What Is Your Opinion of Civilization 5 As of Today

[pilot00]

i know i am a civ4 fan, but i would like to see a few more people than those with 50 posts state that civ3/4/5 is the best.

I have played Civ for 20 years, through 1, 2 and 3 (got stuck on 3 for a while) and eventually 4. Civ5 looks like watching a movie knowing that the plot is hollow.

Excuse me but...What does number of posts has to do with that? I have been playing the same time as you (maybe more ) but I didn't join the forum at an earlier time, so what?

No offense meant but I just think that the number of posts is a bit irrelevant in judging (harsh word I know) someones opinion.

 

[jjkrause84]

Furthermore, every game which deals with managing an economy, be it SimCity or Civilization, should have a budget (or slider) to manage the distribution of resources into the various economical fields, depending on strategy and preference. It's probably the most intrinsic, core feature of the entire genre. That Civ 5 left it out is nothing but appalling, and it indicates shockingly the design team's serious lack of understanding the genre they are working in.

Exactly. Civ5 plays as though it were developed by people who've heard of Civilization, but never actually played it themselves. The mechanisms used are kind of similar to previous iterations, but all have some sort of strange aspect in their implementation that is just incomprehensible (like global happiness...).

 

[Aristos]

Exactly. Civ5 plays as though it were developed by people who've heard of Civilization, but never actually played it themselves. The mechanisms used are kind of similar to previous iterations, but all have some sort of strange aspect in their implementation that is just incomprehensible (like global happiness...).

Well, not exactly... no one can deny that Shafer "played" Civilization before becoming a "designer", as proven by his long activities as a modder in this very forum... the real question is: HOW did he understand what he was playing?

The answer to that may well be in his own words: he once said (don't remember where to find the link, but remember the interview) that he always wanted a Panzer General with cities in between, more or less words.

Thank God he "resigned", and some more professionally oriented people took command. Civ5 has jumped leaps forward as compared to the original design; not there yet for many, but very close, especially if they hit it with BNW.

 

[DarthSheldonPhD]

Excuse me but...What does number of posts has to do with that? I have been playing the same time as you (maybe more ) but I didn't join the forum at an earlier time, so what?

No offense meant but I just think that the number of posts is a bit irrelevant in judging (harsh word I know) someones opinion.

I strongly second pilot's motion. I'm sure many of you have been playing the series as long as I have, but can guarantee that no one has been playing longer as I started when the franchise did, purchasing civ1 within days of it's release(so I guess the civ1 beta testers have me beat, but I digress...) More importantly...

Be very....
very....
very....

careful with this proposition that number of posts is respective of civ-series veteranship. It is, although probably unintentionally, a blatant endorsement for trolling on the forums. Sure, half the people with hundreds of posts are long time contributors who have helped us all out, but the other half are trolls who only add congestion to the site.

I started following the site when civ4 came out, looking for insight as the game was revolutionary compared to civ3. I was hesitant to create an account, as I noticed some of the veterans were becoming distressed by people asking the same questions over and over which had already been answered. I can empathize with their annoyance, but as one of the people who's asked redundant questions, I'll defend myself by saying that there's currently almost 400 pages, each with about 50 threads, each with dozens of posts, in which one has to dig to find the answers, and that's just for civ5-general. With the average human lifespan of around 100 years... it would be nice to be able to find the answers while I still have enough life left to play the game. This rock-hard place scenario was created predominately by trolling.

I don't want anyone to take this as a message to post less; in fact there are several members whom I would love to have share more of their gems. But equating accumulated posts with loyalty/veteranship can lead to frustrating results.

 

[neilmeister]

I don't want anyone to take this as a message to post less; in fact there are several members whom I would love to have share more of their gems. But equating accumulated posts with loyalty/veteranship can lead to frustrating results.

You guys need to calm down.

How long someone has been a member and how active they are at posting is the only metric available.

So, I'm sorry that I can't distinguish between a Civ1 almost-beta tester and a 12 year old who just bought CivRev and joined the forums yesterday... and yes, one of those peoples opinions counts far more when the topic is the evolution of the series.

