I've heard words like this repeated several times, but never any detailed examples of what exactly this means. Experimentation and lateral thinking can still be done, with success and fun, in Civ V. IV had set paths to victory, you ever met the conditions and won, or didn't.
This says a lot. I think most of the V's detractors simply don't like the game on a personal level, and try to justify it on these forums with lists of ways that the game is bad. When really, they just don't have fun playing. Which is sad, I feel bad that we both waited so long for a game, and some are loving it, and some are hating it. But, it's just personal preference.
Well, I dont know for you. But for me in each game I start I know what I need to do for win in a diplomatic, cultural o domination way. It is very linial, you can experiment what can happen if you build one thing before or after another (lol) but that changes nothing, the path is established from the first turn. The game will not change because of the few variables that we have, there will not be an unexpected turn as could happen in civ4.