Civilization 5 Announced

[scooter]

I have yet to see one real reason why I should buy this. I can't even see one thing where my reaction was "wow that would be nice!" There were like a dozen of those things for me leading up to Civ4. I've read numerous interviews with Schafer and I find myself disagreeing with a lot of what he says...

When the demo is released, I'll download it and try it. If it doesn't blow me away, I'll happily stick with Civ4.

[T-hawk]

Just for comparison, I went mining back to 2005...

250 posts in one thread isn't "endless". CFC has 170,000 posts in their Civ 5 forums.

[Cull]

And meanwhile somebody is pushing for a subforum in Civ V already in Site Feedback. We have one thread sitting under 300 posts. CFC is bloating over with the Civ V talk. Below is the OP for the thread pushing for a Civ V subforum. This was back in July FYI.

I'd love to spend more time in the Civ 5 forum to talk about the game, but it seems like every time I do, the experienced is ruined by people denouncing Steam, Firaxis, PC gaming in general, the idea of DLCs, etc. Some of these may be valid topics, but would it be possible to segregate the threads about the game itself from threads about the marketing and distribution? Maybe a new subforum for that purpose?

I don't mind running into people who are disappointed about their favourite civ not being included or skeptical that some of the mechanics will be an improvement, because at least these people are talking about the game. But honestly, I DON'T CARE how the game is sold and I'm sick of hearing about it, especially from people who swear they aren't going to buy the game anyway. Why are they even posting in a forum about a game they aren't going to buy? :dunno:

I will be very disappointed if this sort of discussion is still prevalent after the game is released when I'll be excited to jump in and talk about my game play experience. I understand some people are quite passionate about these other topics, but their vitriol is spoiling the fun of the forum for me.

[SevenSpirits]

250 posts in one thread isn't "endless". CFC has 170,000 posts in their Civ 5 forums.

To be fair, they have a few more people. Speculative opinion posts are proportional to the number of people, not the actual amount of stuff to be discussed.

[Jowy]

Just for comparison, I went mining back to 2005...

We still don't discuss, we whine

[Swiss Pauli]

All of this is a shame, because I feel like there's a good game in the Civ5 design, but wow did they ever screw up some of the details. Just not feeling too good about this one, guys. Too much Civ: Colonization and Civ: Revolutions, not enough Civ4.

I think you're being a prejudiced by your Civ4 experience: yes, it would be a disaster if the Civ4 AI were back, but that AI was intentionally kept weedy in BtS where Blake had made strategic improvements in his BetterAI project that didn't make the cut.

The city states mechanic is either make nice (bribe, kill barbs, supply resources) or conquer, so it's at least two dimension rather than one Civ4 diplo was too dominated by religion, and undermined by the seemingly transparent system having certain hidden modifiers that do little but trip up the player who hasn't seen the code.

Colonization was a dreadful cash in: a game with Civ4's engine simply shouldn't come down to an 'end-of-level-boss-battle'. I can't comment on CivRev because I've not played that game.

I'm obviously more optimistic about the implementation of the radical re-design than you, but the proof will be in the playing.

[HouHou]

Man there are a lot of rose-tinted glasses for Civ4 here! Remember, this ist he game that produced such "fun" concepts as:

* Whip-chop being the go-to strategy for high level play.

* Infinite anarchy + Praetorians for domination wins.

* Suicide siege. I understand why it's there, but it makes zero real-world sense. .

* The Great Lighthouse. Who playtested this wonder?

* Being in the lower half of the scoreboard and trading with the lower half of the scoreboard will not incur WFYABTA, and sharing <8 tiles with a neighbor reduces the chance you will become a land target. (These concepts aren't bad, but they are OPAQUE unless you start digging into the XML. For all of the moaning regarding Civ 5's lack of diplomatic modifiers, we shouldn't forget that Civ4 had a lot of poorly-explained concepts as well.)

I've had a ton of fun with Civ 4, but I think it's ok to admit some of its faults.

- The city-states really bug me. So the whole game mechanic there is based around bribing them with gifts of gold? Really? That's your vaunted new diplomatic system?!? Umm, there had better be more to it than that, because the Civ4 modifier system was light-years ahead of this.

Wait, you're talking about the system that allows such fun things as:

1) Monty & Shaka randomly declaring on you from half a continent away

2) Situations where your continent is full of religious strife and backward tech while the other continent is sharing one religion and happily singing kumbaya.

3) A Civ that is "Friendly" to you voting for a Civ that it is "Pleased" with. (This is an especially egregious example of the Civ 4's system lack of transparency).

4) 100 hammers giving potentially 100% immunity to war. Fun, but a little gamey right?

I am not down with the puppet states either. So my "reward" for capturing an enemy city is either a giant happiness penalty, or an inability to control the city's production. Umm, thanks but no thanks there. The whole vassal/puppet idea is one that sounds like fun, until you realize how stupid the AI is at controlling city production.

a) You can build a courthouse to "assimilate" the populace.

b) Civ 4 had "We want to join the Motherland!" Isn't that the same concept?

c) Speaking of "rewards," what about Civ4 Renaissance+ wars, where your reward for capturing one city was...19 tiles of opponent's culture swarming over your city, thus making it useless unless you chain-conquered everything?

[Kylearan]

Hi,

I can't even see one thing where my reaction was "wow that would be nice!"

It's obviously a matter of taste, but using hex tiles and an AI that is designed to win instead of trying to simulate a historic civilization are two fantastic changes in my opinion, which would be enough for me to buy the game. The only thing is that many games claim they have a good AI that tries to win which most of the time turns out to be pre-release BS, so I'll wait and see about that. But hex tiles are great!

-Kylearan

[Adlain]

I hate to pop your bubble but:

2) Situations where your continent is full of religious strife and backward tech while the other continent is sharing one religion and happily singing kumbaya.

This is called REAL LIFE - sure there are other factors aswell, but religion really could mean the differance between freindly and weary/ dis trustful Relasionships between countries in the past.

[SevenSpirits]

I hate to pop your bubble but:



This is called REAL LIFE - sure there are other factors aswell, but religion really could mean the differance between freindly and weary/ dis trustful Relasionships between countries in the past.

I don't speak for HouHou but that was a list of dumb/unfun game mechanics. Realism didn't enter into it as far as I can tell. No bubble bursting required!