To buy or not to buy?

[TheFatSultan]

"Civsassin". Then on the same note - shouldn't you be respecting my right to an opinion too? The difference is that your opinion is the gaming equivalent of approving the holocaust. How is this method of releasing one civ at a time with an extortionate price better than releasing a proper expansion pack? How many civs did BTS have and how much did that cost? This is Civ, not Habbo or whatever you kids play these days, and I don't want to buy one little outfit at a time.

I am sorry my disregard of your opinion offended you but whatever. Sucky forum anyway if i'm punished for "flaming" people by calling them clowns when they are talking utter rubbish. So I will leave with a true flame. Typical witless American... awful spelling, random punctuation and all too eager to use Mom's credit card to fund the devolution of one of the best series in gaming.
Moderator Action: You are not allowed to
- insult any other people in this forum
- to troll around
- and to discuss moderator actions in public.
Please behave according to the rules in the future.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Furycrab]

On DLC... For me getting both expansions was $100.00 ish just over 2 years. As far as ratio of "content" per dollar it ends up being something really strange.

For instance paying $5 for a Civ and Scenario pack will end up in the long run being more expensive if I started adding them up to get the same amount of content as a full expansion... but that's just it, but I get to pick and chose which ones I like and dislike... whereas in the full expansions if I didn't care for much of the extra civs/scenarios I was most likely paying a whole lot more for stuff I just didn't want.

I've been playing succession games with people at tl.net, so DLC is a little annoying in how we need to make DLC free games, but we still manage.

On the OP, I'm on the Loveit side, and the devs have been fairly active at patching and adding content and scenarios. Unless $50.00 (or whatever currency you are currently in) will somehow break your back, I don't think you can go wrong at least giving it a go. I'd recommend watching Maddjinns youtube LPs to give you an idea of how you would approach a game at higher difficulties.

 

[thadian]

you get no choice up front, however. When you buy the game, you realize certain civ's are missing and being re-sold later. Also, the DLC is overpriced with minimal value. For example, you can't say "I want to buy these 2 civ's". Instead, each Civ has a crappy "map pack" bundle to justify its higher price with extra "content".

It would be different if all the civ's are DLC and your purchase let you download X of them. That way you can start with inca, and babylon but choose not to have songhai. This idea could even allow you to choose which leader you want, presumining 2 leaders per country (one old one new).

The current model is like a skinchy bag (potato chips, people).

You just don't get the "choice" some people imply you have and if you think about the release prices of Civ 4 and Warlords together - its about the same price as Civ V without an expansions. What do you get? about 5 civ's.

Fortunately, there are several good mods for maps, civ packs and gameplay overhauls. Like with Civ 4, if you buy this there is a good chance you will enjoy the mods more than the actual game.

Also, its probably just a matter of time before the number of mods you are allowed to download is a pay-per-storage basis like cell phones. But for now, if you can get it on sale somewhere for its TRUE value of around $30 USD (like 2 of my friends did) then its a great buy. If you spend 50, then do the math of buying civ's it doesn't add up in your favor.

On a side note, the ONE DLC ITEM i am happy about is the soundtrack - the music is incredibly done, and very crisp. it is less "grabby" and more "ambient" which makes smoother gaming, but just as a music CD, it is at least as good as any other new age/contemporary classical works.


Edit: The pro-dlc arguement of having a choice is a weak arguement because you already don't have an up front choice which civ's will be a part of your "core" gaming experience before you spend extra money.

 

[vincentz]

On DLC... For me getting both expansions was $100.00 ish just over 2 years. As far as ratio of "content" per dollar it ends up being something really strange.

For instance paying $5 for a Civ and Scenario pack will end up in the long run being more expensive if I started adding them up to get the same amount of content as a full expansion... but that's just it, but I get to pick and chose which ones I like and dislike... whereas in the full expansions if I didn't care for much of the extra civs/scenarios I was most likely paying a whole lot more for stuff I just didn't want.

I've been playing succession games with people at tl.net, so DLC is a little annoying in how we need to make DLC free games, but we still manage.

On the OP, I'm on the Loveit side, and the devs have been fairly active at patching and adding content and scenarios. Unless $50.00 (or whatever currency you are currently in) will somehow break your back, I don't think you can go wrong at least giving it a go. I'd recommend watching Maddjinns youtube LPs to give you an idea of how you would approach a game at higher difficulties.

Its really strange how people compare single civs with expansions. I would never buy a civ expansion if it only consisted of extra civs. I would however gladly buy one even if there wasnt a single new civ in it.

Expansions expand (duh) on the gameplay. extra civs doesnt.

 

[thadian]

extra civ's CAN expand on gameplay if they use mechanics designed for the expansion, or if they have a unique feature no other civ has. for example, it would expand gameplay if there were a civilization that had a unique spy for an espionage system, or a unique unit that could sacrifice to gain ONE unit of a strategic resource on the map. (turn 4 iron into 5 iron or an empty tile into 1 horse.)

 

[vincentz]

but that would still be for that civ only, like a UU, UB or UA. Not really contributing to gameplay IMO.
btw. love your sig.

 

[gingerbill]

Threads like these pop up every month or so. People who love it voice their opinion, as do the haters, the OP decides to buy it anyway, voices his/her opinion, most likely leaves discussion. Cycle repeats.

hehe true but not always . On another thread when someone asked if they should buy it 6-7 said yes and 1 said no , the OP quoted the person who said no and said " ok i won't buy it" , hehe.

 

[TheFatSultan]

Before I am banned, please enlighten me as to how "extra civs don't expand gameplay". Regardless, one thing is for sure - after all the bugs, catastrophe of a multiplayer system, not to mention the fact I am forced to use steam just to play one game - charging however much per civ (+ random crapola map/s) is just salt in the wound and feels like a subscription charge to me. If they want to wait a few months and release an actual compilation of civs and they want me to pay - that's fine. In the mean time I will try leyman's terms for you.

