Will Civ V be better than Civ IV?

[MAHRana]

True.

 

[feelotraveller]

It will definitely be better. Hexs, brilliant. Bigger cities, fabulous. No more stupid stacks, excellent. Combat outside of cities, stupendous. Real tactical battles, got to love it. And there will be so much more.

 

[Willem]

The fact that Steam will be mandatory already makes it worse than Civ 4 for me, since I won't be buying it.

 

[PeterWimsey]

I think it's impossible to answer this question. I loved Civ I and II, and while I was initially a fan of III, I found after playing it for a few weeks that it just didn't grip me the way that I and II did...and I'm still not sure why; I certainly liked the graphical improvements.

So I laid off of civ for years, and only recently got IV. I've been playing IV for about a month now and find that it has a similar addictive quality as I and II, which is very cool.

I'm looking forward to V quite a bit, especially the 1upt combat system - I think that will be a great improvement - but we won't really know how good the game is until we see how all of the elements fit together.

 

[MAHRana]

The thing is that every Civ game has been relatively good so far and the changes made in each of them really added to the game in a good way.

 

[Alki]

I got hooked on Civ (1) and think every game has been better than the last.

 

[MAHRana]

But do you expect a major improvement in that case?

 

[MrBullterrier]

I hate chocolate.

Suddenly your nickname makes sense...
Also, I think that Civ5 will just be a different expirience. They are changing a lot of things from the old games, so it might turn out there won't be any standard to which we could compare it. Whatever the endresult, there isn't a game in the series, which doesn't have a good deal of replayabilty value in it, so I'm guessing I'll like it regardless of how it stands to the rest of the franchise.

 

[Honorable_Pawn]

Suddenly your nickname makes sense...
Also, I think that Civ5 will just be a different expirience. They are changing a lot of things from the old games, so it might turn out there won't be any standard to which we could compare it. Whatever the endresult, there isn't a game in the series, which doesn't have a good deal of replayabilty value in it, so I'm guessing I'll like it regardless of how it stands to the rest of the franchise.

Chocolate sucks.

I'd much rather have a nice hamburger or Italian Sausage.

 

[MrBullterrier]

Chocolate sucks.

Dear God, it's contagious!!

 

[Alki]

But do you expect a major improvement in that case?

Not sure I expect a major improvement, I'm pretty happy with what I have already but I doubt I'll go back and play 4 after I have my grubbies on 5.

 

[deanej]

IMO civ4 will be better. War and diplomacy will be a LOT more difficult in civ5, especially if you don't have a mind for tactics. I also have concerns with modding - it looks like they're going back to the civ3 system - ease over power. I'm neutral on everything else we know about right now.

 

[Rusty Edge]

If the definition of Civ IV includes patches, expansions, and mods, I think it's not only the greatest Civ ever, but the greatest computer game of all time.


Civ V could easily do worse. I'm excited about hexes, ranged combat, the end of SoD, unprecedented modabillity. I'm concerned about the game becoming less epic and too tactical, day 0 DLC ( and possibly more to follow ) potentially dividing PBEM, GOTM, succession games,etc., and modding audiences.

Hopefully they will have meaningful explanations at E3.

 

[Honorable_Pawn]

Dear God, it's contagious!!

What!?!

Are you craving a nice juicy hamburger too?

mmmmm.....hamburgers.

 

[Darth Caesar]

If the definition of Civ IV includes patches, expansions, and mods, I think it's not only the greatest Civ ever, but the greatest computer game of all time.

WHOO!!! No words about Civ IV have ever been so True!!!

 

[Jayrad]

I could live with civ 4 or even 3's graphics its the gameplay and modability that i look at

 

[Rusty Edge]

WHOO!!! No words about Civ IV have ever been so True!!!

Thank You!

I'll allow that you and I, and everyone at CFC may not be entirely objective on the issue.

 

[Centurio]

Well, let's look at the difference.

Here is Civ 4:

You seem to have a tank on your crotch. Or is there a crotch on your tank?

Honestly, I liked the art styles and appearance of Civ III more than those of Civ IV. Something appeals to me about sprite based graphics. On the other hand, I really hope that each faction will have accurate units, and that the Romans and Greeks won't have the same freaking architecture to their cities. I saw some of the Aztec stuff online and it looks great, but here's to hoping for faction specific units (Aztecs and Mayans look wrong with European mace-men and British architecture all over their cities) and more organic terrain and believable leader-heads. Don't get me wrong, what Civ IV had was great, but it still calls for great improvements. Other than that, I liked Civ IV's game-play as much as that of Civ III, and additions like Capitulation for diplomacy and unit promotions were more than welcome. The Great People system was also ingenious and added a great layer of depth to gameplay; however, I feel as they should try to limit Great People names to within their respective cultural borders: it's a little off-putting to see Horace being born in Guangzhou and Du Fu being born in Brundisium.

 

[MAHRana]

That's what I was thinking just today!
(The GP names)

 

[TorontoCivFan4]

Guys, when Civ V comes out, it will have been almost exactly 5 years since Civilization IV was released. They've had plenty of time to develop a truly revolutionary (and better) product, and I have faith that they've capitalized on it.