1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Rant and Review

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by kaan.uni, Apr 17, 2011.

  1. kaan.uni

    kaan.uni Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1
    This is my first post on this forum. So I would like to provide a little bit of information about myself. My name is Kaan, I am 29 and I live in Istanbul. I have been playing civilization since I was about 10. I've played everything from Advanced Civilization, Civ I, Civ II, Civ III, CtP, Civ IV, Rhye's and now CiV. I am not the best player I suppose, I typically play on Prince and sometimes I don't even win. I'm generally a peacefull guy who concentrates on science and culture. The following are my thoughts on Civilization V.

    Graphics and Aesthetics:

    While I adore the new hex system and it does provide for great looking terrain, I am somewhat disappointed at the rendering of the layers above it. I have the following qualms:

    - Why are nearly all wonders built outside of the city? The Machu Pichu is brilliant but the developers seemed to have flaked on the positioning of most of the others. The Sistine Chapel, Hagia Sophia, and Notre Dame, to name a few, should be inside the city, not at it's borders and certainly not outside the city and definitely not on water. The Oracle might be excused for being at the outskirts of the city but again not outside it and definitely not on water. And shouldn't the Pyramids be built on desert and Stonehenge on hills? Ultimately a city with more than a two wonders ends up looking like crap.

    - Trading posts are ugly, and they take up way too much space. They don't seem to improve much in appearance over the ages. I think trailer park would be a more apt name for this improvement. Also lumber mills and more so mines are eye sores. Though especially with the latter I suppose this is realistic, no so much in the early ages though. While a stone quary might have a visual impact in the clasical era, a gold or iron mine would not.

    - Roads should taper off when they aren't connected, not go in some random direction and halt abruptly. But even worse are junctions. I am forced to build 60degree junctions for the sake of aesthetics. The loops are too wide and there is unnecessary curvature. That being said I do like the new 3d look of roads through forest and jungle.

    - There are issues particularly around rivers. The corners of farms and wonders will often cut off a river and give them a rather odd apperance. In addition randomly improvements of all kind seem to take quite a while to render at all, or render wrong. Also very rarely a certain portion of the upper layers of the map (improvements, units, cities) will stick to the screen. All three of these issues I have experienced on two seperate graphics cards, one onboard intel, one Nvidia GT 425M on both directX 9 and 11.

    Game Concepts:

    I like about 80% of the changes but the remaining 20% is kind of critical. Especially the lack of religion and vassalage.

    - I love the hex and 1upt. It makes war so much more interesting. Though I personally would have prefered 2upt in open terrain and cities, perhaps allowing only one unit to cross a river per turn even if both sides are open. The AI as many of you have noticed is completely devoid of strategic planning and even I as a peaceful kind of player can dominate pretty much anybody (though I haven't come up against the Japanese yet) on prince. I could probably do the same on Deity if I could keep up technologically.

    - I also love the city states. I wish there were a couple other kinds though. Like a scientific and trade. I can't wrap my head around why Venice for example would help me with food instead of gold or happiness. It also seems odd to me that when playing as Rome often times the closest city states will be Seoul and Kuala Lumpur.

    - What happened to religions? That was one of my favorite aspects of cIV. They added a great new depth to diplomacy and I think they would also add even more depth when combined with the city states. I hope they restore religions with the next expansion along with capitulation and vassalage.

    - I'm not sure I like the new cultural policy aspect. It's kind of an RPG type mechanic, as if the game needed to be more addictive. The naming is horendous. Liberty and Freedom aren't the same thing? Really, Sid? Really? Why not call liberty something like expansion? That is after all what it is. To be fair the old civics system wasn't ideal either. I had a few gripes even after Rhye's changes. I think they are fairly balanced though. One little bug I've discovered is that after the patch, if you activate the allow save cultural policies button, then save up some policies then build the oracle it forces you to spend all your policies. Also if you try to rush to free speech it doesn't seem to have any bonus. Though to be fair free speech in the early Renaissance isn't really logical. I think individual cultural
    policies should be unlocked also through scientific progress.