One of a games most important features is its characters. Check.
Civ's civilizations are basically its characters. Check.
If you bought Super Mario, would you expect to pay 5 bucks to play the same crappy levels, but as Luigi? I don't think so.

It seems to me that the people who find this behaviour acceptable tend to be the ones who make comments such as "civs dont expand gameplay" or the type that report to moderators the second somebody refers to them as a clown.
Moderator Action: Don't troll around, and don't discuss anything regarding moderation in public.

 

[wcbarney]

... I'm just wondering if this game is worth picking up or is it really a hit or miss? I read some of the metacritic player reviews and the general response was that this game has been dumbed down, diplomacy is terrible and the "epic" feel of the game has been taken away. Watching some of the Civ 5 game reviews, I do fancy the idea of 1 unit per tile as well as hexagonal tiles though.

Thanks a lot for reading this and appreciate any response I can get

Buy the game; you'll like it! I've played all the Civs, starting with the original back in 1991; became a whiz at all of them except Civ IV, at which I totally sucked. I like Civ V best of all. I've bought two of the DLC Civs & scenarios, but not the DLC maps. The DLC Civs are good to very good; the DLC scenarios are OK, but get tiresome pretty soon.

Before I am banned, please enlighten me ... If you bought Super Mario, would you expect to pay 5 bucks to play the same crappy levels, but as Luigi? I don't think so.

It seems to me that the people who find this behaviour acceptable tend to be the ones who make comments such as "civs dont expand gameplay" or the type that report to moderators the second somebody refers to them as a clown.

Has anyone noticed that nobody wants to respond directly to TheFatSultan any more? I wonder why. I almost want to talk to him like I would talk to my rather spoiled 15-year-old grandson, but I think that he might be rather younger than that.
Moderator Action: Such attacks on other posters with insults are not allowed in this forum.

 

[thadian]

The DLC Civs are good to very good

Follows the rule of the best sword in game being +3 but there is a DLC for 19.99 that lets you get a +5. better enough it will rain samhain on anybody who doesn't buy but not "godly enough" to make people notice that buying the product only gets you part way there.

You have to keep paying using the base game NOT as a quality driven product to expand on, but using the base game as "just a platform to sell you upgrades". This is why they should have released 25 up-front civ's and let the purchase of the game get you 20 of choice - so that you could control who is part of your core game letting you expand beyond your initial decision if you choose to.

 

[cman2010]

"Civsassin". Then on the same note - shouldn't you be respecting my right to an opinion too? The difference is that your opinion is the gaming equivalent of approving the holocaust. How is this method of releasing one civ at a time with an extortionate price better than releasing a proper expansion pack? How many civs did BTS have and how much did that cost? This is Civ, not Habbo or whatever you kids play these days, and I don't want to buy one little outfit at a time.

I am sorry my disregard of your opinion offended you but whatever. Sucky forum anyway if i'm punished for "flaming" people by calling them clowns when they are talking utter rubbish. So I will leave with a true flame. Typical witless American... awful spelling, random punctuation and all too eager to use Mom's credit card to fund the devolution of one of the best series in gaming.
Moderator Action: You are not allowed to
- insult any other people in this forum
- to troll around
- and to discuss moderator actions in public.
Please behave according to the rules in the future.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

wow compairing dlc to the holocaust that has to be one of the crazyest things I have ever heard.

 

[Furycrab]

Its really strange how people compare single civs with expansions. I would never buy a civ expansion if it only consisted of extra civs. I would however gladly buy one even if there wasnt a single new civ in it.

Expansions expand (duh) on the gameplay. extra civs doesnt.

Well with the support of DLC sales they have pretty much been giving gameplay tweaks and modifications for free. However what I like is that it is a choice. They don't add as much gameplay as say an expansion, but they also cost 10 times less... I pay more in coffee in ... 2 days <.< than what a civ + scenario will cost me.

It's nickle and diming at it's best, but at least I'm only nickle and dimed by games I actually still playing rather than having to take leaps of faith with expansions that had a ton of stuff I didn't really like... Who knows, they might be working on a bigger DLC pack that will bring some changes more comparable to an expansion, but I still won't need to buy any of the previous DLC. Warlords and Beyond the Sword added a ton to the games, but were they worth 50+ each... Not sure.

 

[Bezurn]

Until they add options in the game to disable ALL or SOME DLC content for multi-player / single-player (HoF) I will not buy any of it. With expansions you can easily sync multiple people up to the same version by ensuring they have the correct expansion and patch installed. With DLC and its a la carte method version matching is near impossible. If they introduced extended game play features like corporations or espionage under the same DLC model, the game would be unplayable in all but single-player sandbox IMO.

 

[Civsassin]

It's nickle and diming at it's best, but at least I'm only nickle and dimed by games I actually still playing rather than having to take leaps of faith with expansions that had a ton of stuff I didn't really like... Who knows, they might be working on a bigger DLC pack that will bring some changes more comparable to an expansion, but I still won't need to buy any of the previous DLC. Warlords and Beyond the Sword added a ton to the games, but were they worth 50+ each... Not sure.

It really isn't nickel and diming because you have the option to pass and not buy any of it. One of the moderators said in another thread (I don't recall which moderator or thread) that they are working on an expansion for a holiday 2011 release.

 

[DOmar1990]

I get it the first day it was release on Puerto Rico (september 21 when I just get back from Army trainning) and it was total dissapointment. Actually I have the game there, but I unistalled it from my computer because it's just wasting space. If I were you, I will wait until they release a decent expansion to Civ V alike Beyond the Sword.