Only thing missing as others have pointed out is religion, really wish they had kept it other then that game is fantastic.
I didn't care about religion anyway.
However soundtrack is not quite on same level with Civ IV.
I am not what anyone would term a religious person, but to leave it out of a Civ game that starts at prehistoric times is just silly. How can they say that religions (and more importantly, religious differences) have not had a profound effect on our world?
Don't blame me, I voted for Pedro!
actually the no-stack feature is great and i wouldnt miss the old massstacks of death . It was really boring to just spam your units onto another stack and get spamed back.
The new fields look sweet but are nothing special and actually the consoly look of the interface isnt so nice.
The game is extremely unbalanced. I recommend holding off buying it until they've patched out those balance issues. The AI is also extremely stupid.
"Der Krieg ist eine bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln.
(War is merely the continuation of politics by other means.)
Played(better said labored with) demo and gameplay is really shallow with lots of missing features and oversimplified.There are 2 welcome editions , city states and 1 UPT, but it doesn't cover for huge list of missing things.
It's quite obvious that they are trying to streamline (read dumb down) game for console port(something that 2K is generally obsessed with 24/7)Looking what 2k did to Mafia II, Bio II and basebal series games i am not surprised at all.
This game is worth $19.99 at best if you really want to waste money on it.Or wait for missing features in form of multiple DLC's a la Mafia II.
Yep I think they just tried to be politically correct or make the game simpler/dumber.
After playing Paradox games I don´t really think I can get back to Civ. War exhaustion, religion, casus belli, dynasties, plus the fact that it´s in a real world map... sorry I´m too spoiled
Just on the patch side, there was an update, and since that update, gameplay has been *much* more stable.
There are also a lot less open spaces compared with previous Civs. You have to chop down a lot of forest and jungle.
Last edited by Simon Cashmere; October 04, 2010 at 08:36 AM.
My bookshelf is a hate blog.
Well, I actually liked the game and I wonder where all this negative is coming from. Civ5 is not that bad. It has its flaws, but every other game does as well.
Under the patronage of the honourable La♔De♔Da♔Brigadier Graham
Personally, I feel like I should've gotten Victoria II instead.
Disappointed, really.
Originally Posted by Dan the Man
Check out the TWC D&D game!
Message me on Discord (.akar.) for an invite to the Thema Devia Discord
Daughter, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan
I have played a massive amount of the demo- it's extremely addicitng. I think I'll wait till next summer to play this with friends and teachers, when the price has dropped and the massive amount of bugs have been fixed.
Religions for me, wasn't such a big deal, I'm kinda glad they dropped it and replaced the unrealistic open hand diplomacy system with a more hidden and deep diplo system.
If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Last edited by Defianc4; October 07, 2010 at 04:38 PM.
I've played lots of hours of Civ V and most of it feels like a civ game experience, which is very good. The "one more turn" syndrome is there allright.
The game is certainly far from polished. There are a ton of mionor annoying things everywhere, gameplay, sound, interface, graphics. Individually they mean little to nothing, but they all add up and sometimes cause a lot of frustration.
What is also specially unsettling is that the devs have intentionally removed certain features from the game, which have been along since Civ I (like selling/destroying city buildings).
There is one major problem imo at the momement: no matter the difficulty level, the AI fails miserably at combat even if it is one tech ahead of you and it outnumbers you 3-or more to 1. Given that the AI like to wage war in land-heavy maps (and fail to expand in sea-heavy maps, but that's another issue) it is quite tempting to pump-up your war machine and start bulldozing everything to reach a quick domination victory (conquest).
There are also several nice new features, which show promise, like:
1 unit per tile means that armies are much smaller than they used to be in revious civs and I find it very welcoming in terms of micomanagement.
The introduction of the social policies (sort of replaces government types) means that small empires will have a chance to victory.
What people tend to find most disappointing is that Civ V does not properly capitalise on the last version of Civ IV and its most popular mods, which took several long years to evolve. It seems as if the devs are trying to re-invent the wheel and go through the same long process, which may be the profitable way to go for them, but it is perceived as a step back by the fans of the series.
|--------------------------------------------------|
|Patience is a virtue. Indecision is a vice.|
|--------------------------------------------------|
Boy am I bummed out. Had a great civ going as the Romans, on the Indian subcontinent. I was playing the extra long option, and the year had progressed to 1964. I was building spaceship factories in 2 of my cities, and had great visions of winning via the space race option. Massive amounts of time invested.
And then, as I clicked over a turn, it CTD'd. Loaded it up, and again, same thing. I thought perhaps it might because Monctezuma and the Aztecs north of me saw my space advance as an extreme threat and attacked and overloaded my Aion capable computer. So I went thru and juggled a few things in my relationship with the Aztecs, clicked on the turn advance, and same darn thing.
Total waste of my invested time.
"oooh a gypsy wind is blowing warm tonight, sky is starlit and the time is right. Now you're telling me you have to go...before you do there's something you should know." - Bob Seger
Freedom is the distance between church and state.
Religion in civ IV was anoying, sumerian hindus? Where was the Sumerian panthenon or the roman one, Or the Greek, Or the celtic or germanic or scandinavian etc...
And in the end it was only really benificial to be Christian (huge gold bonus)
I'm glad it's gone! I don't want to be Jewish/hindu/Christian/islamic/budhist/confucian Sumeria or Persia or Babylonia
Zorohastrism is older then judaism and really the first monothëistic religion not Judaïsm
Some people on CFC complain about the classical blatant anachronisms in which Firaxis indulges (like Bismarck ruling Germany in 2000 BCE), but there's nothing much new, apparently.
Hexes, a lot of shortcomings -no stacking? no civ- and mostly they're leaving out a lot of space for modders to add to it instead of taking the time to sell a decent product by themselves. Feels… as posted above, unpolished. unfinished. Like they shipped it quickly, perhaps not to lose ground to StarCraft II?
Also, the AI is very stupid.
As for the price, it's a bit steep -blasted politicians fiddling with currency and daring to tax me!!- so I'll wait until it comes down a bit.
The tentacled horror from beyond my stars spoke, and von Neumann help me, in my madness, I understood its words.
СИНДИКАТ!
Dè a tha Montrose Mór ag ràdh?
Heavy Metal will never die. - Sir Christopher Frank Carrandini Lee.
I was so excited to hear that they were coming out with Civ V. The trailers and such that I saw/read made it sound well-worth the money. Now after some of your comments, I'm not sure...hmmm...what to do? what to do?
Do what I'm doing: wait a bit until price comes down, then swoop in for the kill!!!
The tentacled horror from beyond my stars spoke, and von Neumann help me, in my madness, I understood its words.
СИНДИКАТ!
Dè a tha Montrose Mór ag ràdh?
Heavy Metal will never die. - Sir Christopher Frank Carrandini Lee.