Own And Played Every Civ From 3 To 6

[number51]

I don't really care about cut scenes, regardless of the size (stop being so obsessed about the size! LOL). My problem with what I have seen in the Civ VII previews is the silly cartoon like animations of the units in the game.

 

[Gedemon]

I don't really care about cut scenes, regardless of the size (stop being so obsessed about the size! LOL). My problem with what I have seen in the Civ VII previews is the silly cartoon like animations of the units in the game.

that a silly obsession you have here, when everyone showed you it was not really better in the previous games.

 

[GeneralZift]

I find Civ5's leaders wooden and robotic (though I do miss the beautiful environments). However, with Civ7 I really do feel like they need to pick either realistic models or lively animations; they look very strange together.

Hmm... Wooden and robotic but for the time they were still pretty good. I think of them as "reserved" which works really well with their programming.
Like they always look like they're plotting something, so it doesn't feel weird when they surprise war. It's like wow, how slimy of you...

I do agree with you, I can't quite put it. Civ6's art style matches the animations. Civ7's leaders have like Civ5.5 art style with Humankind animations. It's a little worse of all worlds I can't lie.

 

[number51]

that a silly obsession you have here, when everyone showed you it was not really better in the previous games.

Nope! LOL you missed the part where I explained the difference between a cut scene and an actual part of the game. The difference is obvious, sorry you can't understand it.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

civ is SRS BSNS!

 

[TheGrayFox]

Yeah OP this argument really isn't working. The Civilization series has never been overly serious, Civ 5 was the exception to that rule.

If you prefer the grounded art style of 5 (many do including myself) just say as much but framing Civilization or past art styles as being a kid's game because the series trend toward exaggerated caricature is silly.

 

[Professor Phobo]

Civ 2 was pretty silly.

Yeah OP this argument really isn't working. The Civilization series has never been overly serious, Civ 5 was the exception to that rule.

...Giant Death Robots?

 

[TheGrayFox]

Civ 2 was pretty silly.


...Giant Death Robots?

Sorry I should've specificed i was referring to art styles

 

[abj9562]

I have played all the incarnations of Civilization. Graphics have generally improved every iteration, although not always to some people's desired tastes. Too bad for them, the game system is still great.

 

[Gedemon]

Nope! LOL you missed the part where I explained the difference between a cut scene and an actual part of the game. The difference is obvious, sorry you can't understand it.

I wasn't thinking about that, but leaders are actual part of the game, a very fundamental one for some players.

 

[reddishrecue]

I have played all the incarnations of Civilization. Graphics have generally improved every iteration, although not always to some people's desired tastes. Too bad for them, the game system is still great.

I agree, the graphics seem really well advanced in civ 7, here.

 

[Thormodr]

5 was an unmitigated disaster that was only rescued by the community through modders dragging it up to the half decent level.

I found the graphics sterile and boring. The squeaky wheel from 5 fans got some grease in 7 with some compromise on the graphics and a return of some mechanics like happiness and social policies.

 

[Thormodr]

I wasn't thinking about that, but leaders are actual part of the game, a very fundamental one for some players.

Leaders are even more important in 7 now, too.

 

[GeneralZift]

5 was an unmitigated disaster that was only rescued by the community through modders dragging it up to the half decent level.

I found the graphics sterile and boring. The squeaky wheel from 5 fans got some grease in 7 with some compromise on the graphics and a return of some mechanics like happiness and social policies.

Idk what game you lot are playing it must be different to what game I'm playing

 

[Thormodr]

Idk what game you lot are playing it must be different to what game I'm playing

You were playing a game that had the lead designer quit in disgrace for a reason.

5 is the only game that I did not put thousands of hours into. I've been playing literally the same month Civ I came out.

Anyway, in order not to derail the thread any longer, I will leave it at that. Hoping for much better things for 7. I'm sure you are, too.

 

[Solver]

You were playing a game that had the lead designer quit in disgrace for a reason.

I'm compelled to point out this is blatantly false.

