It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)RANT Civ 5 installlation(62 posts)(62 posts)
(62 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
This is my favourite topic
Posted January 09, 2014
avatar
pi4t: The most common complaint against Civ 5 now which I've seen is that it's much more casual: the 'marathon' game speed, which in Civ 4 would have lasted 2-3 weeks at least for a full game now lasts more like 1-2 days. A lot of the mechanics are simplified (unified happiness, removal of health, etc) and there are a lot more strategies which universally tend to work, rather than needing to think about what's needed in a particular situation. The diplomatic AI has also been accused of acting more like it's playing a game, rather than actually being those leaders (for instance it would - at least in previous versions - often declare war on its 'trusted ally' for no apparent reason, because they'd become too powerful). Naturally, whether these things are good or bad does depend rather on taste, but came as a large shock to the more experienced civilisation players, who understandably were expected something a little more in depth than Civ 5 turned out to be.

What cannot be denied, though, is that Civ 5 was the first game to implement DLC, at a rather poorer cost to content ratio than the expansion packs of it and previous civilisation games, meaning there's rather less content available without buying said DLC. It's also a fact that they only released the full modding tools which Civ 4 had for the game two years after its release, regularly promising it was nearly there in the meantime, leading many to accuse them of withholding it so they could sell their DLC without mods providing nearly identical content for free. That means that the people who might have modded it were rather driven away, and the modding scene hasn't really developed to the level of Civ 4's (which is still going strongly, ironically helped by the lack of modding support in Civ 5). Finally, of course, Civ 5 is the first Civilisation game to be Steam based.

You'd be surprised how much hate there is for Steam on the civilisation forums. It's actually stronger than over here, in general!

Is that acceptable as a list of things which aren't objectively better or worse, but worth considering, and things which are objectively worse?
avatar
AFnord: It's true that Civ V is a bit more casual. I would not call that objectively better or worse though, as it's a matter of "which audience do you target?". To some degree, it has gone back to a more Civ 2-like state of complexity. With the expansions though, Civ V got a good amount more depth, something that it did lack before them. So while a bit less complex, it does feel like Civ V is at least as deep as previous Civ titles.

As for the AI, yes, it does feel a bit more gamey in how it works, and yes, that does remove a bit of the immersion. It is smarter though (the Civ series has never really had a great AI. Better than Total War, mind you, but the Total War AI does not stumble over its own shoelaces simply because it has not yet figured out that it should wear shoes).

As for the DLC, I won't deny that many of the small DLCs were rather expensive for what they gave you. That being said, they are entirely optional, and it never did feel like the game was lacking content that was cut due to DLC. The extra civilizations are only really needed if you are actually interested in those specific civilizations, there are plenty of civilizations to pick from without them.

There were not a whole lot of things that were objectively worse in your list :P And most of the issues that Civ V had when it was new has been fixed. The AI could still need more work (but so could the Civ IV AI), and the game is not as well optimized as it should be (chalk that one up to "things Civ IV does objectively better").

