Old timer's, what are your thoughts so far?

[Atwork]

I've played every Civ game dating all the way back to the old Avalon Hill board game. And, I've been excited about every release and expansion.

I was super excited about Civ 5's release because I expected Civ 5 to take BNW, incorporate some of the amazing Civ 4 mods, improve it all and amaze. But, Civ 5 turned out to be a huge disappointment on it's initial launch because it was rushed to market unfinished. The game wasn't finished, IMO, until after the expansions plus a number of terrific mods.

I am super excited again about Civ 6, especially after seeing some gameplay. The reason is because this game seems to be amply developed with all the systems of Civ 5 albeit re-worked and improved IMO. So, I think we're going to get a really terrific game on day 1 with lot's of immersive content. I can't wait to see what the modders and this great fanbase do with the game after release. I'm looking forward to years of epic gameplay with Civ 6.

 

[Raw is War?]

I started with Civ II in the late 90s (on the Playstation ), and have played III, IV and V. (I also have BE, but haven't played it much - just can't get into it) I'm really looking forward to the features they've announced thus far. Really hoping for a lot of depth and immersion from day one.

 

[CoolLizy]

Been playing since the very first Civilization in MS-DOS (although, technically I began with Colonization). I've liked every direct sequel in the series other than Civilization II.

Thus far I can't wait to get my hands on this game. As someone who really likes to play all the way to the modern age, I really hope they nail the late game this time. It sounds like they're putting quite a bit of focus into that aspect, thankfully.

 

[whyidie]

Bought every release except Beyond Earth. Too cluttered, no clear vision.

Enjoyed every release, although I'm generally biased towards the odd numbered ones. This is most likely due to fatigue coupled with the tendency to go full "moar" on even numbered releases. Bad combination for me as I'm usually looking for a reset after thousands of hours of a title.

Civ V got the reset just right. In comparison to the unholy Europa Universalis interface of orbs of potentially useless information available at all times, it was refreshing to come back to an interface that didn't take the "show everything" approach. Notifications were well managed, the information displayed was relevant, it was UI Zen. Coupled with less workers, less units, less things that didn't really matter was perfect for where I was at with the series.

As for VI, some of the features have me excited, but the interface looks to be taking a step towards more of everything. Do we really need to have the continent name show up on every single tile tooltip ? I prefer an executive style interface, show me the things that are important, if I want to dig into the minutia I'll dive into sub menus. Disconcerted about movement points. I was hoping for less constraints, make exploring and getting around easier, not harder. Wasn't a fan of the art style, but after a week I've already adjusted.

On the whole I am excited though. I'll be buying as usual. If this one isn't exactly my cup of tea but locks in newer players or older ones who were left out in the cold with V, I'll take one for the team and settle for hundreds of hours of fun vs thousands.

 

[gcm4738]

Been playing since the very first Civilization in MS-DOS

Oh man - I just had a flashback to a kind of civ-like MS-DOS game I used to play on the Apple II in the early 80's called "Hammurabi"...

 

[Moriarte]

Zero interest in this new title, visually. Perhaps there may be a ton of interesting game mechanics pressing me to change my mind, who knows, but looking at art direction/quality, the new title is obviously engineered for the $$$ platforms and I don't feel the need to accept lesser graphics than that of Civ 5 (whatever the reason), as there is a big choice of cool modern games to play, with cunning visuals and juicy complicated game-systems, including civ5, so why should I? Was a little disappointed at first, but hey, if Firaxis doesn't want to create modern turn-based strategy with cutting edge visuals, somebody else will. I don't mind waiting.

Civ 1.
Civ 5.

 

[Rusty Edge]

Now I understand there will be no tech trading, as well as no more World Congress. I'm sensing a restrictive trend to trade negotiations and diplomacy with IV, V , and now VI.

So I really hope that the 1st expansion focuses on trade and diplomacy, allowing more options, such as 3-way negotiations for treaties and tri-lateral trade, mixed payments of techs, commodities, luxuries, gold up front and gold per turn, units, and cities.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Now I understand there will be no tech trading, as well as no more World Congress. I'm sensing a restrictive trend to trade negotiations and diplomacy with IV, V , and now VI.

So I really hope that the 1st expansion focuses on trade and diplomacy, allowing more options, such as 3-way negotiations for treaties and tri-lateral trade, mixed payments of techs, commodities, luxuries, gold up front and gold per turn, units, and cities.

Tech trading was way too exploitable and always in favor of the human player--it's one "lost" feature that I feel makes it a better game.

 

[Ryika]

Tech Trading is silly as a mechanic anyway. It creates value out of nothing, because you don't lose anything.

 

[HisDivineShadow]

I started with Civ I. I actually very much enjoyed Civ V after its expansion, and play it instead of any previous versions.

