[BirraImperial]

In general, I'm disappointed and sad. Why? Because I no longer feel like I'm building a "Civilization".... just a handful of cities. Add to that the fact that generally, warfare is not really relavent for at least 5000 years... that just doesn't seem right. The game just feels slow and plodding.

I want to love it...I really do. But I find myself getting bored after a couple of weeks of playing.

It does feel like you are building a Civilization, more than ever. There's culture, there's religion, the cities now look more real, etc. Warfare is always relevant, if not the AI would destroy you, don't really undestand what you mean.
I think the AI is probably the biggest flaw of the game. Sure, its harder to beat and that's good, but when they only aim to build the damn space ship or attack you for no reason and then you attack them once and they remember that for the rest of the game, that sucks.