things civ VI did GOOD (part 2)

It pains me to say but it's hard to come up with things 6 did good (or better then earlier iterations) but I think the unstacking of cities is something they should keep in civ7. I also like the many civs and their specialisaties. If corps & monopolies was working properly it could be something they could build on too. For the rest I honestly belief they need to take a step back and remove all features and game modes the AI can't handle. Less is more
 
I bounce between civ 5 and 6 a lot, and probably the biggest thing that pulls me back to civ 6 is the loyalty mechanic. You get forward settled a lot in civ 5 and you HAVE to be a warmonger or suck it up (or be so insanely ludicrously rich that you can buy the land; something that should not be so expensive for forward settled outposts, considering how much land was traded and purchased in real colonial history)
 
I would be a little concerned that it would turn it into the religion diplomacy of CivIV--basically you would spread religion to everyone and they'd be your friend. Wasn't very deep. I'm sure there are ways to sidestep that though.

That's a very rare occurence. Typically, there are several religious blocs
 
There are so many little changes I love about civ 6 that make it hard to go back to civ 5. Civ 6 makes building cities so much more fun, having to micromanage city locations for wonders and districts make it fun to play a less aggressive game. I like that you keep your pantheon belief even when you get converted. I like that modding is simple enough even I can make a unique civilization with it (civ 5 also is good for that). Alliances are fun and the social policy system is flexible and interesting. I'm glad they brought back governments. The New frontier pass has so many fun game modes and secret societies are a joy. National parks are awesome and I love that culture has so many different routes to victory from parks to improvements to great works (it'd be nice to see that flexibility in other conditions in the future).
 
  • Like
Reactions: PiR
Religion was pretty weak in Civ V, felt like a waste of resources. Civ VI religion feels a bit more rewarding to found and spread and I'm pretty sure you can turn off the religious victory condition anyway.
This does not change AI behavior.
 
The reward of spreading someones else religion is minimal, both in Civ V and VI.
And yet the AI did it in Civ5; they do not in Civ6 because whether it's on or not they're programmed to believe that spreading a religion other than their own is helping someone else win. :dunno: Again, the entire system needs a ground-up overhaul, but Religious Victory singlehandedly makes Civ6's Religion worse than Civ5's.
 
I find religion has some things in civ 6 that are worse than they were in civ 5, namely that in civ 6, there are a set few policies in each tier that I basically always want each time. This somewhat exists in civ 5 too, but I think it's to a smaller magnitude.
 
Well, Civ VI is a flawless game if we're just talking aesthetics.

I mean, this game's animation is gorgeous. Seriously, I've gotten used to it so I take it for granted, but every frame of these leaders is a delight to watch. The animations fully deserve a moment where you stop, take a step back, and appreciate it in motion. So every now and again, don't skip those agenda cutscenes. Sure, Dom Satan might be whining at you for playing the game right, but if he's gonna whine, you might as well enjoy his slick animation while doing so.

Additionally, I think the artstyle was executed well. It definitely had a lot of stylistic variance and unfortunately some leaders only look good in a vacuum, but as someone who does their own art in a similar style, I appreciate it. Also, just ignore me, I definitely didn't make fanart of the leaders... :shifty:

Besides leaders, I also adore this game's cities. Sure, they don't have nearly enough clutter in them (something this mod can fix), but the attention to detail and adaptive generation of them is a joy to watch. Before I exit my games, I always zoom in close, turn off yield icons and slowly pan across my empire, admiring all the small details in every carefully designed piece of architecture. This is a very subjective thing, I concede, but I get some inexplicable joy in seeing these interconnected, bustling cities that I built. It's satisfying.

Quick note on the game's voice acting: while shoddy in some places (Jadwiga, Robert, and others...), I can't deny it's very entertaining, mispronunciations and mistranslations aside. I have no clue what Gilgamesh is saying, but he's saying it with so much charisma.

Lastly, the OST. Do I need to explain myself here? This is quite literally the game that got me into composing... some of these tracks will stick with me for the rest of my life. This is the kind of music that will long outlive its game.

Really? I can't stand the art style. Looks cartoonish and childish. Civ V art style was way better.
 
