First Reviews of Civilization V 380
An anonymous reader submitted linkage to a story explaining why Hemos has been twitching for a week in anticipation: "Defying the urge to phone-in an unambitious sequel and coast on past successes, Sid Meier's Civilization V is anything but a lazy rehash. It feels almost as if someone described the concept of the renowned 19-year-old turn-based strategy series to a talented designer who'd never played it, and let him come up with his own version. It's similar enough to be familiar to veterans, different enough to be fresh, and its polish and accessibility make it a great place for new players to pick up one hell of a Civ addiction."
Just...one...more...turn... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just... another... one...
My Review... (Score:4, Informative)
Been playing it all morning.
Be back later.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I try not to read reviews as these days they're little more than advertising funded press releases.
A few questions...
Is it actually any good? The video I saw of some gameplay made it look like a console game designed
for the lowest common denominator. I understand them wanting to improve graphics and change it to appeal
to non-civ fans but I'd be happy with a Civ4 that didnt run constantly out of memory.
Can you still zoom out to see more than 4 blocks away?
most important...
Does Spock still beep...beep...beep
Re:My Review... (Score:5, Informative)
>>Is it actually any good?
I'm enjoying it. Playing it on normal difficulty (prince), and I've made it to 1500AD without going to war with anyone. No real pressure to, either. Peace has a lot of benefits - earn gold, bribe city states, and they supply you with lots of resources. If you start blowing up city states, though, they get annoyed at you, and the present parade ends. They also give you lots of quests to earn reputation with them as well.
Culture is now like science - earn a certain amount, and you get a culture tech. (Remember fascism and the like? That's how you get them now. I love how it's implemented.) Instead of culture pushing boundaries out in all directions all at once, it's broken down to just one hex at a time of expansion, but a lot more often. Another good change.
Money can be used to buy units right off the bat, which means that gold is a lot more useful in Civ V than in previous versions (when you'd have thousands sitting around without much to do for them.)
Naval adventures are a lot better, with an early-ish tech allowing land units to build their own transports. They can't defend themselves, but it eliminates a lot of the annoyance of building transports and microing units on and off of them.
Diplomacy seems kind of limited. I miss the old diplomacy screen that shows all the plusses and minuses enemies have toward you. I think there's something missing here.
Overall, a very good game. It's nice to see that they didn't make another shit game like their latest Colonization attempt.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Reminds me of my play style in Civ II - I stay peaceful for most of the game, often only exploding into conflict in the modern era. Railroads help troop movements; this and some other things seem to make waiting be in the human player's favor.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Better diplomacy would be nice - one of the real strengths of all the Civilization games is the depth and complexity of the interaction with NPCs. I like what you're saying about an improved navy. To improve realism, it would be good if they added a raft-with-sail (likely how early humans reached Australia, now believed to have been 70,000 years ago - well beyond the timeframe of Civilization of any edition). There's a few other such touches I'd like added, but whatever they added there'd always be somethin
Re:Just...one...more...turn... (Score:5, Insightful)
One more.
Five more.
Oh crap, sunrise! I gotta go to work!
One more.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Ok, it's midnight. One more turn. One more. Five more. Oh crap, sunrise! I gotta go to work! One more.
Me and my roommates used to have a joke that we were calling in "civ" to work or taking a "civ" day if we stayed up too late the night before playing.
Re:Just...one...more...turn... (Score:5, Funny)
I don't think I'm going to get Civilization V. The last time I played Civilization, I sat down at 9 AM and got up again at about 6 AM of the next day, having completely forgotten to eat or sleep.
Oh, who am I kidding? I'll be the first one at the counter.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In all seriousness, I'm very happy with FreeCiv. The graphics aren't terribly awesome, but graphics aren't what I play Civilization for, anyway.
FWIW, the games have been getting more mechanically complex over time, too. At least, I remember FreeCiv as being very Civ2-like.
