sabo
My Ancestors were Vikings
I remember Civ 3 and 4 staying in the top ten PC games for quite a while, you don't see Civ 5 in any top tens anymore.
Was Civ IV the last great Civ game ever?
- Thread starter sabo
- Start date
timurlame
Chieftain
In my opinion yes,
I have all current consoles, loads of PC games
But I hardly play anything but civ4.....
civ5 is ok, but again only my opinion, it trys to hard to tweak what was already a perfect game.
civ4 is the game I've enjoyed the most, more than any other , in any genre, on any console or PC, I started playing civ 2 on playstation 10 years ago. and all the grand theft autos, and modern warfares could never compete, let alone other civ games.
also your in the civ4 forum? do you expect peeps to disagree with you
I have all current consoles, loads of PC games
But I hardly play anything but civ4.....
civ5 is ok, but again only my opinion, it trys to hard to tweak what was already a perfect game.
civ4 is the game I've enjoyed the most, more than any other , in any genre, on any console or PC, I started playing civ 2 on playstation 10 years ago. and all the grand theft autos, and modern warfares could never compete, let alone other civ games.
also your in the civ4 forum? do you expect peeps to disagree with you
timurlame
Chieftain
@sabo
I just saw you when you joined and your contribution to this forum...
so how bout I just shut the hell up
I just saw you when you joined and your contribution to this forum...
so how bout I just shut the hell up
I doubt it. Firaxis seems to have forgotten what made civ great (I've loved civ I back in the 90s), and that is not fancy 3D graphics that require a monster PC to run on full-specs, but a 2 dimensional game with a very high level of strategy and variance in game play. Take a look at the football-manager series, they have large sales/fanbase despite releasing a new version of their game every year. They do no bother much with graphical enhancements but rather with improving the strategical aspect of the game (granted FM2012 was the first time they disappointed me as it did not improve much on FM2011). Firaxis should do the same.
sabo
My Ancestors were Vikings
LOL cuz I got no business in the Civ 5 forumn, I even bought a brand new laptop so I could play Civ 5 on...also your in the civ4 forum? do you expect peeps to disagree with you
Archon_Wing
Vote for me or die
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2005
- Messages
- 5,257
Well, that's kinda unfair.
There's only been two games since Civ IV: Colonization and Revolution which I didn't bother with.
I also hear some people made a plagiarized, dumbed down version and called it Civilization V, but that's not a game as much as it is a beta.
There's only been two games since Civ IV: Colonization and Revolution which I didn't bother with.
I also hear some people made a plagiarized, dumbed down version and called it Civilization V, but that's not a game as much as it is a beta.
CurseUppl
The bureaucracy expands.
They basically pulled a Bioware.
They took a successful game (Star Wars Galaxies), looked at what made it great, then completely ignored it and made their own version (The Old Republic).
You could argue both were/are successful and I agree. But long term success (cIV) still trumps short term success in my book.
Oh well, that's what indie developers are for! And modding!
*edit* I forgot about the voice acting in ciV and TOR. Both costed millions (in TOR's case, I've heard rumours that the voice acting alone was a whopping 100 million dollars) and yet they add nothing whatsoever to the game, except a temporary immersion that's broken the moment you leave the chat/diplomacy window.
They took a successful game (Star Wars Galaxies), looked at what made it great, then completely ignored it and made their own version (The Old Republic).
You could argue both were/are successful and I agree. But long term success (cIV) still trumps short term success in my book.
Oh well, that's what indie developers are for! And modding!
*edit* I forgot about the voice acting in ciV and TOR. Both costed millions (in TOR's case, I've heard rumours that the voice acting alone was a whopping 100 million dollars) and yet they add nothing whatsoever to the game, except a temporary immersion that's broken the moment you leave the chat/diplomacy window.
The_Reckoning
Prince
Without Soren Johnson I think Firaxis are on the way to becoming a B or C list developer.
I hope they prove me wrong with the new X-Com, but looking at Civ5 and how that's been treated... I have no faith in them.
I hope they prove me wrong with the new X-Com, but looking at Civ5 and how that's been treated... I have no faith in them.
Civ4 is also the greatest game ever made for laptops i.m.o. Civ5 was a disaster probably because the developers felt they had to do something different as civ4 (bts version v3.19 i'm talking about - the final version of civ4) was just about perfect. Games like GTA are fun for a couple of months, and, well, that's it, back on the shelf or sold.
I took a break to check out Skyrim on xbox, which is excellent, but once you've cleared the areas and completed the quests, that's about it for that one too. Civ4 is endlessly replayable and timeless too, well until 2050 which will do me. I only feel a bit guilty that I paid £6.50 for GOTY version on amazon which will work out eventually to about 1p per game. I play at Monarch level which is just the right difficulty for me as it allows trying things out without being blattered as I would be on deity.
I checked out the civ5 forum just now, and its interesting to see that it's less viewed and posted on than civ4. QED.
I took a break to check out Skyrim on xbox, which is excellent, but once you've cleared the areas and completed the quests, that's about it for that one too. Civ4 is endlessly replayable and timeless too, well until 2050 which will do me. I only feel a bit guilty that I paid £6.50 for GOTY version on amazon which will work out eventually to about 1p per game. I play at Monarch level which is just the right difficulty for me as it allows trying things out without being blattered as I would be on deity.
I checked out the civ5 forum just now, and its interesting to see that it's less viewed and posted on than civ4. QED.
tdy99
Prince
It's possible there might be a "reload" of the franchise 10 or 20 years from now. Who knows what the world and games will be like by then. I do think Civ 5 will probably be the last installment from the current owners of the franchise.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
I don't either. If they don't feel the TBS is marketable any longer or that they can't get basic controls working properly for several games in a row, maybe they should sell off the civ IP rights to someone competent. I know it's a slow era for TBS, but that doesn't mean it's OK to release unfinished products in beta as retail. Yes, short term money, but in the long term it's killing the genre and puts a serious damper on people's confidence in the civ franchise.
Madden 2012 has fewer bugs than civ V. That really, really hurts, given how EA operates.
shakabrade
Praise Vivec!
Civ5 is really age of decadence for Civ.
Civvers are a dying breed.
I was surprised when I realised I was among youngest on this forum since people have been telling me I'm too old for playing games for some time.
Civvers are a dying breed.
I was surprised when I realised I was among youngest on this forum since people have been telling me I'm too old for playing games for some time.
shakabrade
Praise Vivec!
They could have contacted the community like they have with developing civ4, but they purposely didn't.
They BETRAYED us.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 27,101
so true! I've been putzing around in Dragon Age II since I bought it for $5 bucks recently. Arrrgh! Such a skeleton of former D&D games. So cheap and lazy.
AJ11
Emperor
One of the reasons why I didn't buy Dragon Age 2 at all, why I have boycotted DnD 4.0 and never had the urge to get Civ5.
Game quality is going to crap, especially with the new fangled nonsense of DLC.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 27,101
DLC is such a laughable pile of BS for most games. Developers really need to rethink the whole DLC model.
For RPGs, I could see it work as a serialized set of contiguous storylines if they fully supported it. Instead, they plop out crap like basically a single lame mission or two that provides no incentive for upgrading your character - whether new or old. They always make it sound like they will provide all this content and then release maybe 2 or 3 short and worthless DLCs and then abandon it. OR they have some DLC with a few new special items, which is even more BS. Basically you are buying "virtual loot". ugh! I don't know...maybe some people buy this crap
For RPGs, I could see it work as a serialized set of contiguous storylines if they fully supported it. Instead, they plop out crap like basically a single lame mission or two that provides no incentive for upgrading your character - whether new or old. They always make it sound like they will provide all this content and then release maybe 2 or 3 short and worthless DLCs and then abandon it. OR they have some DLC with a few new special items, which is even more BS. Basically you are buying "virtual loot". ugh! I don't know...maybe some people buy this crap
AJ11
Emperor
Don't get me started on that and the morons who pay good hard-earned money for virtual and temporary advantages in those "free" online games (e.g., Utopia, Travian, etc.). What a bloody waste of money.
