very disappointed in graphics.

[charon2112]

I'm playing at max settings, DX11 and this is terrible. Civ IV Colonization had much better graphics than this. In Civ IV every tree swayed in the breeze, you could zoom in nice and close and see waves lapping on the shore, there was waves and white water in the rivers. None of this is in Civ V. You can't zoom in close, the trees are just painted on, the rivers are just a strip of blue, the ocean isn't nearly as realistic looking as Colonization. Maybe the units have more polygons, but the overall terrain is lifeless.

 

[Dizzy75]

That's strange, because at least a couple of reviews specifically mentioned cool details about the graphics. I'm at work for several more hours, so I haven't seen anything yet. What's vid card do you have?

 

[charon2112]

That's strange, because at least a couple of reviews specifically mentioned cool details about the graphics. I'm at work for several more hours, so I haven't seen anything yet. What's vid card do you have?

I read that too, that's why I'm so surprised. I have an ATI HD 5770. 1 gig
more than enough. any every detail is maxed.

 

[kaltorak]

I only have the demo, but graphis havent impressed me much. Everything at max too.

btw, it crashed after 10min.

 

[zomg]

Do you have it in strategic map mode by chance?

 

[Buccaneer]

I have the settings on mostly low and it looks ok, not as good as Col but there I had it on a higher setting. The one thing that stands out are the terrible looking rivers - very cartoonish whereas everything else looks more natural.

 

[grandad1982]

Aaargghhhh! I TOLD YOU SO! When I first saw this game I said "Hmmm, terrain is abit rubbish and just look at those stupid rivers." I was told "It'll be better in the final release."....

 

[Dizzy75]

Hmm, that's a lot better than my GeForce 8600. Damn.

 

[MkLh]

Max settings with Gxt460 don't really impress (in demo). On the other hand, I didn't expect them to. Turn base strategy just can't be eye candy. It's kind of strange you can't zoom really close though.

 

[Thormodr]

The graphics in general are pretty good.

The rivers do look bad though.

 

[kattana]

under video options do you have

High Detail Strategic View: This causes the game to use higher texture resolution, allowing
you to zoom in more while in the strategic view. It may affect game performance on lowerend
machines

enabled?

 

[Lancor]

I don't know what game you are playing, but the demo, in comparison to Civ IV, is like if you compare Half-Life 1 with 2... it's just beautiful. Granted, you can't zoom in as deep as in IV, but the details are there too.

And this:

under video options do you have

High Detail Strategic View: This causes the game to use higher texture resolution, allowing
you to zoom in more while in the strategic view. It may affect game performance on lowerend
machines

enabled?

only affects the strategic view, not the normal game view.

 

[Delgar]

I'm playing at max settings, DX11 and this is terrible. Civ IV Colonization had much better graphics than this. In Civ IV every tree swayed in the breeze, you could zoom in nice and close and see waves lapping on the shore, there was waves and white water in the rivers. None of this is in Civ V. You can't zoom in close, the trees are just painted on, the rivers are just a strip of blue, the ocean isn't nearly as realistic looking as Colonization. Maybe the units have more polygons, but the overall terrain is lifeless.

I think the Civ5 graphics are just fine. Can't really say they are better or worse than Civ4 Colonization, maybe just different. Besides Colonization was the last expansion for the Civ4 series. We're just now only at vanilla Civ5. I almost want to stick my neck out and say that the Civ5 graphics will be beat Civ4 Colonization by the time the final Civ5 expansion rolls around...

Agreed on the rivers though - they need more detail. Also would be happy to zoom in closer and maybe also be able to change the viewing angle e.g. the way you could do so in Sims.

Overall though, as I said above I think the graphics are just fine, especially for a turn-based strategy game.

 

[charon2112]

under video options do you have

High Detail Strategic View: This causes the game to use higher texture resolution, allowing
you to zoom in more while in the strategic view. It may affect game performance on lowerend
machines

enabled?

I do, but the performance is good. Just the graphics aren't great. For instance, look at these two coastal scenes:

see how the river is just a blue strip that just sticks into the ocean?


and here, you can almost see the water flowing over the rocks.

 

[lymond]

I'm not wow'd by them either, but the big issue is not having the ability to zoom in close.

Also, anyone notice how odd the city screen is when you pull it up. It's never centered and the view varies. I haven't figured out how to move it around, if you can.

 

[charon2112]

I think the Civ5 graphics are just fine. Can't really say they are better or worse than Civ4 Colonization, maybe just different. Besides Colonization was the last expansion for the Civ4 series. We're just now only at vanilla Civ5. I almost want to stick my neck out and say that the Civ5 graphics will be beat Civ4 Colonization by the time the final Civ5 expansion rolls around...

Agreed on the rivers though - they need more detail. Also would be happy to zoom in closer and maybe also be able to change the viewing angle e.g. the way you could do so in Sims.

Overall though, as I said above I think the graphics are just fine, especially for a turn-based strategy game.

The graphics in a game coming out in 2010 and supposedly utilizing DX11 effects, should be considerably better than the Civ IV expansions, which stopped in 2008, and were based on an engine from 2005. I should be blown away by the detail, I should be able to zoom right up an archers nose, and I can't. The graphics are mediocre at best.

 

[Maniacal]

Wow, that is an ugly river.

 

[honus]

Agreed. GFX need improvement, but game is fun so far!

 

[Delgar]

The graphics in a game coming out in 2010 and supposedly utilizing DX11 effects, should be considerably better than the Civ IV expansions, which stopped in 2008, and were based on an engine from 2005. I should be blown away by the detail, I should be able to zoom right up an archers nose, and I can't. The graphics are mediocre at best.

Zoom right up an archer's nose? Seriously? I know you are probably using an analogy here but still! It sounds like you were expecting Mass Effect 2 graphics. I mean, c'mon...take a moment to really think about it. This is a turn-based strategy game. Maybe if you lowered your expectations a little bit...

 

[lymond]

Zoom right up an archer's nose? Seriously? I know you are probably using an analogy here but still! It sounds like you were expecting Mass Effect 2 graphics. I mean, c'mon...take a moment to really think about it. This is a turn-based strategy game. Maybe if you lowered your expectations a little bit...

Regardless of graphics quality, you could zoom in VERY close in CIV4. My expectation with the quality level in 5 is that, if you could zoom close, things would like much better and far less pixel-y. However, in this case of 5, you can't zoom in very far at all.