I much prefer Civ 4, although I did love Civ 2 for what it was in its day.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I didn't like Civ2 much. It had isometric graphics, but I felt they were uglier. It also had basically the same tech tree, with some things grafted on in unconvincing places.
Why are they imitating that instead of Civ 1? Not to speak of Master of Magic. Best Civ1-engine game ever.
Civilization 'V' (Score:2, Funny)
I was lost for Civilization II - Why the two 'I's? Confused me with World War II - "eye eye".....
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
V stands for vacation. You're going to have to request one if you're not going to get fired.
Re: (Score:2)
Vernacular. As in, why aren't you good at yours? trolololol
Re:Civilization 'V' (Score:4, Funny)
Wine? (Score:3, Interesting)
What is the wine status? I want to know whether to get it right away or wait for wine to gain proper support for it..
Re:Wine? (Score:5, Funny)
You'll probably have to research Monarchy, and also have a source of grapes.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Raises an interesting point; in Civilization IV do you need to have researched a technology required to gather a luxury resource like wine to be able to receive it in a trade?
It's plain to see you can't get strategical goods like iron in trade without Iron Working and so on, but as a casual Civ player I'm uncertain about less vital things like luxury resources...
If you do need the tech, then it's certain you'll need Monarchy for wine; probability won't enter the equation.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? My current operating system runs everything I need fine, including StarCraft II. I'm not a big gamer, I have other things to do with my life, but StarCraft and Civilization are the exceptions to the rule. ;)
And I'll have you know that my neckbeard is quite clean.
CAN'T FREAKIN WAIT (Score:2)
I spent lord knows how many hours with the Civilization series. Countless memories of LAN parties and late night solo games. I'm hoping Civilization V will provide more of the same kind of memories.
Everything I've read about the way things have been streamlined seems to be like a good direction to go. Not sure I'm keen on them dropping religion from the game, but nearly everything else I've heard about seems like a shift in the right direction.
Re:CAN'T FREAKIN WAIT (Score:5, Interesting)
Religion was horribly overpowered or over-abused in Civ4 - Most of my multiplayer game lobbies were a scramble to see who could get the civilizations with the Mystical starting research, so they could jump right into Buddhism and Hinduism. I mean, once the races were picked, then people would all research polytheism and meditation, then it was a cointoss on who got it first.
Eventually, as the games would progress on, whoever got the religions first would end up winning. It put you so far ahead of everyone else, there was no real way to catch up. The only way you got to Mega cities of 17 Population or more was mostly to do with keeping people happy, not so much about keeping them fed, and since Religion gave you an early burst in happiness, you had a more productive city than everyone else, so you generated more research, and were able to get a great person sooner (usually a priest! no doubt). Then they get to Monarchy sooner so they can just do that "military keeps people happy" civic and then they've got an a mega city that works because its so well defended. So then whoever gets the first priest ends up using the priest to get another religion. And Bam, before you know it, One person has founded 4 or 5 of the religions, and has an amazing economy because of it, has good culture to spread better than you can, and has the happiness available to use slavery to catch up on the infrastructure. If you attacked him early on you cripple yourself for everyone else to take you out, if you leave him be he wins automagically. You dare not attack him later because he's further in the tech tree than you (at least defensively) - so you ride it out. By late game, He still has 100% dedicated to research and is raking in over 100 gold per turn, and then when he feels like finishing it, he switches to universal suffrage, nationalism, and Theocracy, and pumps out an instant army and steams rolls each civilization 1 by 1.
I am glad they dropped religion, it ruined Civ4 multiplayer for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm...interesting. I guess I have a different view of it, since every multiplayer game of Civ IV I played was either at a LAN or when a couple of friends stayed over for the weekend...never did any online multiplayer.
Speaking of friends coming over for the weekend, here's a fun Civ IV drinking game: Every time Nimoy says something, you do a shot of beer. Every time you take over a city (not build one, just take over), you do a shot of whiskey. Every time a player (computer or actual person) gets knocked
Re: (Score:2)
Well - yes - when playing with people I know, it becomes a very person very exciting experience, as no one is really in that "I NEED to win" attitude, its more of a "Let's have some fun and see what happens" kind of mood.
