Why do people hate this game?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by lordsurya08, Oct 22, 2010.

  1. lordsurya08

    lordsurya08 class-A procrastinator

    Oct 22, 2010
    New to the forums, so hi to you all.
    New to Civ as well, so I can't really compare Civ 5 to the previous ones. I noticed that a lot of people disliked it, though I personally find it extremely addicting and worth the price. So why the hate? Not trollin', just curious.
  2. Vordeo

    Vordeo King

    Sep 24, 2010
    Some people hate it because of the numerous bugs and balance issues, and because the game just feels incomplete.

    Alot of people hate it because it isn't Civ IV.

    I like the game, for the record. It's not perfect or anything, and it does have numerous flaws, but it's still very enjoyable in spite of all that. I also have every confidence the gameplay issues will be addressed with patches.

    Edit: Also, welcome to the forums!
  3. Soronery

    Soronery Prince

    Oct 3, 2010
    I never played the Civ series but I think Civ V is a great game. Right now, it just needs to be patched up a bit.
  4. Biz_

    Biz_ Prince

    Aug 28, 2010
    because it's a much more competitive game, but without challenging opponents it isn't fun

    the AI is really really bad
  5. Akka

    Akka Moody old mage.

    Nov 14, 2001
    Facing my computer.
    People hate it because it's a much inferior game than its predecessors, soiling the spirit of one of the few franchise that was, up to now, very constant in quality.
    It's also a dumbed down, buggy and badly designed game that lacks immersion and is pretty shallow in term of strategy.
  6. Kylome

    Kylome Chieftain

    Jun 28, 2007
    It is like playing an extremely slow, poor man's version of SC2. Except SC2 has more diplomacy.
  7. Morningcalm

    Morningcalm Keeper of Records

    May 7, 2007
    People like me had expectations that Civ 5 would at least match near the quality of Civ 4, and the innovations they had planned for 5 sounded exciting so I preordered it. Was a bit disappointed by what I found. Lots of rough edges--not just major things like bugs, stability issues and faulty AI, but small things like unfinished UI, missing entries in the Civilopedia, missing replay features (which ALL the Civ games up until 4 had btw), etc etc. Just feels unfinished. And diplomacy is a complete shambles. All the AI hate on you.
  8. Ashwind

    Ashwind Warlord

    Dec 8, 2005
    Perhaps 'hate' is the wrong term to use. Personally, I don't hate it. But I find that it is missing the element of 'fun'. I'm still playing it but it does not engage me as much as Civ4 and 3 did.

    Maybe after some patches, it'll get better.

    A lesson in only buying games after they are out for a while.
  9. Becephalus

    Becephalus King

    Nov 30, 2005
    I am a long time player (1991) who thinks the game is fun and made some good design decisions.

    Right now the AI badly needs work though, and there are a lot of balancing issues. Hopefully it will all be squared away and working in 6 months, like most PC games.
  10. Gaspar~

    Gaspar~ Warlord

    Jan 8, 2006
    Quincy, MA
    For me, I think its because I've never loved a game instantly quite the way I loved Vanilla Civ4. I'm not saying Vanilla Civ4 was the best of the series, just that it so completely blew away my expectations and solved so many of my issues with the prior games in the series. Civ5 at release has basically had the exact opposite effect. My expectations were very high based on how much I enjoyed Civ4 and I'm just appalled by the blatant and obvious lack of balance and testing. Not to mention the fact I can't play two games in a row without a CTD.

    In short, the answer is expectations. Civ4's success made expectations for Civ5 enormous. For many long time Civvers, Civ5 tremendously failed at meeting those expectations.
  11. Namel

    Namel Chieftain

    Sep 27, 2010
    On these forums this seems to be by far most common reason. Almost always people's idea of fixing anything here is changing Civ V to exact copy of Civ IV.

    I think biggest problem currently is horrible AI and somewhat unfinished interface. I hope they concentrate on fixing these instead of removing all new innovation like Civ IV fanatics on these forum demand.
  12. Saarud

    Saarud Warlord

    Aug 24, 2004
    Totally agree. I am sure that when AI are fixed many of the problems will disappear as a bad AI reflects on every part of the game.

    I don't know about others but myself I haven't played a unmodded CIV 4 game since a month or so after the release of CIV 4. I have always modded the game to make it more fun to me and later on when good mods such as FFH 2 and RoM 2 existed there was never no need for me to play unmodded CIV 4 game again.

    It's the same thing for me in CIV 5. Many of the thing's I think could be made more fun for me I mod to make it more fun. I have realized that in the end I will be able to make a much more fun game in CIV 5 than I ever could play in CIV 4. Firaxis MUST fix the AI though. If AI aren't fix I will join the hate group I think... nah I could never hate a game. ;)
  13. fantsu

    fantsu Prince

    May 24, 2009
    I hate it, not because it is bad compared to all the previous games, but because I used $50 to it.