    - I don't think the leaders are very balanced. Honestly I think this is okay and the game should go more for historical accuracy than balance with leaders. What I miss most is having a choice of leaders for each civ. I hope this too will be added in the expansions.

    Interface:

    I do like the new simplified gameplay interface. The only problem I have with it, is that it seems to have ADHD and keeps jumping from one side of the map to the other. If two units are free to move next, the game should chose to select the one closest to the current view first. Another qualm I have is with the start playing and set up game button. While I eventually got used to it, I ended up hitting start playing too many times without setting up the game. Who plays the same game all the time anyway? I think the diffrentiation is useless. Also perhaps all the map types could be in the simple set up and an option to regenerate a map on your first turn is also sorely missed. I am no landlubber it's too many clicks, especially if you are setting advanced options (and selecting opposing civs) to get a good start. Also I have a dream of building Rome next to a coast, river, mountain, wine (incense wont get me drunk:) and non essentially a desert. Damn near impossible when you consider all the clicks and the load times.

    ---

    Anyway, this is the end of my rant. I'm sure I have forgotten something but I have run out of steam. And all this talking about the game has me now wanting to play it.
     
  2. jojorah

    jojorah Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    520
    err, this has been said many times before trust me MANY people dislike this game your not the first and though im not one, the majority of the people at the civ 4 and civ 5 forums agree that civ 5 should be boycotted the game until is civ 4.5. I dunno about you but i think its good that civ goes back to its roots, i found civ 4 overcomplicated. Its not that im a major noob i play on multi player most the time and enjoy it even when my steam friends crush me. Try getting some steam friends and try multiplayer thats where all the real fun is! OH YAH, WELCOME TO THE FORUMS
     
  3. jojorah

    jojorah Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    520
    Also i find having to adapt to a bad scenario half the fun, use for instance a resource-less game. It forces you to over come that major problem. Or if your a military civ and dont have uranium and your enemy does and is building a nuke you have to make decisions. A. Rush more units to take citys faster B.Search for the resource and destroy it. C all hope is lost and you cant stop them in time should you make peace? I find it fun. Or when a steam friend trys to take an allied city state to get access to your land, your forced to fight for the city state or the whole game may be in ruins.
     
  4. Fabiano79

    Fabiano79 Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    337
    Im amazed that a guy with your knowlodge only plays on prince.

    You are right on everything, just forgot that the AI is terrible on combat and that the dilpomacy makes no sense.
     
  5. jtb1127

    jtb1127 Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,498
    Location:
    Arlington, Virginia
    Yeah. Especially the diplomacy. Diplomacy is by far the biggest issue for me.
     
  6. Deggial

    Deggial Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,384
    Location:
    Germany
    DefenderofIslam, I'm aware that you are *not* on the CiV hater's faction (same with me). Reading kaan.uni's review, he seems neither.
    While you are right and his points are far from unknown (and I can second many of them), he seems to be quite content with the game, alltogether. A liking of 80% (game concept) is not so bad, isn't it? :)
     
  7. filli_noctus

    filli_noctus Hmmn

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,221
    Interesting points, I'll address some things that stick out to me.

    City-states: They're definitely a good mechanic that needs some work. You mentioned finding it odd that there's no 'gold-giving' city state. As they're currently implemented a mercantile city-state would essentially be you getting interest repayments on a loan. If the balance is shifted to give gold gifts less weight and more weight to non-financial methods then I think a mercantile CS would work.

    Objects sticking to screen: Highly annoying, although I haven't seen so much of it recently. I found the best way to clear that is to look at the fog of war for a while, although that might not clear it.

    Wonders: As I live pretty near I can say with a reasonable degree of confidence that Stonehenge is not on a hill ;)
     
  8. chazzycat

    chazzycat Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,916
    Improvements sticking on the screen has probably become my #1 annoyance.

    I don't build nearly as many trading posts after the nerf in the patch, and my cities are much more appealing to the eye as a result (I wonder if they did that on purpose...)

    I have a feeling religion will be coming back in an expansion, but it remains to be seen how it is implemented. Personally I thought it lead to an oversimplification of diplomacy the way it was done in Civ 4.

