Now before you start hatin' on the hater, lemme just say I'm a huge fan of the Civ series. But now that I've bought Civ 5 I must say it seems worse than Civ 4. I've played it for about 2 days now and it just seems a little too simple/easy and boring/repetitive to play. I've made it to 1000AD and all I've done is 1) Defend against annoying barbarians, 2) Build cities and improve them. Done. I don't need to make units because no one has attacked me since I wiped out the barbarians, the cities seem to function fine without too many improvements, and even without them I seem to be streaming ahead of all the other players, city states are pretty lame, diplomacy is stupid (the AI doesn't let you try to sweeten your deal - they just give you the best deal you're gonna get and that's that, unlike Civ 4 where they gave you a terrible deal and you had to try and find out what they could offer), etc etc.
So now I have an important decision, from you guys who have played the game longer than me. Should I return the game? I played Civ 4, and although eventually I did get bored of that after my millionth playthrough, I found features such as warfare, diplomacy and exploration to be more rewarding and logical than 5's. I still have that copy, so I won't go without a Civ game if I return number 5. So, does the game get better? Does the AI ACTUALLY attack you for no reason this time through? Lemme know - I have a week or two before the game has to go back to the shop. : )
Sid Meier's Civilization V
Game » consists of 6 releases. Released Sep 21, 2010
Civilization V brings brand new gameplay elements to this beloved franchise, while maintaining the "just one more turn" mentality.
Serious decision...
IF you have experience playing other civs before, then get off the normal difficulty and play at least emperor difficulty. In terms of complexity, yes civ 4 is more complex, but actually having to think about battle instead of giant stack of death in civ 4 is a blessing. At the late game, its more like Survivor (the game show) where the other civs ain't chillin just living life but also planing on winning the game as well. So back stabs will happen which means you usually have to at least have an army that can scare them into not back stabbing you. As lame as city states are, they do play a role since how you treat city states is reflected in how everybody else looks at you. start killing them off and they see you as a warlord, start helping them and they see you as bigger threat with more allies. There is a be neutral with them option, but that means that is not resources you aren't getting either by taking them over or being thier allies.
The whole not as complex mechanics may seem stupid at first, but its just different. Having culture unlock social policy instead of science makes more sense and happyness unlocks golden ages at set intervals makes it more apparent then it was in civ 4. At least to me Civ 4 had consisted of a race for as many wonders as you can in your core cities and having a giant stack of death army to expand.
If you have 2 weeks left before the return date, then I say play a game on at least emperor difficulty and make the map real crowded by adding more city states and civs. (don't make the map bigger if your comp can't handle it). The over crowded map would breed conlfict of having deal with you neighbors a lot sooner so the game isn't just chillin at your cities with nothing more then barbarians to kill.
Thanks for the info guys. Yeah, I do like the way happiness/culture flows this time round, and the whole ranged attacks and non-stackable units - that is so cool. But the AI is just so dumb and diplomacy is so retarded it really does tarnish these improvements. But you've convinced me - I'll keep the game. Who cares, it was only $70 on special. Well my currency, not American. ; )
All the game play systems all create terrible catch 22's from hell because of how they interact with each other....Infinite AI Civ happiness blows...hard. The only way I have fun with this game is cultural victory on difficulty below or on king otherwise it's impossible. +30% cost on social policies with every city makes no sense because no other system does that, cities don't make technology cost more beakers for example...
All in all the game has terrible game design, but I keep going back because I hate myself and need a new Civ.
Civ's attack me ALL THE TIME, even if I leave them completely alone and sign friendship deals.
They I.C.S (infinite city sprawl) like crazy, even if you beg them not to settle near you, they will ALWAYS ALWAYS tell you to piss-off...Why even have the option to discuss it? They try to "infect" your empire by putting a city in the middle of it or anywhere they can -- EVEN if it only gives them 7 hexes of new space. It's very INFURIATING. My gawd!!!!!! It's broken...to hell!" If you settle near them and have only a few units (like 1 if you did not make any) they will come at you. at least on King. Also they city spam a lot now "
they will back off from settling near if you are stronger then them. I had told a couple of Civs this one time after i beat the snot out of them in a war and they didn't settle near be for a good long while.
" @Wuddel said:Oh yeah, that is annoying. I had Cesar set up a city on this tiny tiny island that I already had 3 cities on. I was like "What is this even for?!". So I just took it and made my bitch. Still the worst thing about playing archipelago though. They'll move right in the middle of your island chains.They I.C.S (infinite city sprawl) like crazy, even if you beg them not to settle near you, they will ALWAYS ALWAYS tell you to piss-off...Why even have the option to discuss it? They try to "infect" your empire by putting a city in the middle of it or anywhere they can -- EVEN if it only gives them 7 hexes of new space. It's very INFURIATING. My gawd!!!!!! It's broken...to hell!" If you settle near them and have only a few units (like 1 if you did not make any) they will come at you. at least on King. Also they city spam a lot now "
"
Isn't it very tactical? They can keep an eye on you and kinda force you to go to war since a city between your cities is just a ticking time bomb. Kinda makes you look like the bad guy to all the other civs.
Ah, who am I kidding? Diplomacy is stupid in Civ 5, they'll gang up on you anyway. It's frustrating that even your greatest ally has a timer for when it will declare war on you. Even when you gift the cities of the civ they were at war with. >=(
Please Log In to post.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment