Maybe it's been mentioned too often in a positive light and the developers just gave the audience what it supposedly craves?
Wouldn't be the first time a runaway meme derails...
Who has come back to Civ IV after playing Civ V?
- Thread starter Davor
- Start date
Maybe it's been mentioned too often in a positive light and the developers just gave the audience what it supposedly craves?
Wouldn't be the first time a runaway meme derails...
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
Maybe it was like Microsoft with their Windows slogan (Windows 98 I think) "It just works".
What, it only just works NOW? After all these years?
What, it only just works NOW? After all these years?
obsolete
Deity
Don't worry all, the next expansion pack is coming out soon: Civ5 - Beyond the Toilet
And all your troubles will be fixed... just pre-order it ahead of time. You can even get it before the reviews come out!
And all your troubles will be fixed... just pre-order it ahead of time. You can even get it before the reviews come out!
Ironically, this fits. Civ5 has basically given our wallets a collective enema.
The game is about as much fun as a case of Tourista, too.
Asterix Rage
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,585
Yoshiegg737
Jungo Jungo
I miss Civ4's awesome diplomacy music 
Sure there's diplomacy music in Civ5 too but...I don't like it
Sure there's diplomacy music in Civ5 too but...I don't like it
I always seen people sticking to old version of games like Civ to be somewhat ...eh, special 
The "I hate changes"-type of people. Now I'm officially a weirdo too
But to be honest, coming back to Civ4 isn't all good. There are issues with the game. Issues that I really hoped Civ5 would fix without f'cking up the entire economy and implementing a non-working combat model. So I'm not completely satisfied with Civ4. There's a reason why I looked so forward to Civ5.
So while I'm trying to squeeze out a few more hours of Civ4-joy I'm constantly looking at other games. And while there certainly are quite a few strategy games out there(and great games in other genres) the Civilization series is really one of a kind. I even tried going another step back, to Civ3 but that game doesn't work for me at all.
The "I hate changes"-type of people. Now I'm officially a weirdo too But to be honest, coming back to Civ4 isn't all good. There are issues with the game. Issues that I really hoped Civ5 would fix without f'cking up the entire economy and implementing a non-working combat model. So I'm not completely satisfied with Civ4. There's a reason why I looked so forward to Civ5.
So while I'm trying to squeeze out a few more hours of Civ4-joy I'm constantly looking at other games. And while there certainly are quite a few strategy games out there(and great games in other genres) the Civilization series is really one of a kind. I even tried going another step back, to Civ3 but that game doesn't work for me at all.
ezwip
Prince
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 389
I went back to Civ V after hating it initially. It still needs a lot of work, and feels incomplete in comparison to Civ IV. However, the basic changes such as 1upt and strategic resources are great. Not having those available makes it difficult for me to enjoy Civ IV.
shpeka
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2009
- Messages
- 184
You are not alone. We are the Borg.
Seriously. I feel the developers of CiV tried to address many outstanding issues, and did satisfactorily.
They messed everything else, though.
I am officially back.
blind biker
King
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2009
- Messages
- 609
I said somewhere already: toilet paper is more useful than Civ V. And more fun, too (no, I don't suggest nor have any idea how toilet paper could be fun, but Civ V has negative fun value).
blind biker
King
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2009
- Messages
- 609
I like how the resources are handled, but don't like the fact that there are only a handful of resources. This goes into the "dumbed down" category, and there are many more in Civ V.
As for 1UpT, that should die. Die die die DIE! It's the dumbest concept ever forced upon a Civilization-type game. It does NOT work, and it shouldn't, either, due to the sheer pointlessness two units not being able to share a tile that is supposed to be the diameter of a city.
I agree, but I think we're in the minority. Some of the returnees liked 1UpT and all the Civ V lovers like it. I feel it's an excellent concept, for other games. It doesn't fit well with Civ, however.
phungus420
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,296
Had Civ V simply used the same and updated economic model as Civ IV; instead of replacing it with an entirely new system, and simply focused more on the AI for the 1UPT, it would have been a great success. The Stack of Doom is the flaw in Civ, and 1UPT was an excellent improvement. It's just that Civ V's economy is rubbish when compared to Civ IV.
Agreed. To be fair to Firaxis, 1UpT was something at a lot of Civ4 players had been asking for for a long time, because unlimited units per tile is unrealistic and makes late game warfare very tedious. Personally, I was very keen on 1UpT when I first heard about it. But of course now I've actually played Civ5, it seems obvious to me that this apparently nice idea simply doesn't work, at least not the way Firaxis have designed it. What the solution is, I don't know. I think both models are broken, but I'd say the Civ4 model is less broken than the Civ5 one.
Similar threads
