Why are people so surprised at the state of Civ V?

[Nog]

I ask not in a rhetorical way but...well...out of genuine curiosity.

I've never been able to get into Civ 3 or Civ 4 even though I bought both. Too micro-oriented and way too many levers and pulleys for what I find fun as entertainment. Also, I've been playing online games for so long that playing against a computer - any computer, seems so boring.

When I heard a new Civ was coming out, I was hot and heavy into SC2. I've already acheived the 1000 win stat with SC2 so needless to say I've played it...a little. Ok, a rediculous amount of time and wanted/needed a break so thought I'd try Civ 5.

I love it compared to the last two and am finally addicted myself 'cept for now all the AI shortcomings are making it hard at times.

That said, I never looked into the game at all - just bought it based on the review scores (high-level, never really read them) and previous franchise. I had no expectations.

But is it not fair to assume they had a beta for this and an open beta at some point that everyone had to know what was coming? Or at least all the people who seem so sad.

Or, I'm guessing, since this game has no real online element and multiplayer essentially doesn't work, that this game was only shown at E3 and the like?

Did they not spell out the specifics during these live demos and you could watch gameplay?

I realize the AI couldn't be measured and so I'm guessing there was no closed or open beta and everyone just thought this would be like...what exactly?

People couldn't be basing their expectations on a previous version because this is a new one, not an expansion.

 

[kaltorak]

It's the fifth game of one of the best game series ever. The problem is not it's not good. But when you have played the other 4 civs, you expect a almost 10/10 game, and when you get a 8/10 game, which is good, you are still dissapointed.

 

[blizzrd]

It's the fifth game of one of the best game series ever. The problem is not it's not good. But when you have played the other 4 civs, you expect a almost 10/10 game, and when you get a 8/10 game, which is good, you are still dissapointed.

I agree with you in all aspects except for the 8/10 bit. I put Civ5 at about 4/10. I like to be a glass-half-full so I looked for the positives when I started playing Civ5. One point for the hex system, two points for the graphics (which are really good except for rivers which can't be seen properly) and one point for the concepts of cultural acquisition of tiles. That is all that I find is new and interesting over what Civ4 BTS offered, which was 10/10 for mine.

Social policies are not as interesting as civics.
Basically no thought has gone into the tech tree.
City states are just simplistic ways of buying culture/food/military units for your entire civ with your spare cash.
Combat mechanics could be good, but the AI has no clue how to play and multiplayer is broken.

 

[PieceOfMind]

It's the fifth game of one of the best game series ever. The problem is not it's not good. But when you have played the other 4 civs, you expect a almost 10/10 game, and when you get a 8/10 game, which is good, you are still dissapointed.

Perhaps the real problem is in you expecting the game to be 10/10. Disappointment about a 8/10 game is something you bring upon yourself.

Think about it. It's still a good game, right? Then why be disappointed?

 

[Generals3]

Perhaps the real problem is in you expecting the game to be 10/10. Disappointment about a 8/10 game is something you bring upon yourself.

Think about it. It's still a good game, right? Then why be disappointed?

Good or bad, these are relative concepts . Remember when we used to consider 2d graphics good ? Now it's considered as bad because we expect more . Same goes with Civ V , if it were the first Civ i would most likely love it but now i had expectations based on the previous civ's .

 

[Nog]

I tried to Google and can't really get an answer which I guess is my answer.

I take it they had no public closed or open beta?

So basically the only thing the Civ community had was E3 reviews and whatever the publisher/developer chose to leak?

Sure, there were 'previews' by some 3rd parties but those are just hype machines anyway.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Good or bad, these are relative concepts . Remember when we used to consider 2d graphics good ? Now it's considered as bad because we expect more . Same goes with Civ V , if it were the first Civ i would most likely love it but now i had expectations based on the previous civ's .

Fair enough, but it's your choice what expectations you want to have. Or at least I think people can usually choose their expectations. I certainly try.