Who else agrees that Civ 5 has been dumbed down?

[Inspector Javert]

I'd have to say yes. It's been majorly simplified likely in the hopes of bringing in more casual gamers. The removal of religion and governments/civics (Sorry but social policies flat out does not replace the systems of government from Civ II-IV) coupled with the very lack luster diplomacy really takes away from this game. That said it's a good game, I'm not disputing that, it's just not the great game that it can be.

 

[ananirtudosi]

No culture, research and commerce sliders.

No civics. Now civics is merely a ladder of perks that you upgrade. Has absolutely no flexibility.

No vasal states.

No religions.

No hamlets that can upgrade, instead we get this absurd "trading post".

No health/sickness.

No espionage.

Culture, commerce and productions are now separate entities.

No random events.

Leaders have no personality traits. Only one leader per nation.

No scenarios.

No wonder animations. No end-game cinematics.



Calling it dumbed down is an understatement.

Don't be fooled, people, Vanilla CIV5 this is not. This is plainer than Vanilla, this is CIV5 Incomplete.

I thought CIV IV was too complex, but I find it addictive once I get a grip on the mechanics. CIV V? I really can't let go the feeling that this game is, as you said, INCOMPLETE. Bugs, battle-oriented gameplay, it's just far from what 'building a great empire' on a turn-based game that gets me 'just one more turn'.

I wish they just bring CIV IV with CIV V graphics and hex tiles. That'd be awesome.

 

[falconne]

The way the percentage of Yes votes have been going up in the last few days (from around 25% to 41% now) shows, I think, that among the people who spent their time playing the game a bit more before sharing their opinion, the proportion who think it's dumbed down is higher. Higher than among those who voted based on first impressions.

 

[Methos]

Moderator Action: While the thread itself is borderline trolling, please keep your discussions respectful and within our [rules]forum rules[/rules]. Several posts have been deleted.

 

[KingYosef]

UPDATE ON POLL (10/1): Yes, you guessed it! The numbers continue to even out for those who think the game has been dumb down, which now sits at 41.19 percent. The number of undecided is at 10.18%, while those who don't think it has been dumb down now drops below the 50 percent mark to 48.63%. At this rate the majority will think the game has been dumb down will even out with the opposite view in less than a week. Stay tuned...

 

[DiabolicX]

Playing civ since mid 90's and I just picked this game up a few nights ago. No bueno, I fall asleep every night playing it. Cant believe Sid let this game be released.

 

[hoojahmoolah]

This is my second ever post, my first just 5 minutes ago and compelled by, as is this one, by the horrendous pile of excrement that is ciV.

It feels bore than dumbed down but reduced to some kind of console game. Everything seems to be calculated from a global scale yet there is no global management.

Unless I am overlooking a button, and I am not sure how I could so enormous and ugly is the interface, I can find no way of adjusting taxes. So in order to alter my global civilization I have to go through the cities individually and move the workers around in a process that seems even more long winded than before.

To my mind they have dumb downed the game by removing all the interesting elements of customising your civilization and inexplicably making the basics of the game, movement, combat, management as tedious as hell.

As a civilization game this latest addition is beyond awful. I intend to mail my copy back to Firaxis and demand a refund.

 

[SpurnSpore]

I never thought Civ could be worse than spore, but this is worse than the space part of spore! It's a wonder they didn't add dress up your warriors with weapons and tunics for fanbois.
war is a boring long drawn out chore only to be wanged by archers when you have riflemen and aircraft!There is just no way to win or even gain partial domination power!
The game will crash when you get even close,but if you are meek weak and powerless
you will be beaten by the A.I? then no crash.
Its so dumbed down it is like a cornflakes token free age of empires for 12 yr olds.
Even the pop up cards for policy's are useless garbage.
Stratego was more fun and a board game, this is a computer game? LOL

 

[Katzenkrimis]

I never thought Civ could be worse than spore, but this is worse than the space part of spore! It's a wonder they didn't add dress up your warriors with weapons and tunics for fanbois.

lol - Yes, Spore was pretty bad.

I could picture one of these guys in Civ 5.

