Civilization 5

Wasn't Sid Meier working on some facebook Civ?
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2008
Messages
1,718
Location
Dear Green Place
Wasn't Sid Meier working on some facebook Civ?

Yeah - he is working on a 'social' game, and also Civ V ... a true PC-only follow-up!

Hopefully after that they will also do another DS game like Civ Rev ... but primarily I am excited for Civ V!
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,938
My complaint with Civ4 was that it added complication without sufficient payoff. When the Civ bug bites, I still go back to Civ2. Granted, this is a "30000 feet" snapshot, but my first impression is that Civ5 will go even further into the weeds. Unfortunate.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,536
Location
Illinois, USA
I didn't see much that indicated where Civ5 was going. Supposedly, combat tactics will play more of a role (which means they'll have a role beyond unit spamming and placement on the world map). I never played Civ4; I have it, but Civ2 always absorbs so much time that I never get around to installing it. In fact, I refuse to install Civ2 on the basis that I'll never do anything else for about 6 months straight if it's on my computer. :p

I wasn't overly impressed by Civ Rev. Seemed to me like a simplified Civ1... which isn't good. It was ok, probably the best strategy game I've played on a console... which isn't saying a whole lot.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
2,743
Location
In the Middle of Nowhere
Great but turn based again ? Real time + pause would be great .
I am not a big fun of tactical battles in big strategy games , 1 save can have 500 skirmishes can you imagine the amount of boredom ? :)
Civ 4 wasn't bad and the expansions added stuff , of course i regard Alpha Centauri ( + Alien crossfire ) a far more exiting game .
 
Joined
Jun 22, 2009
Messages
1,439
Location
Athens (the original one)
I was dissapointed with Civ 4. It really felt not alot different than 2 or 3, bar slightly nicer graphics.
 
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
62
I've been hoping for them to get rid of single-unit combat since Civ 1 - and this time at least they've gotten a visual upgrade in the right direction.

If they actually manage to make combat something resembling real tactical battles, I'll be all over it.

The only thing that kept me from enjoying Civ 4 was the endless production cycles of single-unit armies and the atrociously bad combat system - as well as the one zillion workers/engineers bogging the game down.

Call to Power did MUCH better in these areas, so it's a bit strange a game so old hasn't inspired more with its great features.
 
Great but turn based again ? Real time + pause would be great .

Why not just change it to full real-time ... with a first person perspective and ultra-cinematic cutscenes! ;)

My point - there are very few turn-based games, why not leave them along ... isn't that what we want for the RPG genre?
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,938
Wasn't Sid Meier working on some facebook Civ?
Yeah - he is working on a 'social' game, and also Civ V … a true PC-only follow-up!
I believe SM's involvement in Civ4 largely consisted of stamping his name on the box, so I wouldn't be so sure he's even on this project.
 
Joined
Nov 18, 2006
Messages
525
Location
Sweden
great but turn based again ? Real time + pause would be great .
I am not a big fun of tactical battles in big strategy games , 1 save can have 500 skirmishes can you imagine the amount of boredom ? :)
civ 4 wasn't bad and the expansions added stuff , of course i regard alpha centauri ( + alien crossfire ) a far more exiting game .

no no no no no no no no!!!!!
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
5,645
Location
Tardis
With each new version of civ I play them less and less. Civ4 was mildly boring allready. The best one was the first civ I played on amiga. Im not really interested of civs anymore. There are new more interesting strategy games out there than this old one with new graphics.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
3,160
Location
Europa Universalis
I liked Civ4 with the expansions and certain mods.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
2,299
Location
VA
I only got into Civ with Civ IV. I was initially very impressed (and hooked), but that wore off fairly quickly. My main beef was that despite the apparently huge amount of variety in it, most of the variety was just cosmetics -- the different sides didn't play all that differently, and they were pretty much indistinguishable by the endgame. The trajectory of a civilization was always the same, and always ended up with a technologically and militarily advanced Western democracy.