avatar
trusteft: Also, why no love for ancient religions...I don't like that. Either you implement religion or don't.
avatar
AFnord: Religion in Civ V works in an entirely different way to how it worked in Civ IV. In V you get to chose what your religion's focus will be, and it impacts how it interacts with the surrounding world. As you get to design your own religion, you might very well do one based on an ancient religion (or why not Discordianism?)
That doesn't change what I said one bit.
Major religions of the past (and present though much less powerful) are out. Also no atheist option.
Posted January 09, 2014
avatar
AFnord: As for the DLC, I won't deny that many of the small DLCs were rather expensive for what they gave you. That being said, they are entirely optional, and it never did feel like the game was lacking content that was cut due to DLC. The extra civilizations are only really needed if you are actually interested in those specific civilizations, there are plenty of civilizations to pick from without them.
While I hate DLC, I will say that you could call Civ4's expansion packs DLC's. I think Civ V ended up doing them individually instead of a bundle of civs, which I did not like. As for not having the extra civs, I'd rather have them. I've played every civ in Civ4 at least once, and I rarely play the same one in consecutive games.
avatar
trusteft: That doesn't change what I said one bit.
Major religions of the past (and present though much less powerful) are out. Also no atheist option.
Exactly, if I am playing Vikings why would I want to choose one of the major religions and not the one the Vikings actually used with Thor, Loki, etc.
Post edited January 09, 2014 by jjsimp
Posted January 09, 2014
Civ IVs expansions were standalone games. Great package, bought them during the winter sales especially for Colonization.
avatar
jjsimp: Exactly, if I am playing Vikings why would I want to choose one of the major religions and not the one the Vikings actually used with Thor, Loki, etc.
Because the Vikings eventually converted to Christianity :P. Just kidding.
Posted January 09, 2014
avatar
pi4t: The most common complaint against Civ 5 now which I've seen is that it's much more casual: the 'marathon' game speed, which in Civ 4 would have lasted 2-3 weeks at least for a full game now lasts more like 1-2 days. ... snip
Not sure how I missed this thread. Do you have hands on experience with this aspect? If true this would make Civ 5 much more appealing to me. Much as I love it, the long playtimes of Civ4 meant restarting saved games was a huge pain for me. Eventually I just stopped playing all together.

The thing that kept me away from Civ5 up to now, is that I read how unlike previous instances the civs have a much more marked strategic flavour. In itself this is ok, almost similar to a fixed geography and starting position in a Paradox game. But reviews I saw stated it goes further, to almost not having flexibility in changing strategy based on the play - you pretty much need to choose and stick to a course from start to finish to beat the AI. Or resort to war and game the tactical AI inadequacies.

Bottom line, if the overall play time for a session is so much shorter than in Civ5, I'll be quite comfortable with diving in regardless.
Posted January 09, 2014
avatar
pi4t: The most common complaint against Civ 5 now which I've seen is that it's much more casual: the 'marathon' game speed, which in Civ 4 would have lasted 2-3 weeks at least for a full game now lasts more like 1-2 days. ... snip
avatar
Brasas: Not sure how I missed this thread. Do you have hands on experience with this aspect? If true this would make Civ 5 much more appealing to me. Much as I love it, the long playtimes of Civ4 meant restarting saved games was a huge pain for me. Eventually I just stopped playing all together.

The thing that kept me away from Civ5 up to now, is that I read how unlike previous instances the civs have a much more marked strategic flavour. In itself this is ok, almost similar to a fixed geography and starting position in a Paradox game. But reviews I saw stated it goes further, to almost not having flexibility in changing strategy based on the play - you pretty much need to choose and stick to a course from start to finish to beat the AI. Or resort to war and game the tactical AI inadequacies.

Bottom line, if the overall play time for a session is so much shorter than in Civ5, I'll be quite comfortable with diving in regardless.
I'm afraid I can't give first hand experience, as my only experience with the game is getting vanilla for free in a promotion from GMG a while back (presumably designed to encourage buying the expansions) , and playing a part of a game before deciding to try installing one of the largest mods, which brought it up to around Civ 4 vanilla in my mind. However, judging from how quickly a friend was able to complete games, it is significantly faster. This mostly comes about as a result of reduced content: there seemed to be around 4-8 technologies per era, for instance.

In the time since I posted that, I've thought of one or two other things I should warn you about: namely, a lot of the features in the game seem designed to hold you back and limit what you can do, rather than allowing new possibilities. Consequently, the game tends to rapidly lose the 'just one more turn' feel of its predecessors. Gaining another population point, for instance, is something which was going to happen before too long in some city and - due to the nature of the happiness cap - it isn't really noteworthy that city X has got the next unit of population rather than city Y (although depending on your strategy, you may want to limit growth in some cities as much as possible, but that's another matter). In the previous games, gaining a point of population - especially early on - was something you'd eagerly wait for as it was almost always a good thing and an increase in the productive ability of your civilisation.
Posted January 09, 2014
avatar
pi4t: ...installing one of the largest mods, which brought it up to around Civ 4 vanilla in my mind.
Which mod was that? It probably would not make it feel like Civ4 for me, but it's worth a look.

I tried Civ3 last night, and I just can't get back into that archaic interface. I'm used to just clicking on the map to move my soldiers, but with 3 you actually had to select the move button and then click...too much of a hassle for me. I might have been able to put up with the dated graphics, but add in that extra step and it just wasn't worth it.
Posted January 09, 2014
You can't call yourself a Civ 4 player if you did not try Fall from Heaven 2 mod. That was probably the best mod that a civ game ever had. Other good mods for 4 are: Rhys and Fall of Civilizations ( not the one included in the Civ4, but the one that was further developed by the mod creator, a person that did the very same mo0d previously for Civ 2 and 3 ) or The Ancient Mediteranae.

Another point for Civ4, Firaxis did include some nice community mods in the expansions.

Extra bonus for Civ3: Joan of Arc as a french leader. The lady deserves to be a selection in any Civ game. After all, she saved a nation.
Post edited January 09, 2014 by wolfsrain
Posted January 09, 2014
avatar
pi4t: ...installing one of the largest mods, which brought it up to around Civ 4 vanilla in my mind.
avatar
jjsimp: Which mod was that? It probably would not make it feel like Civ4 for me, but it's worth a look.

I tried Civ3 last night, and I just can't get back into that archaic interface. I'm used to just clicking on the map to move my soldiers, but with 3 you actually had to select the move button and then click...too much of a hassle for me. I might have been able to put up with the dated graphics, but add in that extra step and it just wasn't worth it.
*Looks it up* Here.

Regarding your second comment, Civ 3 was my first real game, so I'm sure I'm biased towards it, but you don't need to click on the move button each time you want to move. If you hold down the left mouse button, and move the cursor INTO the tile you want to move to (from a different tile) then the movement arrow will appear. Release the mouse to move there. If you decide you don't want to move, you'll have to find somewhere the unit can't move (the sea, a non adjacent enemy, etc) and release the mouse there. Not exactly ideal, but significantly easier than clicking the button each time once you get the hang of it.
Posted January 12, 2014
People use the mouse for movement in Civ games? Keypad ftw.
Posted January 12, 2014
In Civ 5 the mouse is easy to use, while in the previous games, i find the keyboard a better control alternative.
Posted January 12, 2014
Save yourselves the trouble.

Don't ever buy Civ V!

All odd numbered versions of Civilization are crap.
Posted January 12, 2014
avatar
noncompliantgame: Save yourselves the trouble.

Don't ever buy Civ V!

All odd numbered versions of Civilization are crap.
Well, I wouldn't go so far as to call Civ 1 crap. Civ 3 wasn't that much fun. Civ 5 I haven't played because of Steam.
Posted January 12, 2014
avatar
noncompliantgame: Save yourselves the trouble.

Don't ever buy Civ V!

All odd numbered versions of Civilization are crap.
I can't figure out if you are kidding or not.

I never liked 1 but it wasn't crap. It had horrible load times on my ST, but still it was a solid game.

3, with all the expansions (ie Complete Edition) is a great strategy game, among the best.


4 which is an even number, I can't stand. But I do accept it is a good game.


I wish 5 didn't have steam as a requirement, but I guess that's what we should expect till Steam collapses or something.
Posted January 12, 2014
avatar
trusteft: 3, with all the expansions (ie Complete Edition) is a great strategy game, among the best.
Not to mention Alpha Centauri, which I found surprisingly good.
Posted January 12, 2014
sometimes I want tacos and sometimes I want pizza. the enjoyment of one does not exclude me from enjoying the other. I love each civ game for it's unique qualities <3

also, if you want to blame someone, blame the croutons who vote for steam with their dollar. without them the flapping-head dollar-jockeys running the big publishers wouldn't have any incentive to drive their lemmings off that cliff.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)RANT Civ 5 installlation(62 posts)(62 posts)
(62 posts)