 

[Bfoxius]

==Pros==
The game is a lot more newb friendly than CivIV. I believe that newbs are key in keeping a game series alive. I have seen many games fall because they are not user friendly. Yes, I am a Civ veteran, and do look back to the old days when Civ was less mainstream. (I do not like anything that is super mainstream, e.g. Beats headphones, Call of Duty, the "words" Swag and YOLO, etc.) Newbs however have helped Civilization overall.

2. The game is simply beautiful. TBS games are not known for having the most stunning graphics, and I too fall into the Gameplay>Graphics camp, but CivV makes the worlds seem alive. Everything from forests to Gandhi's head makes the world seem real.

3. Civilizations feel more unique and less leader-centric. I do not want an array of cookie-cutter civilizations with maybe one unique unit, and a couple "leader traits". It makes the civilization feel less unique, and more based around the leader. The leader is just a person however great. The civilization may have lasted since the dawn of history. In CivV, you get a unique unit, a unique unit/building/improvement, and a civilization perk. I believe the leaders should be there mostly for flavor, and CivV does a nice job of that, with its realistic leaders.

4. Military seems more unique. Even though the one unit per tile is terrible, I admit I rather enjoy ranged combat. Even though it is unrealistic (Longbowmen shooting across the English Channel into the heart of France,) I believe that the game strikes a great balance between realism and gameplay.

5. Expansions make it GREAT. Vanilla CivV was okay. Sure you had a couple cool base things, but many things were lacking. It seemed like a strong base to build a series on. I remember reading an Amazon review of the game a couple days after it came out. "The game is okay, but I really did not see the potential in CivIV until Beyond The Sword. Perhaps the same will be with Civilization V." Well, he darn well predicted the future. The DLC was cool, with the boss Mongols and the Polynesians, introducing Unique Improvements. G+K added a LOT to the game, and made it what a good strong Civilization game should be. Civilization expansions are the best. The games just present old mechanics in a new package. The expansions push the boundries. And with BNW just around the corner, Civilization V is likely to do a lot of boundary pushing.

==Cons==

1 Unit per Tile. I admit this seemed good on paper. It made a lot of cool gameplay options show up. The game just feels crowded and unrealistic with this however, especially in the endgame.

2. HUGE loading times and gameplay issues. Okay, I admit it. I am NOT a hardcore PC gamer. I play my games on a 64 bit 4gb laptop, although I am building a gaming PC now. I can hardly play a game on DX10/11. For starters, the base loading time is 2-4 minutes, then another 1 minute for the mods, then 3-10 minutes to load the save, then I have to scroll all around the map to load the map. I can barely play "Large" worlds, and my laptop crashes on Huge and Giant. Please, please, PLEASE Firaxis, somehow make all this disappear. After all, this IS still a TBS game, not Crysis or Battlefield.

3. Forced Steam. Steam can be good or bad. Forced Steam is always bad. What if you have a trashy internet connection and don't care about multiplayer or achievements. Steam makes all of this stuff mandatory.

 

[PhilBowles]

1 Unit per Tile. I admit this seemed good on paper. It made a lot of cool gameplay options show up. The game just feels crowded and unrealistic with this however, especially in the endgame.

I don't see why Firaxis has apparent difficulty making larger maps - I think the key problem is linking map size to number of civs. If a Huge map always has more civs than a Large map, you don't gain the benefit of the extra map size because the two additional civs hog the space.

The 1UPT system is fine, the game just works on maps that are too small. This is a key point where Civ IV scores more highly, and in a game in which exploration is a key feature, bigger is always better where maps are concerned.

2. HUGE loading times and gameplay issues. Okay, I admit it. I am NOT a hardcore PC gamer. I play my games on a 64 bit 4gb laptop, although I am building a gaming PC now. I can hardly play a game on DX10/11. For starters, the base loading time is 2-4 minutes, then another 1 minute for the mods, then 3-10 minutes to load the save, then I have to scroll all around the map to load the map. I can barely play "Large" worlds, and my laptop crashes on Huge and Giant. Please, please, PLEASE Firaxis, somehow make all this disappear. After all, this IS still a TBS game, not Crysis or Battlefield.

It works a lot better post-G&K, and my new laptop runs it with little delay - initial loading times seem pretty much as long for any new game, and it's considerably faster than the latest Total War.

3. Forced Steam. Steam can be good or bad. Forced Steam is always bad. What if you have a trashy internet connection and don't care about multiplayer or achievements. Steam makes all of this stuff mandatory.

Not something it's fair to blame on Civ V, though - every new Steam-compatible game does the same. Civ IV would if it were released today.

 

[Arachnofiend]

I don't see why Firaxis has apparent difficulty making larger maps - I think the key problem is linking map size to number of civs. If a Huge map always has more civs than a Large map, you don't gain the benefit of the extra map size because the two additional civs hog the space.

You are aware that you can reduce the number of civs in your game, correct?

 

[Maxym]

Diplomacy in this game is actually pretty good.

I'm a huge game theorist and love screwing with the AI to manipulate it to ultimately aid my victory (by offering it logical short term gains for seemingly neutral "costs", which I design to create a web in which I come out far ahead overall when all other AIs are considered).

I think this game strikes a brilliant balance between an overall hyper-logical structure (that characterize most game AIs), a small % of random decisions (much like rolling a 1 on a 20-sided dice; to keep things fun), and hints of transparency with deception, rather than 100% transparency or opaqueness. It's quite frankly imo the best part about this game. It's manipulat-able, but each interaction is a huge puzzle wrapped in a mind game where you have to analyze each civ's past actions, current positions, the hints you get about its current/future actions (love intrigue), etc., each time you make a move. And, if you do it exactly right, you can still bend the overall AI to your will and get 50+ turn notices of what the AI is planning to do 95% of the time. But if you mess up, or analyze wrong, the AI can really screw you. The problem people have with the AI diplomacy is that the AI is too GOOD at it (i.e. better than you, screwing you over), the opposite problem as with the AI's military strategy, which is simply awful (i.e. worse than a 5 year old, screwing itself over).

Some of the diplo weights are a bit off kilter in terms of how they reflect reality (or at least my perception of it), the warmonger mechanic is heavily broken with city-states (but that can partially be justified by the game's desire to keep CSs alive), and AI still doesn't take %chance to war into account in its trades, but the overall structure is wonderful for replay-ability if you don't mind paying attention.

Although, I can 100% see how someone who's not good at game-theory analysis, or playing the game very fast, or not observing the AI's actions (and diplo text) in relation to its past actions AND other civs, thinking that the system is much more random/finicky than it actually is. If you ignore the tools the game gives you to conduct diplomacy, then you're just not very good at diplomacy. In CivV, diplomacy isn't optional unless you're a total warmonger.... diplomacy is vitally integrated into every other play-style and victory condition, and most people just do not pay it the attention/respect it deserves and suffer for it as a consequence.

Thanks for pointing this out to general public. I am not quite adept at AI diplo manipulation but I have seen it done in GOTM. On Deity level no less, with a bunch of uber warmongers Halcyan2 wins a Diplo Victory and gets AI to vote for him. And does it consistently, so we just need to learn it's nice to know there is a part of this game that's so hard to master.

 

[Dr. D]

I strongly second pilot's motion. I'm sure many of you have been playing the series as long as I have, but can guarantee that no one has been playing longer as I started when the franchise did, purchasing civ1 within days of it's release(so I guess the civ1 beta testers have me beat, but I digress...) More importantly...

Be very....
very....
very....

careful with this proposition that number of posts is respective of civ-series veteranship. It is, although probably unintentionally, a blatant endorsement for trolling on the forums. Sure, half the people with hundreds of posts are long time contributors who have helped us all out, but the other half are trolls who only add congestion to the site.

I started following the site when civ4 came out, looking for insight as the game was revolutionary compared to civ3. I was hesitant to create an account, as I noticed some of the veterans were becoming distressed by people asking the same questions over and over which had already been answered. I can empathize with their annoyance, but as one of the people who's asked redundant questions, I'll defend myself by saying that there's currently almost 400 pages, each with about 50 threads, each with dozens of posts, in which one has to dig to find the answers, and that's just for civ5-general. With the average human lifespan of around 100 years... it would be nice to be able to find the answers while I still have enough life left to play the game. This rock-hard place scenario was created predominately by trolling.

I don't want anyone to take this as a message to post less; in fact there are several members whom I would love to have share more of their gems. But equating accumulated posts with loyalty/veteranship can lead to frustrating results.

That's a lot of talk for a noob with 28 posts... what could you possibly know about the Civ franchise if you've only made 28 posts in this forum? LOL

Seriously, post count is not the only metric by which to judge... just the fact that someone can put together complete sentences should be enough to prove they aren't just some 12 year old who just bought CivRev.

 

[neilmeister]

Seriously, post count is not the only metric by which to judge... just the fact that someone can put together complete sentences should be enough to prove they aren't just some 12 year old who just bought CivRev.

Fair enough, an 18 year old that just bought CivRev.

 

[pilot00]

and it's considerably faster than the latest Total War.

Sorry, but it is waaaaaaay out of the league of total war graphics wise. And truth be told my comp handles total war better than Civ in an oxymoron way

And @ DarthSheldonPhD thanks for the support m8

 

[PhilBowles]

Sorry, but it is waaaaaaay out of the league of total war graphics wise.

While this is true, Shogun 2's campaign map's high-quality graphics are mostly for static scenery elements on a map that never changes - that should be quick to recall once loaded once; the battles have their own excruciating long loading times to load those graphics. I don't think graphic processing is the main limitation on loading times anyway - there doesn't seem much correlation between the two (Distant Worlds and Starcraft II are comparable in initial loading time to Civ V, while graphically more demanding games - including Napoleon TW - are typically faster-loading).

 

[pilot00]

My programming experience leads me to believe that all it amounts into is code efficiency and graphic engine design. If one or the other is not efficient in what it does [Blizzard has been the best till now at optimization but starcraft II is streaming data through battlenet (and dont mean achievements )even in single player hence the loading time] you are facing problems. I don't consider CiV Vs graphics to be over the top or needing those huge requirements. The fact that loading times seem to have lessened a bit (at least for me) since the last patch, leads me to believe its inefficiency, though as to which of the two parts I dunno.

 

[Civking5]

i know i am a civ4 fan, but i would like to see a few more people than those with 50 posts state that civ3/4/5 is the best.

I have played Civ for 20 years, through 1, 2 and 3 (got stuck on 3 for a while) and eventually 4. Civ5 looks like watching a movie knowing that the plot is hollow.

The title of thread asks about people opinion about civ5, not that post in this thread if you are a lunatic civ4 fanboy who cannot deal with new ideas. Any way, nice attempt for derailing another thread in civ5 forum.

In my opinion this game is in a lot better shape in compare to when it got released and has gone a long way.

One important issue with civ5 is that in order to enjoy the game to its full potential, you need a relatively good computer, and the suggested minimum requirement are not simply enough.

 

[Civking5]

Moreover, slider system was an artificial gamey mechanism. I am happy that it is gone.

 

[Aristos]

The title of thread asks about people opinion about civ5, not that post in this thread if you are a lunatic civ4 fanboy who cannot deal with new ideas.

Ad Hominem Fallacy.

Reported.

 

[Civking5]

Ad Hominem Fallacy.

Reported.

Thank you for proving my point. Now, go back to your civ4 forum. Tata

 

[neilmeister]

Thank you for proving my point. Now, go back to your civ4 forum. Tata

Proving your point?? Which was?

Oh, I get it, because I said I preferred Civ4, I'm not allowed to post here and criticise your beloved Civ5... and I am the lunatic fanboy of course.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Why does this always have to happen in these types of threads. Knock off the trolling and flaming. If you have an issue with a post, please report the post and let the staff handle it. Taking justice into your own hands is both in both uncivil and asking for trouble. Please return to topic, with civility, or this thread will be closed.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889