Yes, I think Civ5 is easily the low point of the series. I played the release version much less than any other Civ game, it left me disappointed in many ways. And while I know many veterans felt similarly about it, Civ5 was nothing other than a major hit critically and commercially, which firmly established Civ as a core franchise for 2K. I may not have liked the game but that in no way gives credence to the false rumors (and sometimes outright ridiculous accusations) I've seen aimed at the lead designer whom I saw give Civ5 years of his best effort, and who then left Firaxis with the reputation of a respected, ambitious and capable designer.

 

[Thormodr]

I'm compelled to point out this is blatantly false.

Yes, I think Civ5 is easily the low point of the series. I played the release version much less than any other Civ game, it left me disappointed in many ways. And while I know many veterans felt similarly about it, Civ5 was nothing other than a major hit critically and commercially, which firmly established Civ as a core franchise for 2K. I may not have liked the game but that in no way gives credence to the false rumors (and sometimes outright ridiculous accusations) I've seen aimed at the lead designer whom I saw give Civ5 years of his best effort, and who then left Firaxis with the reputation of a respected, ambitious and capable designer.

Alright, perhaps I was a bit strong worded there. The lead designer had a "mutual parting of the ways" and left with the game in not the best of shape.

Most Civ games do not have the best of launches but 5 was particularly bad. It improved as all Civ games do. The community and a collection of modders stepping in saved this from a much more ignominious fate with the Vox Populi mod.

I bear no ill will towards the lead designer. I actually generously supported his project, At the Gates, at a top tier level. I do believe in second chances. I was less than impressed with that one as the game concept and mechanics kept changing over the years and was severely delayed. Anyway, I hope he is doing well in whatever endeavour he is pursuing now.

That's all I am going to say.

 

[Solver]

The lead designer had a "mutual parting of the ways" and left with the game in not the best of shape.

Regardless of the shape of the game (and I do agree Civ5 was especially bad on launch), this is the norm for the series, a designer typically moves on, to another project or company, after the launch.

Civ1 never had expansions but of the game's two designers, one left Microprose not long after release, and the other stopped working on Civ.

Civ2 had a couple of expansions (or content collections) but the original lead of Civ2 had nothing to do with those, working on another project.

Civ3 had a complicated history with multiple designers, but the top-billed designer of the game wasn't doing any design work on the expansions or other post-release content.

Civ4 was an extremely lucky project (a rare instance where everything went right during development) but follows the pattern - the game's two expansions were not designed by the Civ4 lead, who remained at Firaxis for a bit and then left

Civ5 again followed the pattern, with its lead designer quitting Firaxis and then a different team working on the expansions

Civ6 is the first to partially deviate, as most post-launch content was designed by others, but the lead designer also designed one expansion.

Civ7, for the first time in the entire series, has a lead designer who had already designed an earlier chapter.

 

[Krajzen]

Honestly, as much as civ5 leaders were stunning back in the day, today they are really boring to look at in comparision with civ6 leaders, and I say this despite not being a very big fan of Pixar character designs overall.

Just very static and far less expressive (hi Hiawatha :l ), with much less colourful color palette.

 

[GeneralZift]

Honestly, as much as civ5 leaders were stunning back in the day, today they are really boring to look at in comparision with civ6 leaders, and I say this despite not being a very big fan of Pixar character designs overall.

Just very static and far less expressive (hi Hiawatha :l ), with much less colourful color palette.

I do actually like this kind of reserved look for them, even if it's more boring.

I would like it more if they kept the expressive moments to special events. So in normal talk, they're quite serious and reserved and when they declare war, then you can take out the trumpets and the expressions. I think that would be cool.

You were playing a game that had the lead designer quit in disgrace for a reason.

5 is the only game that I did not put thousands of hours into. I've been playing literally the same month Civ I came out.

Anyway, in order not to derail the thread any longer, I will leave it at that. Hoping for much better things for 7. I'm sure you are, too.

I have to say I joined Civ5 at the end of its development cycle, so I did not experience this apparent unmitigated disaster. When I tried it, it was finished and pretty good, even without mods.
I wasn't aware of any tall meta although I happened to play the game more tall than wide. I found it interesting. It got me into the series