From what I've seen so far of Civ VI, I'm going to like that even better!

 

[Sal]

Civ 2 onwards for me.

I was very disappointed with the drop in depth from Civ IV to Vanilla V. However after BNW it was a fantastic game. Even so, it never quite displaced Civ IV as my favourite. I found social policies a bit naff - the way your gov choice in 2000BC locked you into a gameplay style for the rest of time took some dynamism away from the experience. So I am delighted at what I am seeing regarding governments and civics in Civ VI.

I am also pleased they are not paring it right down to the bones again by taking out religion, trade and espionage - and making us wait for expansions to get them back. That felt a bit cynical with Civ V, although I could see they did it to make the game accessible to newcomers in the early stages.

All in all I am quite excited.

 

[Nikolai II]

Been playing since the mid-late ninties. Seems very promising thus far!

 

[Karmah]

PLayed civ1 when I was a kid , got hooked like crazy. Got every iteration , I consider 5 the most mature and complete version of the game. I was doubtfull when I read the governements were back (I don't like the simplistic picture were democracy is basically US version of it) and prefered implicit government choices from 5 rather than explicit. Now that I've read about the 'card' system , it seems like a fun gameplay and even so I still don't like explicit governement names , I'm pretty excited about VI , five months more to go ...

 

[TrailblazingScot]

I have been playing since Civ I and I have burnt countless hours on the series. Not enough to stop me getting a degree, married, a house, a profession and soon a son to play Civ with

I am optimistic that Civ6 will develop the series. There appears to be an appreciation of the problems with CiV and those areas that CiV does so well.

I hope that Civ6 can bring competitive multiplayer back to the Civ series. Civ IV was far from perfect in this regard, but I got a real rush playing in different tournaments.

Fingers crossed.

 

[AlazkanAssassin]

I am looking forward to 6 a lot! So many nice looking changes, and they kept the good things 5 added.

I started with Civ 1.

 

[chrisge]

I played a huge amount of Civ 1, some Civ 3 and a huge amount of Civ 4. I would rather play Civ 1 than Civ 5. Hoping that Civ 6 can heal the schism between 4 and 5 die hards and bring the series back on track. Jon Shafer admitted that he got Civ 5 wrong in a number of areas remember? http://www.pcgamer.com/jon-shafer-criticizes-every-decision-he-made-in-designing-civ-v-explains-how-at-the-gates-will-differ/

 

[Thormodr]

I played a huge amount of Civ 1, some Civ 3 and a huge amount of Civ 4. I would rather play Civ 1 than Civ 5. Hoping that Civ 6 can heal the schism between 4 and 5 die hards and bring the series back on track. Jon Shafer admitted that he got Civ 5 wrong in a number of areas remember? http://www.pcgamer.com/jon-shafer-criticizes-every-decision-he-made-in-designing-civ-v-explains-how-at-the-gates-will-differ/

I hope so, too. Thanks for the article. It was a good read.

Welcome to the forums.

 

[gunnerxtr]

I played a huge amount of Civ 1, some Civ 3 and a huge amount of Civ 4. I would rather play Civ 1 than Civ 5. Hoping that Civ 6 can heal the schism between 4 and 5 die hards and bring the series back on track. Jon Shafer admitted that he got Civ 5 wrong in a number of areas remember? http://www.pcgamer.com/jon-shafer-criticizes-every-decision-he-made-in-designing-civ-v-explains-how-at-the-gates-will-differ/

Anyone else notice that CIV 6's fog of war / hand drawn map look very familiar to this screenie from 'At the Gates'?

 

[Thormodr]

Anyone else notice that CIV 6's fog of war / hand drawn map look very familiar to this screenie from 'At the Gates'?

Good catch!

I knew it looked familiar!

Nothing wrong with borrowing a good idea.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

I've been playing since Civ II, though I skipped Civ III. I've logged over 5000 hours on Civ IV with playing and modding, and a whopping 19 hours on Civ V.

Can you tell which version I prefer?

I found Civ V too simplified for my tastes, even with BNW. Those of you who are going to tell me that I haven't played enough Civ V to really know are partially correct. However, I don't get that "One more turn" feeling from Civ V, and I feel that I have played precisely enough of it. I'm sorry, but I just don't like it.

Civ 6 seems to have gone in the same direction as Civ V did, and by the early things I've read and the "Let's play" videos, I'm afraid that it's become even more simplistic and suffers from lack of depth.

I hope for the sake of all of you buying it that you can and do enjoy it, but I'm afraid it's a little shallow for me (so far). I won't be purchasing it unless it's at a deep discount with all of the expansions. I'll stick with Stellaris and Civ IV. Both are solid games with a lot of depth and strategic thinking required.