1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Why not a new series?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Ignorant Teacher, Sep 28, 2010.

  1. UKScud

    UKScud Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    170
    Location:
    Hamilton, NZ

    No seriously...it'll never happen.

    Why do you think that games like Dwarf Fortress exist, an ascii style deep strategy game. That will never have the money pumped into it to produce such a "pretty" product as Civ5, and it has been in beta limbo for years and years. Still a damn fine game though.

    Your average minded person doesn't want to think. Seriously, I'm a school teacher...I see the desire to be spoonfed education in at least 80% of the kids I teach, and they'd be happy if I let them (not that I do).

    The modders here are great though, and the framework that they've been presented with is going to be a fantastic game in two or three years time.
     
  2. UKScud

    UKScud Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    170
    Location:
    Hamilton, NZ
    Yes I was...don't be so touchy.

    I apologize if it came across the wrong way.
     
  3. dannythefool

    dannythefool Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    657
    I like civrev too for its shorter games, but come on, you were complaining about ai and diplomacy, which is both much worse in civrev than in civ v. The difficulty level, too.
     
  4. Ignorant Teacher

    Ignorant Teacher Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    1,467
    Me too. I even co-hosted the Immortal University series on this board along with TMIT for a while. And I strongly disagree with your following statement:
    I apologize. There was a poster back there on the 1st page that was rude so I was mad.
     
  5. Palfouri

    Palfouri Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    85
    Why is it that, after spending some time reading the Civ IV threads from release, I see the a lot same complaints about that game being dumbed down as well? And now apparently it's a masterpiece of complex strategy gaming?

    Do people just have selective memories or something?
     
  6. charon2112

    charon2112 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    YES! that is exactly right. It's always this way around a new Civ release.
     
  7. Korias

    Korias Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    605
    Perhaps you can explain how the AI has not evolved? Is it the lack of a definitive relations screen that shows where you stand with that leader, or is it the way the AI handles itself? As I've said before, I've had many situations where the AI performs significant leaps and bounds that I never saw it attempt in Civ4, and each game is an increasingly different experience due to the way the AI's flavors fluctuate within a certain range.
     
  8. Ignorant Teacher

    Ignorant Teacher Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    1,467
    I wouldn't know because I only got Civ 4 when they had released BTS due to not having good enough hardware. But please note that my point is not that BTS is the apex of TBS gaming. It is that I was expecting a surge in complexity and game features and, although we got some interesting new features, such as the 1upt, in general, my impression is that the game was oversimplified to please new customers who aren't used to thinking strategically.
     
  9. Korias

    Korias Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    605
    :lol: Really? Civ 5 has made me think a lot more about my strategies than Civ 4 ever did. In Civ4, one could swap between victory types up until a certain point, but could always swap over should one become easier to achieve than the current plan. In Civ 5, I've had to plan when and how I purchase my Policies to maximize the way my empire functions, I've had to think about when to Annex as oppose to Raze or Puppet (Which was NEVER an issue in Civ 4: It was always just straight Annexation and then buildings to recoup maintenance costs.), and most importantly, I've had to think about what I'm building so I can focus on what I want to build in the future. Should I build a barracks when I need just one more library for the Great Library? Should I plant my city one tile away from desert to get Solar Panels?

    Civ 5 has a very deep strategic layer. It's just a matter of understanding that it's not the same system as Civ 4.
     
  10. Jester Fool

    Jester Fool Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,181
    Location:
    Katy, TX
    Get over it. Freedom of speech and expression are cherished in America. You do not have to like it (or read it for that matter). Point in case, I do not agree with your opinion, but I WILL defend your right to express it TO THE DEATH. Freedom means you can express unpopular opinions without fear of censorship (or threat of death from Government goon squads).
    P.S. Glad you like CiV
     
  11. Biz_

    Biz_ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Messages:
    482
    that's the reason civ is good

    each game is not just newer with shinier graphics. it's a completely different system with unique strategy of its own
     
  12. Jester Fool

    Jester Fool Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,181
    Location:
    Katy, TX
    @ Korias - No, you are a troll. How dare you accuse ExCivFan of doing exactly what you are doing. He expressed an OPINION. It is his right. He did NOT insult anybody. He kept it civil. You are not the center of the world (or me for that matter). You need to learn to live without Communism. I defend his right to voice his opinion just as much as your right to voice your opinion. What's fair is fair.
     
  13. charon2112

    charon2112 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    The only strategy in IV was who could create the biggest stack of units and then bumping them together until one was whittled away. There is so much more strategy going on in V. In no way whatsoever was Civ dumbed down for anyone. It's not bad to cut features that aren't fun.

    As the narrator said in Civ IV when you researched engineering: "a designer knows when he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add..but when there is nothing left to take away."
     
  14. charon2112

    charon2112 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    not on a privately owned forum. You have no freedom of speech here whatsoever. The owners of this site can kick you off if they don't like what you have to say.
     
  15. mike_cf

    mike_cf Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Messages:
    88
    +1


    Here's my civ 5 strategy: build a small army while grabbing land,get luxuries, destroy the closest neighbours, usually ignore city-states, defeat anything in my path/growing up cities (depending on the victory i want) and ... that's it. You can say it's the same with civ 4, BUT in civ 5 is a walk in the park doing this on Emperor. In civ 4 I'm barely alive.

