Sid Meier's Reaction to the Eternal War

Makes me want to load up CivII.

While CivIV BTS is my favorite, CivV isn't as bad as the bashers make it out to be.
 
It's kinda dissapointing that when there is something Civ5 related the first ones in are bashers... Why? Why they can't just simply move on?

If you prefer Civ I or II or III or IV or Rev then play it, man, and leave the ones who like Civ5 enjoy themselves.

P.D.: Very interesting Civ game. After the 21st-Century nuclear war, three global powers fight in a never-ending war. Only 10% of the population has survived. There is no place to farm. All efforts are put in the war...

Man, this would be perfect for a story in the S&T section or for the plot of ''Civilization Fallout''! :D
 
There are only a couple of posts in this thread saying "civ5 is bad", and a couple more saying "civ5 cannot be played infinitely like civ2 could". There are more posts here talking about civ5 bashers then their are about bashing civ5.

The claims of dedicated and persistent civ5 bashing are exaggerated.
 
I really enjoyed civ2. After civ5, this was personnally the 2nd best civ game of the serie.

(Troll comment)Cool story bro :goodjob:

If humans remain as stupid as they are today, this is more or less what will happen in some centuries, if not earlier.
 
Love how the guy with the feb 2012 join date mentions he forgot the Civ 4 sub forum....

Think he was 6 years late on even knowing this site existed.
 
I've been playing Civ since the first version and have enjoyed them all - except the last. For those who like Civ 5 - enjoy it. I'm sticking with Civ 3 and 4 for now. Though I'm tempted to get out the old Civ 2 disk and play this epic 10 year game save if it's actually used for a GOTM.
 
Love how the guy with the feb 2012 join date mentions he forgot the Civ 4 sub forum....

Think he was 6 years late on even knowing this site existed.

My comment concerns civ5. As far as I know it's never been required to be registered to browse the site.

Anyway, I understand rants on civ5 annoy the players, and I admit I should have posted in the dedicated thread. See, like many players, I've been playing civ since civ1 and would never have thought I'd feel that disappointed with a new release. When you have a look at the fantastic mods the community created, it becomes even more frustrating - hence the constant critics.
 
I do think Civ V deserves some of the criticism it gets. Unfortunately I was always highly annoyed by the infinite unit stacks of the older games, and being free of them in Civ V has made it very hard for me to go back.

Agreed about the mods though. I love modding, and Civ 4 has some of the best mods I've seen for any game.
 
In was going to say that no-one would ever play CiV for 10 years, but everyone beat me to it.
 
10 years? That's taking "one more turn" to a whole new level!

I have to confess though, that the idea of Civ 5 + 10 years, "one more turn" became "please don't crash...again..." in my head.

Not so much a bash, as frustration/disappointment in what should be a fantastic best ever :)
 
civ 5 just aint that feeling of simulation of history anymore.

it became one stupid board game where everyun tries to win.
 
There is always one more turn to be played. :borg:
Were the Boorg. Assimilate.Humanity is to be ceased, as they are irrelevant.

On topic: why is civ2 now soo good? One year to few months ago everyone here was liking civ3 soo much. Dont tell me civ1 is best next year , lool
 
I do think Civ V deserves some of the criticism it gets. Unfortunately I was always highly annoyed by the infinite unit stacks of the older games, and being free of them in Civ V has made it very hard for me to go back.

Agreed about the mods though. I love modding, and Civ 4 has some of the best mods I've seen for any game.

I agree about everything he said. Civ V modding possibilities should be made better in future expansions. And yet, although I liked how many great units Civ 3 moders offer, and how Civ 4 has already civ specific look to units from start + great mods and scenarios, then still, game mechanics and this wonderful organic look of the world makes Civ 5 now best in the series for me. If you really get into it, then Civ 5 feels more realistic. Not only by outlook, but how the game feels. I have had really cool tactical conquest games in Civ 5, but my favourite game was when I found out how cool was one of my peaceful playthrough. This guy playing 10 years this everlasting war, causing world to turn into wasteland - it was how game design leaded players then to certain future. Basically there wasn't any fun playing diplomatic game in Civ 2, Civ 3 and I think even in Civ 4... so you just grow your army and go for conquering, and then feel how wrong it is that you can easily conquer the world before 2000. But in Civ 5 it may really happen that peace is everlasting through the game, and still feel interesting. Or even if you go conquering, you soon find out that fighting a World War against coalition of most other nations is tough thing. Sure, I wouldn't imagine going into future when there is nothing to research in a game like this. So, what I would say... actually earlier Civs often caused you to be idiotic leader who in the end would cause doomsday scenario to come true, but Civ 5 doesn't endorse that one playstyle over all. And I believe that expansion even further expands the peaceful side of the game... at least I hope. In earlier games if you didn't grow your realm, sooner or later some bigger, more advanced civ would declare a war and you would be in deep. But in Civ 5 you can be smaller and with relatively small defense force without causing others to go to war against you. At least if you are a good, wise leader who has constant attention on diplomacy. And it even doesn't mean that you will be culturally and technologically backwards or economically weak... with Civ 5 mechanics it is easy to be advanced and well doing country, even when your lands are not biggest.
I really love the policy system, and now religion and espionage may make it even more interesting. Hopefully they enhance diplomacy too and make trading more important.. if not with this expansion, then with next one. Only part I now miss from old Civ 2, is how revolutionaries appeared around conquered cities. They would really well fit Civ5, as there is possibility to revive already conquered civilizations - so let rebels do that.
Yet... worst problem that Civ 5 has, is that is still buggy... I have patched it with latest patch I think, yet just in my last play I had few annoying problems... especially the one where I couldn't choose policy that gives me great person of my own choosing, because it just doesn't let me choose, and doesn't let me continue without choosing it either. Patches are what we need.. and proper support for modability.
 
Ten years may be only say half an hour a month though, for ten years
 
What people are really missing about this story is the synchronicity of the play's skill to the AI setting. By the time Civ III came out, I was playing Civ II at Emperor level.

No matter what Civ version you like, getting a game to match situation, your skill and competition is a thing of beauty.
 
everyone keeps talking about civ 5?!?
what is it? a game? has it been released yet?
I heard something about a beta version :D

nmv. I'll just continue on my 20 year old civ1 savegame. Im hoping I'll get to discover the wheel within the next couple of years :D
Never gonna give it up.

... Well played...

I think people are missing the point that in reality, the fact he is still unable to break the deadlock after so long has a lot to do with his lack of skill.

It's been said many times before, fundamentalism, get cash, buy production buildings etc etc.

I am very much looking forward to the members here showing us all how it's done.
 
Top Bottom