Were "stacks of doom" really that bad?

Status
Not open for further replies.
No the scale is completely fine. There's no indication that they decided on the minimum specs then worked backwards to determine the scale. Game design usually go the other way. If anything, the scale is deliberate as Civ games have consistently reduced 'scale' and number of units since Civ3.


The requirements for Civ5 may appear to be steep for people who still think multi core processors are a new thing, but the specs are fairly far off from the types of games that tax modern PCs, so it is consistent with what Civ games have traditionally been in terms of system requirements.
 
No the scale is completely fine. There's no indication that they decided on the minimum specs then worked backwards to determine the scale. Game design usually go the other way. If anything, the scale is deliberate as Civ games have consistently reduced 'scale' and number of units since Civ3.


The requirements for Civ5 may appear to be steep for people who still think multi core processors are a new thing, but the specs are fairly far off from the types of games that tax modern PCs, so it is consistent with what Civ games have traditionally been in terms of system requirements.

Can't say I agree with you. Graphics were a priority with Civilization 5. They wanted to lure in a new audience and so they felt they needed to compete graphically with the competition. Huge maps put a strain on people's processors. Hell, the game is chugging along in later eras for most people even on medium sized maps as it is.

So, I believe there was a conscious decision to reduce the scale even more to make the game playable at all. It's still pretty poorly optimized anyway due to the game being rushed out the door 1-2 years too early.

All in all, they prioritized graphics at the expense of playability. That's not an unusual consequence of moving from a middle market game to an AAA game. (or at least attempting to get there.) What we have ended up with is a fluff game that is more style than substance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom