I tried Civ 1-2-3 at release, but they didn't hook me. That was during the golden age of RTS, so I may try them later for interest when I get more gaming time. Civ4 is the one which hooked me, and it is still one of the 3 big games I like to play a few times a year. I didn't know enough to fault it at launch, I just enjoyed this wonderful new gaming experience. The aggravations did stop me playing after maybe a year, until Warlords came out and improved things. Beyond the Sword nailed it, and the BUG/BAT mods rekindled my desire to play by optimizing the UI into a very impressive and enjoyable experience. No reason I won't still be playing Civ4 in another 11 years time. Civ5 I bought early after the glowing reviews--mistake, I probably only put 100 hours into it. G&K & BNW brought me up to over 400 hours acc to Steam. I want to build a civ, not a 4-city province, so the expansion nerf killed it for me. As did the slower pace. With the positive comments from many here, I'm going to see if there are any 5 mods which might solve my main problems of pace and width, while I'm waiting for 6 to mature. I applaud the ideas and ambition of Civ5 which implemented about 7 of my top-10 wishes for the game, and I don't begrudge giving Firaxis my money at all, esp considering the value I got and get from Civ4. For the same reason I will definitely buy Civ6 at some point. That point will be when this forum convinces me that I will get a decent ROI for my time. I don't want to experience the Civ5 let-down again, which may have biased me against a game which many clearly now rate very highly. The UI issues are my biggest concern, I'm just not interested in a chore. I want to plan a strategy, see it move along, adjust strategy to exploit developments, and move along again. Not the click-click-click... someone bemoaned earlier. Reading a few threads, I'm quite hopeful that 6 will in time be a game to rival 4. Not so much in content, looks like 6 could easily surpass 4 in that respect, but in becoming a similarly enjoyable overall playing experience That's pretty much my situation too. I've been playing Civ4 for over 10 years, and it's easily 5 years since I finished a game. The late game is relatively uninteresting, and I customize my setup to extend the interesting play [exploration, discovery, expansion, development] to late mid-game. Yep, lesson learned from Civ5 launch. Of course, I had learned that lesson earlier too, eg Command & Conquer / Red Alert 3-4, and Far Cry 2--so I'm a slow learner. I worked for 2 companies, one of which made blenders, the other computer hardware and software. So I can reliably inform you that 'the same' cannot apply to computer games. A million blenders ship, it's simple to take back 1,000 faulty and diagnose and fix the very limited number of possible problems. If blenders were 'the same' as computer games, the repair shop would have to consider: What is the wiring and layout of the user's kitchen? What is the wiring and layout of kitchens where this problem doesn't happen? What other appliances are being used in the user's kitchen? What other appliances are being used in kitchens where this problem doesn't happen? What is different about this user/kitchen/appliances combo, since many others report happy blending? And so on. Blender company would have to wait for a statistically significant number of each kind of failure, and then do a lot of analysis and digging to determine the root causes and what needed fixing or changing. The good news for us is Firaxis have a very good record of doing exactly that over repeated patches and expansions. No, they don't. What happens is they separate the chips into good-okay-poor grades, and sell the latter two for different less-demanding uses. Simple example: A 6-core CPU with 1-2 bad cores sells as a 4-core chip. Some chip batches have to be entirely dumped [that's hundreds of chips], and while yield rates are a trade secret, my guess is around 25-30% manufacturing failure rate over the life of a chip [higher early on, lower towards end]. You're probably thinking of the final retail CPU. There's nothing magical going on there, all the bad chips have been weeded out by an established hugely expensive testing regime before shipping from the factory. CPUs go into a known environment, the details of which are specced out the wazoo, so very low failure rates after shipment are to be expected. It also doesn't hurt that chip plants cost billions of dollars to build and equip, and have large ongoing operations budgets. If Firaxis had a multi-billion budget for Civ6 engine and game design, plus an Intel-level ongoing expenses budget, they'd have a much bigger chance of delivering a polished product out the gate. Even then, they would still have no control over the environment [device config] where their product is installed. Agree on the market forces, Firaxis is owned by a public company, which means it's all a money game at the top level. So I expect there was a non-negotiable directive to ship in time for the holiday shopping period. On the complexity, if a very successful company ~50 times the size of Firaxis' top-level owner thinks it's a good idea to forge ahead with a 25-30% product failure rate caused by complexity, why should other companies steer clear of the cutting edge?