Should I buy Civ V?

[Aristos]

Should I buy Civilization V?

Well, it really depends on your taste...

If you want a deep strategy game, with lots of options and decisions, different ways of playing and huge replayability, then NO.

If you want a wargame, with a lot of focus on tactical operations of a handful of specialized units, a challenging tactical AI, and less micromanagement, then NO.

 

[stormerne]

(one even said that Freeciv is better)

Freeciv is cool. It's free. Multiplayer is designed in with separate server and clients. But it's very Civ2 by default... but I like that. Nevertheless, I've not played Freeciv since Civ4 came out, and not played Civ4 since Civ5 came out.

 

[Threedog43]

freeciv is not better

Aaahhhh, but the price begs to differ.

 

[Dirk1302]

I tried freeciv and i didn't like it much. c-evo, another open source civ, is certainly better than ciV atm imo. Also c-evo is free. As for buying ciV: now no way, in a year maybe.

 

[blind biker]

Freeciv is cool. It's free. Multiplayer is designed in with separate server and clients. But it's very Civ2 by default... but I like that. Nevertheless, I've not played Freeciv since Civ4 came out, and not played Civ4 since Civ5 came out.

Freeciv is broken: it is super-heavily biased towards ICS - tightly packed cities, and a LOT of them. And the AI seems to know it, too, even at the lowest levels. There is NO WAY you can win in freeciv unless you ICS!

I tried many times to play Freeciv, and always discovered that the AI pulls past me because it built a metric ton of cities, plastering its continent with them.

 

[ShadowoftheDark]

Buy it. Then get the mods (Mega mod, ccmat, Economy, balance, etc).


Haters gonna hate

 

[blind biker]

Haters gonna hate

Bwahahahahahhh...!!

 

[Aristos]

Hardcores gonna warn you

There, corrected it for you to spare you a notification for using nasty words.

 

[alhill]

Civ 5 is not terrible, but right now it's simply not as polished, deep, or fun as Civ 4 BtS is. As other people have noted, Civ 4 went through years of patches, expansions and refinements to become the classic game it is, and Civ 5 is only at the beginning of what we expect to be a similar process.

 

[blind biker]

Civ 5 is not terrible, but right now it's simply not as polished, deep, or fun as Civ 4 BtS is. As other people have noted, Civ 4 went through years of patches, expansions and refinements to become the classic game it is, and Civ 5 is only at the beginning of what we expect to be a similar process.

Civ IV vanilla kicks Civ V butt all the way to Bombay.

imho, of course.

 

[Aristos]

Civ IV vanilla kicks Civ V butt all the way to Bombay.

imho, of course.

Well, that depends... if the way to Bombay is patrolled by the Giant Dumb Robot, then you are done, buddy...

 

[zonk]

Well, that depends... if the way to Bombay is patrolled by the Giant Dumb Robot, then you are done, buddy...

Well, that plus you'd have to go through the agony of building a transport and loading onto it if you needed to cross an ocean in IV rather than just magically turning any unit into aquaman the moment you pop a tech... which I keep being told is... better.

 

[PawelS]

Asking this question at this forum could only lead to one result.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

How does the game run one lesser machines? (say 2.6GB duels under 2GB ram and 512MB graphics card) Is the game very choppy and does it lag or freeze?

 

[Zydor]

How does the game run one lesser machines? (say 2.6GB duels under 2GB ram and 512MB graphics card) Is the game very choppy and does it lag or freeze?

I would wait in terms of performance as there is a patch dues any day/week, and it *might* change some things.

In terms of the game itself, well thats a real personal preference question. My gut reaction, based on my play so far, would be no not yet, wait for patches as there are some real heavyweight issues out there with this Version. There are some play styles not affected as such, although thats rare. If you are a long standing Civ Fan, and prepared to wade through some heafty Patches and Packs over the ensuing weeks/months, then fine, go buy it, they will fix it in the end.

One thing is for sure, I personally could not give any unqualified recommendation to buy it, and if it was a close personal friend I'd definitely be saying "no way, wait for Patches/Packs".

Regards
Zy

 

[wapamingo]

2 GB ram is a bit low;

But switch to strategic view and you should be fine.

To the OP: No; wait until next year.

 

[blind biker]

Well, that plus you'd have to go through the agony of building a transport and loading onto it if you needed to cross an ocean in IV rather than just magically turning any unit into aquaman the moment you pop a tech... which I keep being told is... better.

1UpT: you can't have a transporter and an infantry unit in the same tile. Idiotic yet self-consistent.

 

[charon2112]

The problem with FreeCiv is they dumbed it down. And look at that UI! You can tell it was designed for console-kiddies.

Freeciv is broken: it is super-heavily biased towards ICS - tightly packed cities, and a LOT of them. And the AI seems to know it, too, even at the lowest levels. There is NO WAY you can win in freeciv unless you ICS!

I tried many times to play Freeciv, and always discovered that the AI pulls past me because it built a metric ton of cities, plastering its continent with them.

 

[Aristos]

The problem with FreeCiv is they dumbed it down. And look at that UI! You can tell it was designed for console-kiddies.

Even if that were true, which it is NOT, they are NOT charging a cent for it. When you charge money for something shallow and unfinished, the whole story changes...

Then again, your borrowed definition of perfection collides with some facts...

 

[blind biker]

The problem with FreeCiv is they dumbed it down. And look at that UI! You can tell it was designed for console-kiddies.

What are you aiming at? 'cause, you know, there is a hexagonal-like tileset available, for FreeCiv!