    And unhappiness isn't much of a problem when you have lots of luxuries lying around and lots of gold to buy colosseums/circuses etc. The problem at one point is that you play by yourself. Whenever you think the A.I is too advanced you just go for the capital or destroy a few cities to cripple it. And that in a dozen of turns or so. This stuff it's very hard to do in civ 4 (need string armies, maintenance is killing you, revolts, unhealth etc).
     
  16. Korias

    Korias Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    605

    :lol: Well played sir, turning my own logic against me.

    Let's take a step back for a second and compare the two arguments.

    ExCivFan's entire post is comprised solely an opinion. He provides no adequate reasoning to his statement, no examples of what systems are failing, no apparent proof to support his claim. While I agree that he kept it civil and did not insult anyone, his post provides no value to the discussion and at the same time riles those who have a different opinion. It's called flamebaiting, and it's a form of trolling.

    As for my post, I think you're over exaggerating here. Not once did I claim I was the center of the world, nor did I ever bring up Communism (Which my post is clearly not affiliated with.) As it's been brought up before: Freedom of speech is all well and good but here on the forums, which are privately owned, we abide by certain rules. The right to free speech is not one of them.
     
  17. Doskias51

    Doskias51 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    63
    Location:
    VIDOR, TX, USA
    What I think most people do not realize is that Firaxis has laid down the base program for us. What we see is not all we get per say. I personally believe what they have done is give us the basic for the community to be able to mod it to hell or heaven whichever is their taste. With Firaxis breaking down the game a little has opened more doors and added easier access to the community to make the game their own. I believe that is their main goal with this sequel as well as something themselves can build on. Not everyone can be pleased. From a business stand point, they also did what is best for their marketplace as a whole. Make a game that is accessible to everyone. Let the hardcore players tweak it to their dreams with a baseline of features that can be altered and built upon with not a lot of conflict. Basically Firaxis has coded the base of the game as a reference and allowed the community to create it to their needs unlike none have seen before.
     
  18. Hogar313

    Hogar313 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2010
    Messages:
    63
    Location:
    Kraljevo, Serbia
    Several observations of mine about this new game that I'm totally indifferent about:

    1. It can be compared to Empire: Total War. It's all nice and shiny, but it has so many stability, framerate, and a whole other lot of issues that ruin the gameplay silently in the background. That I don't like, and it doesn't keep me addicted like Civ 4.

    2. There's nothing wrong with straying from the regular clichés, but too much is too much. One unit per tile? Okay, if this was a tactical part of Total War or some other real time strategy game I'd not be surprised, but Civ? A civ tile represents a whole bunch of land in reality. Limiting it to one unit just overly ADDS to the micromanagement and does not simplify anything at all. I like complex games, not dumbly complicated ones.

    3. Too much hype about combat. When was Civ about combat only? Practically, the main thing you do in V is fight, fight fight. Who cares if we get hexes or squares? Does it deepen anything? Does it make the game more fun? Perhaps, but for console and basic strategy players, not for somebody who wants a nice and complex, yet simplified game that will take hours from his life. I, for example, cannot be held by a game like Supreme Ruler 2020 or Superpower II for too long because they're overly complex in some aspects and I just want to focus on the fun side of them. But I also don't want to play Heroes of Might and Magic, because the game is boring and childish to me (no hate, my opinion and only an example!). So I get Civ and play along... At least it was like that up to this point.

    4. City states are just absurd... "Look at me, I am just hyped about medieval/renaissance era at the moment so I'm gonna sacrifice the entire game to make it fun to myself while my obsession lasts!" That is practically what Shafer did. City states are something that I would expect from a mod, not a vanilla game. I mean, they're okay for some time, but it gets boring to have limited, small countries that just stand there with such a limited use in gameplay that they become a nuisance.

    5. Removing core game elements that were fun in the previous game is not a good move. Why do I care if somebody is not content with seeing Muslim Americans or Hindu French? It is cool, was cool, stayed cool, will ALWAYS be cool. Also, who told you that cottages were a bad idea, huh? Instead of just limiting their overpowered use in Civ 4 you removed them completely, which pretty much dumbed down the game and made the map of nations in it empty and soulless.

    6. Less buildings, leaders, nations and units don't really contribute to my experience at all.

    7. Non-imaginative way the developers played with technology. With such beautiful graphics, why can't we see nightfall, storms, rain or fog while battling our enemies when that is such an important aspect?

    Now the good parts.

    8. Graphics are really beautiful.

    9. Production values are superb and can be compared to that of Starcraft 2. Sound, animation, everything is perfect. 10/10

    10. Hexes, though really not a needed change are very welcome to the game since they add much smoother and prettier maps and change the gameplay mechanics. Now this was not a bad idea, but it alone is put down by many other issues that can't be tolerated.

    Well, I guess that's it. I'll update if I make up my mind about anything else I've noticed. Yes, as you can see, I didn't like the game very much. I don't think I will ever like it at all either. Until the time comes when Civ 6 will be more like Civ 4 with Civ 5 graphics and based on RoM:AND mechanics, I will be content playing Civ 4. I'm not saying you shouldn't play 5, just saying I probably won't. I'm speaking for myself, what I noticed, what I like/dislike... Peace...
     

Share This Page