    - Not it just doesn't look poor compared to Civ4, but because the game just doesn't work like Civ game supposed to be. Any other strategy is useless compared to warmongering.
    - AI is horrendous, Domination is the only way to go, even AI doesn't know how to win otherwise. Diplomacy doesn't work at all. Even if you try to be friends with somebody, he will betray you (him being more powerful) or attack for some other unknown reason (if you are too much ahead).
    - Most of the buildings are totally useless.
    - There is no balance at all.
    - Tile yields don't work, trading posts are always the way to go.
    - City spamming works in this game.
    - GDR.
    - Simplified on every front (less techs, units, wonders, buildings, improvements, resources, less leaders and civilizations, no religion, no espionage, no sliders, no health, no companies, no trading of techs or maps and so on).
    - Tech tree pretty much have only two lanes to go, war or peace, and it is broken also (GDR without robotics, infantry without rifling, printing press without writing, chariot archers without archery, knights without iron, war chariots without horses, useless future tech and so on)
    - Multiplayer doesn't work (mostly) and it is totally missing important functions (e-mail, working hotseat...).
    - Tons of bugs and exploits.
    - Civilopedia is a wreck.
    - Social Policies are just plain bad, no chance to change them later on, they said that it would be "unrealistic", 'cause Americans would never change to Communism... not that there hasn't been any other countries that have changed it or their form of government.
    - No overflow beakers.
    - AI cheat in happiness.
    - Tons of stupidities, like roads, that doesn't work at all like they should be.
    - Loading times between turns.
    Ahhh... I don't want to make any complete list, you can find many of these around this forum.
  14. Samuil

    Samuil Warlord

    Sep 22, 2008
    TO put is simply - I love the game, but hate the AI - its very stupid :)

    I no longer have to make a huge army to defend myself as the AI does not know how to use his forces and throws them to the slaughter one by one... (Apart from the english, who did take care to have their longbows 3 tiles from my units... they were the only ones that gave me casualties to worry about)
  15. tm01xx

    tm01xx Chieftain

    Sep 25, 2010
    Poor game design, poor graphic, poor programming.

    This is absolutely an embarrassment to all games developers in the industry!
  16. Megatherion

    Megatherion Chieftain

    Aug 28, 2004
    Germany, Rhine, Loreley
    Are there other innovations than new ones?

    OT: Not true. Most people seem to like hexes and 1upt - which really were innovations (for a Civ game).
    But there are numerous other reasons they dislike ciV. Just look at the list above.
  17. Osetjka

    Osetjka Gondorian Armor Command

    Jun 18, 2007
    Why do I hate it? I think this quote sums my sentiment quite nicely:

    "For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

    What little hope that I had of the developers "fixing" the game died when I read that interview about "streamlining" ciV down for the mass market. :(
  18. DiabolicX

    DiabolicX Chieftain

    Aug 5, 2007
    San Jose, CA
    I applaud you for typing all this out. Now go make copies and put it on all the desks of the guys at firaxis. Make haste! :D
  19. Psyringe

    Psyringe Scout

    Dec 7, 2001
    Berlin, Germany
    I wouldn't say hate, just a lot of disappointment. For me, the situation is like this: I expected a game that put a high focus on accessibility. I expected a game that would be less complex than Civ4:BtS. And I also expected a game that I probably wouldn't like as much as I liked Civ4, simply because Civ4 matched my personal preferences extremely well, so much so that it'd be unlikely to get the same sort of match two times in a row. Hence, my expectations for Civ5 weren't particularly high. I expected an accessible, enjoyable game that I probably wouldn't like as much as Civ4, but that would still be fun to play.

    What surprised me is by how much the game fell short of these rather low expectations. Instead of making the game accessible, they created a convoluted UI that hides information from the player when he needs it, and requires people to click their way through various hidden sections to get the data he wants. They made a lot of questionable design choices with even more questionable reasons behind it (you have to set your policies in stone, as if it wasn't historically plausible to have nations radically and quickly switch their ideals, as if the French revolution or Nazi Germany never happened; rival leaders will act out of character because they "play to win", etc.). They focused on wargaming and delivered the game with a broken AI that cannot wage wars. There's a lot to be disappointed about, some of which may be fixed by patches (the AI will certainly improve), some of which may be remedied by expansion (I expect the first expansion to have a strong focus on the "builder" playing style, because these are frankly shafted by the current design), but some of the design decisions look so fundamental to me that I don't think they can be fixed in any iteration of Civ5. Perhaps in a mod, though the viability of this depends on how well the AI can be adapted to a playing style it wasn't designed for.

    Also, since you're asking for "reasons for the hate", there's this odd problem that valid criticism about the game's shortcomings keeps being marginalized and derided by trying to sweep it away with generalized "the critics just wanted another Civ4" comments. You can see this in this very thread. I don't think it's very respectful towards fellow forumers to continually misrepresent their opinions this way, and I think this technique does indeed contribute to the "hate", since of course the critics then feel compelled to clarify that this is NOT the sole reason of the criticism.

    Anyway, I hope I answered your question. Since you're enjoying Civ5, I'm happy for you, have fun with it. :)
  20. troytheface

    troytheface Deity

    Mar 26, 2002
    few hate the game

    many cling to nostalgia as content and write with pathos

    the first taste may have been four, and people get older

    i suppose you could hate chess, but i never have heard of someone saying that

    maybe video games are different in the sense that somehow people feel like they help manufacture the peices

    the evidence is clear- Civ4 , tired, staggering, loaded with mods like a thin man carrying too much luggage. Civ5, heir apparent,
    the modern atomic version of the new millenium for nuclear fisson gamers of tommorrow

Share This Page