Who has come back to Civ IV after playing Civ V?

[Rachsucht]

Out of 9 friends that play regularly, only 1 is ticked off that we went back to Civ4 (he hates SOD's with a passion).

I'm afraid we've reached the point in PC gaming where everything will be further "streamlined' (aka dumbed down) just to appeal to the masses

 

[Ataxerxes]

Out of 9 friends that play regularly, only 1 is ticked off that we went back to Civ4 (he hates SOD's with a passion).

I'm afraid we've reached the point in PC gaming where everything will be further "streamlined' (aka dumbed down) just to appeal to the masses

Unfortunately true. I think Civ 4 is going to stay as the ultimate. But rejoice, there are so many mods and scenarios out there, you still have years of varieties of 4 to play. We all owe the makers of mods our thanks for their hard work. I'm especially fond of RFC.

 

[Archon_Wing]

I've never played Civ V (comp too crappy) but I do find the complaints about that in this thread to be pretty amusing. That's because I decided to look into Civ IV after being annoyed with Starcraft II, which is frequently derided by fans of the 1st for being "dumbed down" and dull and in general being released an unfinished project. It all sounds very familiar.

 

[Wulf38]

When Civ5 came out I switched to playing it exclusively until now. I enjoyed figuring out the game's mechanics and playing with the new combat system. But then I just got bored of it and decided to start a game of Civ4 for the first time in several months. I had forgotten just how much more fun it is to build an empire in Civ4, even if the combat isn't as good as Civ5's 1upt system. I'll mainly stick to Civ4 from now on, but I'll keep an eye on Civ5 to see if future patches or mods make it better. Maybe I'll even create a mod to import my favorite things about Civ4 into Civ5.

 

[PreLynMax]

I came back to Civ 4 after player Civ 3. It just felt unnatural. After a week of Civ 3, I just felt cheated because 4 is far superior in ever level, y'know?

 

[PreLynMax]

I've never played Civ V (comp too crappy) but I do find the complaints about that in this thread to be pretty amusing. That's because I decided to look into Civ IV after being annoyed with Starcraft II, which is frequently derided by fans of the 1st for being "dumbed down" and dull and in general being released an unfinished project. It all sounds very familiar.

There's nothing dumbed down about StarCraft II, if any, it's more complex because of the rock-paper-scissor gameplay you have to play in it.

 

[Archon_Wing]

There's nothing dumbed down about StarCraft II, if any, it's more complex because of the rock-paper-scissor gameplay you have to play in it.

But that's in pretty much every RTS I've played. Well maybe, Rock costs a little less.

I threw in "dumbed down" in as a joke because that's what everyone complains about in a sequel and I saw similar complaints in the thread so I found that amusing. I have greater gripes about the pitiful excuse of a multilayer system (No chat rooms while previous versions did, ladder ranking IS dumbed down, because your rating is only relative to the 99 other people in your division and can't be compared to anyone else-- it's just an attempt to make people feel special.). But this is not the time nor place for me to complain about another game.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

There's nothing dumbed down about StarCraft II, if any, it's more complex because of the rock-paper-scissor gameplay you have to play in it.

Gee, I don't know. It seems that Firaxis played rock-paper-scissors with Civ5:

"We'll release when it's ready, right?"

"Paper covers rock. We release a pre-beta in September of 2010."

"Ok, but it will be a free, limited functionality pre-beta, right?"

"Rock breaks scissors. It will be a paid-for, limited functionality pre-beta, official commercial release."

"But we'll fix it up right away, won't we?"

"Scissors cut paper. We'll release it as is, gauge the user satisfaction level in gaming forums, ignore all of that and insist the game is fine, whilst hosing the customer base with DLC that breaks mods. Gamer's are dumb and forgiving. we'll make out like bandits."

"Oh, well I guess that's ok then."


There. See? There was real strategy used by the designers. It's the only strategy usable in Civ5 at all, but there was some.

 

[PreLynMax]

@Rachsucht: I'm afraid that's what's happening to PC gamers today, I guess. Remember how epic the RTS game Empire Earth II was? How complex the game was, yet how beautifully detailed the game was? Guess what happened to Sierra now... The mass marketed a dumbed down mess out of EE3... and they got bankrupted. Obviously, they didn't follow the concept that EE2 had, and they went all out with a joke of a game. There were some good things that EE3 had, the global view, for an example, but the game was too simplified and the AI was a joke. That's how all games that was once complex and genuine became watered-down messes.
@ AW: But the game itself hasn't been dumbed down, if any hasn't changed at all. I don't know what those other SC players are tripping about.
@LM: See above: Fraxis will learn the hard way that gamers are anything but "dumb and forgiven" when their sales drop harder than a transvestite's voice. LOL.

 

[obsolete]

I think what ticks people off mainly, is that they KNEW Civ Rev was going to be a dubbed down cash-cow. So when that happened, there wasn't too much flack. But with Civ5, everyone was expecting something different and more true to the series.

Unfortunately it was just another dubbed-down cash-cow.

 

[Iranon]

Civ5 wasn't dubbed-down at all , everyone is still speaking their native (sort of) language!



Excessive streamlining would reduce my enjoyment of a game, but I'd still consider that a legitimate choice. What really ticks me off is that nobody seemed to care how it actually plays out.
'I've been wanting Civ+Panzer General since I was a child. And Giant Death Robots. Then throw in whatever the marketing guys think will look good on the box - apparently boxes are important even if you need Steam anyway'

1upt in a game with this scope and loose emergent short-term objectives? That's going to be a huge AI challenge, and masking inadequacies by covering the world in units would be more obnoxious than stacks.