There's nothing wrong with that, except that the game *pretends* to offer you civilizational and developmental choices that are meaningfully different. If I get to play as Sitting Bull or Moctezuma, I would kinda *hope* that my Americas would end up different than the one founded by settlers from England or Spain.

And I doubt that Civ V will be enough to tempt me back to gaming.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
8,540
Well, that's the issue with any game with a static technology development system. You either research THESE techs, or you do THOSE techs, or else you die by midgame.

Same with most RTS games I've played; research and spam certain structures in order to spam certain units, which dominate through the mid to late game. Civ just suffers from a lack of a decent combat model; it's highly abstracted, and whats more insane. It also lacks sane AI capable to dealing with any diplomatic nuances.

I still love it, though I've stuck with the older games in the series and FreeCiv. for the most part. I'd love to make my own strategy game in the same vein, but actually giving choices in how you develop technology and deploy your military power. But the AI in such a complex thing is well beyond me, as well as the time to design such a thing.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
2,743
Location
In the Middle of Nowhere
Apropos Sid Meier : There is no English-language Wikipedia entry there, but the German one http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meier tells that the "Meier" was a profession several hundred years ago.

It was originally a steward or so who took care for the lands of an aristocratic owner.

The "Meierei" was the place where he worked or/and lived.

This is a *very* common surname here in Germany, but with accent to the south of Germany.

I corrected the English Wikipedia article about "Meier" insofar, that "Meier" was *not* - as stated there at the very bottom of the list- , a "common Jewish surname", but instead ot was a common surname *regardless* of religion or anything else.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,915
Location
Old Europe
Apropos Sid Meier : There is no English-language Wikipedia entry there, but the German one http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meier tells that the "Meier" was a profession several hundred years ago.

It was originally a steward or so who took care for the lands of an aristocratic owner.

The "Meierei" was the place where he worked or/and lived.

This is a *very* common surname here in Germany, but with accent to the south of Germany.

I corrected the English Wikipedia article about "Meier" insofar, that "Meier" was *not* - as stated there at the very bottom of the list- , a "common Jewish surname", but instead ot was a common surname *regardless* of religion or anything else.

And knowing is half the battle! G.I. Joe!

:p Nice find, it's always interesting to see where names come from.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
2,743
Location
In the Middle of Nowhere
It's got hexes instead of squares this time, which is a good thing, but it's not worth buying the whole game again. I'll have to wait and see what other features make it in.

My main beef was that despite the apparently huge amount of variety in it, most of the variety was just cosmetics — the different sides didn't play all that differently, and they were pretty much indistinguishable by the endgame.
I think you need a taste of Galactic Civilizations 2. With the last expansion they added fairly different tech trees for each race. Tons of customization, too. That's what I play when the "civ bug bites." http://www.galciv2.com
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
8,238
Location
Kansas City
awesome awesome awesome and about time!

I've been playing this almost continuously since I was finally done with NWN - with a few side breaks for King's Bounty.

they did a sequel to Civ 2 right finally after the tedious Civ 3 and the other two.

I'm not sure what the hexagons will bring to the game, but I'm glad they haven't been sitting on their heels all this time.

Maybe I can start getting into the modding early this time. I love Civ 4 but its starting to get old.

If you haven't tried the BuG mod or the NASA made graphics found at civfanatics.net you're really missing out.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
5,212
Location
The Uncanny Valley
Well, that's the issue with any game with a static technology development system. You either research THESE techs, or you do THOSE techs, or else you die by midgame.

Same with most RTS games I've played; research and spam certain structures in order to spam certain units, which dominate through the mid to late game. Civ just suffers from a lack of a decent combat model; it's highly abstracted, and whats more insane. It also lacks sane AI capable to dealing with any diplomatic nuances.

All true. One reason I liked Rome: Total War (esp. with the Total Realism mod) is that the tech trees really are different for the different factions, right down to the late game -- you might have armored elephants, but your enemy has elite javelinmen, or vice versa.

Even worse campaign AI though.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
8,540
Back
Top Bottom