    They should at least make sure the wonders aren't underwater...that is dumb.

    Leader balance is indeed a little off...poor Ottomans especially.

    I also like the city state mechanism in general, but the diplomatic victory condition needs a little work. It's a bit too easy as currently set up because the AI doesn't know how to defend it effectively.

    Overall I started liking the game a lot more when I figured out a few things and made my way up to emperor level. It feels much more competitive (I am in danger of losing most games) so it's a lot more exciting. Trying wildly different strategies with different civs is really fun too, there really are a wide possibility of different styles that can be played successfully.
     
  9. Civ4Brains

    Civ4Brains imperfectus

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    109
    Location:
    UK
    well i don't mind the re-introduction of religion per se but I would not want it executed in the fashion of cIV in which the diplomacy was dull, uninteresting and without dynamism.

    As I've said in many previous posts, I actually think CiV's diplo is a step up from IV by actually requiring some strategy - feel free to disagree, and even argue with this point if u want, but frankly I've given up caring (and responding to) what the nay sayers think - I'm an intelligent individual perfectly capable of assessing whether something works and is to my liking.

    All I'm saying is, I hope firaxis don't try and crow-bar cIV's religious system back in, just to satisy what they think a section of the community want to see in their updated cIV.

    Ultimately this would just compromise a game which some (myself included) do currently consider working and ever improving (albeit v.slowly ;)).

    to OP: thank you for taking the time to write and post a properly considered review of CiV. Sounds like you do like it for the most part, but it can be quite tempting to rant when suddenly distracted by a particular aspect you dis-like (crappy AI fx.), but you resist with great will, determination and spirit :)

    ...oh and WELCOME!
     
  10. bruntfca

    bruntfca Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2001
    Messages:
    120
    Great first post.

    I'm glad you highlighted the poor graphics. Personally it's one of my major beefs with the game. As you say some of the new features are good, but for me the game looks like bum.

    2D icons on a 3D map?
    Soviet Era/Art Deco Interface killing immersion
    "Trailer Park" trading posts as you say
    Units become invisible when on top of TP etc
    Crummy mine graphics. Boring city progression, same roads through era. On and on. The only graphical improvement are the fractal mountain ranges and coasts..too bad after 50 turns the game looks like bum.
     
  11. I_qua_I

    I_qua_I Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    562
    The roads really have to be the worst. The mines and trading posts look awful but I can at least understand how someone might think they're ok. What I don't get is how someone can see all the crazy (not to mention meaningless) loop-di-loops going on with the roads and think "Yea, that looks aboooooout right..."
     
  12. jojorah

    jojorah Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    520
    Perhaps i sounded i little to harsh,hehe im really enthusiastic about civ. Sorry
     
  13. Shurdus

    Shurdus Am I Napoleon?

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    2,301
    Location:
    Settle in place
    Welcome to civfanatics, kaan.uni!
     
  14. Kaosprophet

    Kaosprophet Warlord

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    244
    :rolleyes:

    To be honest, if I wanted multiplayer I'd have bought Starcraft 2 or re-activated one of my MMORPG accounts.

    I'm still figuring out CV. It has some elements I like, a few I dislike, and many I'm unsure about. Same as I felt about Civ4 after it was released.
     
  15. Jolly Rogerer

    Jolly Rogerer Prince

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    402
    Suggest that the thread title be changed to: "Civ 5: The Rant of Kaan"
     
  16. bryanw1995

    bryanw1995 Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,459
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    A big issue is that, generally speaking, civ 5 is about 1.5 - 2 levels easier than civ 4 was. So if you were a prince player on civ 4, you should be playing emperor or at least king on civ 5 for a similar challenge.
     
  17. jbevermore

    jbevermore Warmongering Menace

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2010
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Southeastern US
    Oh so much win in one short sentence.

    Agree with what a lot of the OP said. Lot of improvements have come down the pipe in a short amount of time, but the diplo game is still the part in need of the most work.

    Funny, I'd never considered how bad trading posts looked until you pointed that out....
     
  18. Ravellion

    Ravellion Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    :lol::goodjob:
     

Share This Page