Having happiness as the main limiter to ICS? Just from reading the manual, the obvious solution appeared to be even more junk cities with cap raisers... head, meet desk.
Even after the fix, growth and spacing mechanics encourage a tight fill anyway, bonuses to the city itself available early on reinforce the 'more is better' theme. Land that may as well be featurelss and a limiter rather than a cost is the wrong way to create depth.

 

[obsolete]

Then throw in whatever the marketing guys think will look good on the box

Well, the PG3D had a really sh!ty looking box. In fact, they even stuck a Sherman on the front. A SHERMAN!? Why would anyone who is used to Panzers want to play with a PoS unit like a Sherman?

A SHERMAN!!!

That aside, and the rest of the ugly box, the sales were not too great, despite PG1 & 2 had reccord breaking sales and spawned the most famous flag-ship title in the wargaming industry since A.S.L.

While that may have indicated that the look of the BOX actually affects sales, I think the answere is more likely that when Ubisoft dictated to SSI how they had to conform to the new 3D style and dub things down so more KIDS could learn how to play.... things went downhill from that point very fast.

IIRC the last of the PG series was made into some silly card game. What a waste of a series...

BTW, UBISOFT = Evil. Even worse than Firaxis, and that's quite telling...

 

[whats a navy]

I was going to get Civ 5 for Christmas but seeing as everyone said that 4 was far superior then I just decided to continue playing it and not bother with a new game.

 

[PreLynMax]

I kinda like the Arco Deco box art. It feels like I'm back in the 1930's. The 70th edition Monopoly game used an Arco Deco art style, but then again the board game was created in 1933... so it fits the style well... plus, it's so perty!
Anyway, back to Civ 5... it's artwork is the only thing I liked about the game...

 

[LAnkou]

not yet back to Civ IV, but i understand that a lot of people does it...

As someone says earlier in the thread, there will be patches and expansion that will improve the biggest flaw of Civ V: AI, MP, Diplomacy, economy...
Well, i really hope so....

 

[LDiCesare]

+1 got back to Civ IV.

 

[Doctor Phibes]

Count me in too. I don't think I've ever posted to the Civ4 forum, but it still feels like coming home, from reading this thread. I think one of the few good things to come out of the Civ5 debacle is that it makes you appreciate what you've already got. Civ4BTS is, of course, the best - but I've also played a couple of games of Civ3 and CTP2 (both of which I used to play endlessly way back) as a reaction to the endless New Turn, New Turn, New Turn... ennui of Civ5. And both of those are miles more fun than Civ5.

And I really don't think that Civ5 graphics are better than Civ4's (as some have suggested) except on first sight maybe. If you look closely at the cities, they have no individuality, no individual buildings, just wonders if you have them. (The deep zoom is, probably deliberately, crippled out of the box, but you can fix that in the .ini file)

No fun with crazy aqueducts - look, someone was really trying hard to make that work in Civ4, and I appreciate their effort. (And workers don't seem to be having their way with cows and sheep any more. Where's the fun?) But for me one of the biggest graphics/UI things is that amazing zoom from Civ4 where with the turn of a mousewheel, you've gone right out from the centre of a city to the globe view from space. Gone now.

That stuff wouldn't matter so much, true, if there were some fascinating strategic depth to the game, but that's not there either. It falls on all fronts, every one. So glad I'm back with Civ4 and - as some others have said, looking forward to getting more into modded versions too - well I can't play it without Bug for a start, work of genius that.

 

[kiwitt]

And I really don't think that Civ5 graphics are better than Civ4's (as some have suggested) except on first sight maybe. If you look closely at the cities, they have no individuality, no individual buildings, just wonders if you have them. (The deep zoom is, probably deliberately, crippled out of the box, but you can fix that in the .ini file)

I agree the cities in Civ 4 look so much more real - like multiple Sim Cities. The ones in Civ 5 look "cartoonish" and "unreal" and makes for a less enjoyable package.

I like the rivers unique paths and flows in Civ 4 and the way the trees move in the wind. The bird flying out of the trees when units move into them. It just seems so much alive. The animated mines, and other resource improvements are great.

I really don't know why you need to have such a high graphics card for Civ 5 when it looks so good already on Civ 4 and does not need anywhere as high a spec card.

 

[jprc]

Back to Civ 4.
... and playing mod Fall From Heaven II !!! I love it !!!
If I play Civ 4/BTS, it would be with the mod: Rhye's and Fall

Actually, there are many good mods with Civ 4, and Civ 5 with whatever expansion that you have to pay for making a bad game acceptable is not an option.
I play Civ4/FFH, then wait for either Stardock's Elemental to be stabilized, or Shogun II Total War to be released...

 

[Ataxerxes]

Back to Civ 4.
... and playing mod Fall From Heaven II !!! I love it !!!
If I play Civ 4/BTS, it would be with the mod: Rhye's and Fall

Actually, there are many good mods with Civ 4, and Civ 5 with whatever expansion that you have to pay for making a bad game acceptable is not an option.
I play Civ4/FFH, then wait for either Stardock's Elemental to be stabilized, or Shogun II Total War to be released...

RFC alone is worth getting BTS. Agreed, most BTS mods by themselves are better than all of CivV. I also don't care for charging for every new mod the way Firaxis is doing. I don't have much hope for CivV patches - the patches so far seem to leave people underwhelmed and they have enough input as to what the problems are. Firaxis is simply milking a cash cow for whatever they can get out of it.