Really? I can't stand the art style. Looks cartoonish and childish. Civ V art style was way better.
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."--C.S. Lewis

Personally, I find a lot of these complaints seem to stem from insecurity: "Oh, no! Colors other than shades of mud will hurt my man-pride!" Most of the complainers seem to either be Boomers, who have old-fashioned senses of what masculinity means (fun fact: you can be masculine and still like colors other than mud--it's allowed!), or Zoomers, who aren't quite grown up enough to put aside a fear of childishness yet. I also personally think Civ5 may be one of the ugliest games ever made; it was ugly when it released and has only gotten uglier since.
 
For something like civ, I did prefer the more realistic look that 5 had over 6's style, especially on the leader screens. I liked seeing what leader's offices, etc looked like, as opposed to the barely visible backgrounds in 6. It's less the quote-unquote maturity and more the level of detail and being able to more easily discern terrain types from each other. There's lots of games that people say "this looks kiddie!" that I love, but it depends on the type of game.
 
For something like civ, I did prefer the more realistic look that 5 had over 6's style, especially on the leader screens. I liked seeing what leader's offices, etc looked like, as opposed to the barely visible backgrounds in 6. There's lots of games that people say "this looks kiddie!" that I love, but it depends on the type of game.
I agree that the leader's background screens, and some of the leaders, definitely aren't as great as Civ 5. That being said I enjoy everything else about the art style.
 
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."--C.S. Lewis

Personally, I find a lot of these complaints seem to stem from insecurity: "Oh, no! Colors other than shades of mud will hurt my man-pride!" Most of the complainers seem to either be Boomers, who have old-fashioned senses of what masculinity means (fun fact: you can be masculine and still like colors other than mud--it's allowed!), or Zoomers, who aren't quite grown up enough to put aside a fear of childishness yet. I also personally think Civ5 may be one of the ugliest games ever made; it was ugly when it released and has only gotten uglier since.

Looking back at Civilisation 5, its flat colours and bland textures really do make it look dated. Talking especially about the map and terrain here. It also has a hideous UI on top of all that. The UI in Civilisation 6 is far from perfect, but it looks aesthetically pleasing and thematic. 5's looks like it belongs to a PowerPoint presentation., the fonts especially.
 
It reminds me of Twilight Princess and Windwaker. One was praised for realistic style early on, while the other was more controversially considered less mature. In time, however, the initially better reviewed has aged very poorly, while the other has maintained a very pleasing aesthetic, gaining respect with age.
 
Last edited:
On the graphics front, one thing to contradict myself about V making it easier to tell terrain types is lakes... I like that lakes look a bit different than inland seas in VI, whereas they look (I think) identical in V.
 
especially on the leader screens. I liked seeing what leader's offices, etc looked like, as opposed to the barely visible backgrounds in 6.

If Civ VII has 3D leaders and backgrounds I will be so happy.

I never even played Civ 5, but that seems like such a wonderful addition. It says so much about the leaders and frames the way you interact with them in a very different way. Sometimes, you feel below the other leader, like their victim or servant. Other times, the atmosphere is more cozy, like you're having an honest discussion as equals. It can be foreboding and welcoming and everything in between, and it's a detail I'd love to see in future titles.
 
I liked seeing what leader's offices, etc looked like, as opposed to the barely visible backgrounds in 6.
I think the intention in Civ6 was to really focus the attention on the leader, but I think they overdid it. I'd love to see Civ7 take Civ6's vibrant, dynamic leaders (and TBH Civ5's leaders felt like part of the scenery) and either put them in a proper scene or at the very least go with what seemed to be Civ6's original intention of a sort of stage-like environment. At any rate, they can hardly do worse than the sort of dark, blurry backgrounds Civ6's leaders stand against.
 
I still think the storage expense of having videos of leaders rather than rendered models should be an option, perhaps a free DLC, allowing weaker processing systems to have the best quality leaders. As is, I often get glitches in rendering (shadows seem problematic), and sometimes simply turn animations off to destress the system.

Sorry, that's a bit tangential to the V vs VI discussion.
 
I'm not sure this thread is as much civ 5 vs civ 6 as it is a look at what is good about civ6 on it's own?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PiR
Top Bottom