Civ5 is unappealing due to many reasons.
First, and that can be noticed by any careful player, even if coming to the franchise right now, the main design elements don't work.
1upt doesn't work to an extent that even the developers has to allow for stacking (civilian and military units, airplanes). But since 1upt was the main "new" idea they still forced it, causing the many flaws in unit coordination. Next to this, even unit cycling (although allegedly already having been improved) is so weak that the coordination becomes tedious.
This is something which even a novice player notices immediately.
Second, Civ5 doesn't keep any promises being made before release. No, there aren't battles in the countryside. No, there aren't "fronts". No, there isn't a competitive combat AI. No, there isn't a meaningful diplomacy. No, there isn't any "accessible" UI. No, the engine doesn't scale properly with processing/GPU power. No, there isn't good mp support. No, you cannot use your additional civs in mp.
These things are obvious to anyone who listened to the marketing hype before release date, even the novice player. And they are still issues two months after release, clearly indicating that the release was not "rushed", but the game design was weak from the very beginning.
Third, Civ5 has removed more things from the predecessor than added new things.
What was added does not work properly. City States don't add anything in terms of strategy or diplomacy. They are just a means to drop your money and get some stuff in return. One third of them is completely unbalanced, what the designers shamefully have already confirmed.
Civil Policies are a completely failed design element, too. Because of the weak way of initial implementation, the designers even have to reduce options for the human player in their desperate attempt to save them. This is another point in which they are changing original design, thus acknowledging that their design ideas don't work.
They even don't have any influence on "international" relationships.
Naval operations in total are a joke. Starting with century-long "battles" between units, followed by the most silly way of embarkation and thus sending units into their annihilation, due to the way in which the 1upt rules have been set up for naval operations, cross-ocean operations are only possible to be performed in meaningful way for the human player, mainly because the AI is not able to counter this even on an area with NO terrain modifiers.
Diplomacy is not only a complete desaster as being pointed out above, it also always plays the same way, regardless with which other civs you have to deal.
To make the game even more easy, placing of cities is next to completely meaningless. This becomes even more obvious due to the fact how the growing of the city's radius works, which doesn't fit to research nor any focus of said city.
Yet, to be fair, one has to admit that Civ5 actually was successful in a certain way. It was clearly designed for the ones who are not so intrigued in having to think much.
It is a game for the player who wants to be able to understand the game in five minutes and being able to finally get beyond chieftain level.
And there it successfully recruites its fanbase.
It lives on the "whoooahhh!" effect. Now, some players are finally allowed to master even the warlords level, thus making it very appealing to them.
In short, it could be very well named "Civ: the Losers' Revenge"
First, and that can be noticed by any careful player, even if coming to the franchise right now, the main design elements don't work.
1upt doesn't work to an extent that even the developers has to allow for stacking (civilian and military units, airplanes). But since 1upt was the main "new" idea they still forced it, causing the many flaws in unit coordination. Next to this, even unit cycling (although allegedly already having been improved) is so weak that the coordination becomes tedious.
This is something which even a novice player notices immediately.
Second, Civ5 doesn't keep any promises being made before release. No, there aren't battles in the countryside. No, there aren't "fronts". No, there isn't a competitive combat AI. No, there isn't a meaningful diplomacy. No, there isn't any "accessible" UI. No, the engine doesn't scale properly with processing/GPU power. No, there isn't good mp support. No, you cannot use your additional civs in mp.
These things are obvious to anyone who listened to the marketing hype before release date, even the novice player. And they are still issues two months after release, clearly indicating that the release was not "rushed", but the game design was weak from the very beginning.
Third, Civ5 has removed more things from the predecessor than added new things.
What was added does not work properly. City States don't add anything in terms of strategy or diplomacy. They are just a means to drop your money and get some stuff in return. One third of them is completely unbalanced, what the designers shamefully have already confirmed.
Civil Policies are a completely failed design element, too. Because of the weak way of initial implementation, the designers even have to reduce options for the human player in their desperate attempt to save them. This is another point in which they are changing original design, thus acknowledging that their design ideas don't work.
They even don't have any influence on "international" relationships.
Naval operations in total are a joke. Starting with century-long "battles" between units, followed by the most silly way of embarkation and thus sending units into their annihilation, due to the way in which the 1upt rules have been set up for naval operations, cross-ocean operations are only possible to be performed in meaningful way for the human player, mainly because the AI is not able to counter this even on an area with NO terrain modifiers.
Diplomacy is not only a complete desaster as being pointed out above, it also always plays the same way, regardless with which other civs you have to deal.
To make the game even more easy, placing of cities is next to completely meaningless. This becomes even more obvious due to the fact how the growing of the city's radius works, which doesn't fit to research nor any focus of said city.
Yet, to be fair, one has to admit that Civ5 actually was successful in a certain way. It was clearly designed for the ones who are not so intrigued in having to think much.
It is a game for the player who wants to be able to understand the game in five minutes and being able to finally get beyond chieftain level.
And there it successfully recruites its fanbase.
It lives on the "whoooahhh!" effect. Now, some players are finally allowed to master even the warlords level, thus making it very appealing to them.
In short, it could be very well named "Civ: the Losers' Revenge"