Give him some hammers. He could build a pyramid.

He'd look great with a little plus five happiness.

 

[Kozmos]

I enjoyed civ 2 on playstation more than this game.

 

[MonorailCat]

only to be wanged by archers when you have riflemen and aircraft!There is just no way to win or even gain partial domination power!

Its so dumbed down it is like a cornflakes token free age of empires for 12 yr olds.

So you feel it's dumbed down, because you are not good enough to win the game?
good post ...

 

[SpurnSpore]

So you feel it's dumbed down, because you are not good enough to win the game?
good post ...

When I have the clear superior techs and superior weapons a dozen cities above all else, then the game crashes, nah not my fault.

 

[Traitorfish]

C'mon, people, at least get your criticism straight. The OP, asinine as it was, was about "dumbing down" (god, what an arrogant phrase) not about all the minor gameplay flaws and technical errors you've encountered.

 

[Natoforcer]

I choose "Undecided". Civ5 is still a good game but the bugs and some other stuff can be quite annoying. On the other hand the game is(at the moment) too good to be a dump down and if the mayor problems got solved it can easily get a dump up but not at the moment.

 

[Isikien]

Implying. Implying everywhere.
This poll is very telling of the current situation on the forums. B
But Civ5 has a good design. It's just poorly executed

 

[Intellectus]

Its an okay CIV game. But we all can agree that it is much better than alot of the recycled FPS stuff thes days. Fraxis has done their job. At least its not pervasively buggy.

Its okay, but it needs significant improvements. For one thing, I would like to see some complexity come back.

 

[Kietharr]

civ5 is most definitely dumbed down. It's the easiest civ to win at deity by a longshot, and having just won my first deity game about a week after launch I'm uninstalling. The AI is AWFUL. Civrev was a harder less dumbed down game than civ5.

It's depressing, really the end of an age. I've played civ games for a decade and it ends like this, grabbing the newest installation in the series and essentially 'beating' it in two weeks. It took me like 4 years to get good enough at civ3 to win on Emperor, I only ever won one Emperor game in civ4, I played mostly at Monarch. So a mediocre player like me can apparently decimate civ5, I can only imagine how disappointed the best players feel.

IDK how you can lose to archers, Spurnspore, unless you're trolling. The AI's ridiculous undying love of archers is the main reason it's so ridiculously easy to stomp them. Build mounted units and annihilate them, knock down their cities with longswords. Or don't, and just get a peace treaty where they give you all of their cities, resources, and money because they seem so willing to do that all of the time. You do have a good point though, this game is only slightly more difficult than the civilization stage of Spore, I don't think I've been this disappointed in a game since Spore either.

 

[pennjersey83]

Why don't you guys just play civ 4 if you think this one has been dumbed down? Stop complaining you sound like little girls

Moderator Action: Please remember that people who don't like the game have a right to post their opinions.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[r_rolo1]

Why don't you guys just play civ 4 if you think this one has been dumbed down? Stop complaining you sound like little girls

Because, dunno, they want to play a civ V that does not seem dumbed down to them ? Most of the people that don't want to play civ V aren't even around here , just for starters ... they are happily playing civ IV or III and posting in the other areas of the forum

Civ V defenders should quit of equaling complaints about civ V with love to civ IV or what ever previous version of civ . It would only make their point look better ...

 

[OliverFA]

Implying. Implying everywhere.
This poll is very telling of the current situation on the forums. B
But Civ5 has a good design. It's just poorly executed

I still find amazing that this poll has more than 40% of "yes" votes. Normally, when someone dislikes a game he does not take the time to go to the forums of that game. This can only get interpreted as a big disapointment.

We can discuss if the real number is 50% or 30%. It is not so important. The important thing is that game designers have disapointed a big part of the fan base. Maybe not the majority, but no doubt a very big one. Instead of increasing the number of people who like the game, they have exchanged one part of the market for another part.

They should instead have created two different branches. "normal" civ and "light" civ (CivRev). With the same engine they could have made two games and appealed to a wider audience.

In my opinion that's good news for companies like Stardock or Paradox. They will no doubt inherit a good portion of that orphan group.