We never really did a drinking game - but we did drink while playing it. And yes - those games become quite hilarious. (Why do your archers spell out LOL in the landscape?)
Re: (Score:2)
Well - yes - when playing with people I know, it becomes a very person very exciting experience, as no one is really in that "I NEED to win" attitude, its more of a "Let's have some fun and see what happens" kind of mood.
This was my favorite part of playing it at a LAN. Very laid back. One of my fave Civ IV memories:
Super long weekend...me, my then-fiance (now wife), her uncle, and three friends all took a Thursday and Friday off. We all congregated at my wife's uncle's house on Thursday morning, and got everything set up. Early Thursday afternoon, we started playing a 6-player game. My wife's uncle and one of our friends were competing with each other, while the rest of us were focusing on culture, technology, or reli
Re:CAN'T FREAKIN WAIT (Score:5, Insightful)
The only way you got to Mega cities was mostly to do with keeping people happy, not so much about keeping them fed, and since Religion gave you an early burst in happiness, you had a more productive city than everyone else, so you generated more research, and were able to get a great person sooner (usually a priest! no doubt). Then they get to Monarchy sooner so they can just do that "military keeps people happy" civic and then they've got an a mega city that works because its so well defended. So then whoever gets the first priest ends up using the priest to get another religion. And Bam, before you know it, One person has founded 4 or 5 of the religions, and has an amazing economy because of it, has good culture to spread better than you can, and has the happiness available to use slavery to catch up on the infrastructure
Historically, that strategy worked pretty out well for the Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Chinese, and many others.
Not really (Score:4, Informative)
Not really. Or rather, not really like in Civ 4. In Civ 4 you can basically have a monopoly on religion, so to speak. Historically that didn't work anywhere near that good.
E.g., sure, you can superficially say that the Egyptians did the same, but really they didn't. Each city has its own deity before Narmer even came along, and really mostly stuck with it. Even afterwards, there were several competing systems even inside the country, with the Ennead being severely at odds with the Ogdoad and both being at odds with Akhenaten's monotheism or with the Hyskos cult of Set.
And then Egyptians having polytheism didn't stop the Greeks from having their own different version, nor the Akkadian zone from having its own, nor the Mayans or Azteks across the ocean from having their own, and so on.
Even stuff like "Hinduism" or "Monotheism" that's in the game, really weren't anywhere near a monopoly.
E.g., Hinduism... which Hinduism? It's a blanket label applied to a multitude of religions in India ranging from polytheistic to monotheistic to technically atheistic. It's about as accurate as saying that everything from England to Persia is Abrahamic.
Monotheism? Which Monotheism? Judaism didn't prevent Zoroastrianism from existing in parallel (and while some versions were strictly dualist, some were really monotheistic), nor the monolatry of Marduk in Mesopotamia taken to near-monotheistic extremes, nor most of the Phoenician city-states from really having each their own monotheistic cult of Ba'al. Was it the same religion? Nope. Check out the whole Jezebel episode in the Old Testament for an example one monotheistic religion kicking out another.
Heck, even Judaism had splintered relatively early. Ever hear of the Good Samaritan? There's a reason a Samaritan is chosen there. Because Samaria had its own version of One True Judaism and were bitter religious enemies with Jerusalem over that. That parable chooses for "even he counts as your neighbour" an example as extreme as that. So there you have it. Two countries with their own version of it.
Even when technically there was one religion, having a grip on it world-wide proved to be a nigh impossible task. Christianity was splintered majorly for a few centuries, with competing schools including Arianism, Pelagianism, etc. Even just the major interpretations of Christianity were a battle royale between monophysitism (Jesus had only one nature, which in turn split into those who made him 100% human and those who made him 100% god), dyophysitism (natch, he had both natures), and miaphysitism (dude, he had two, but _inseparable_.) And if you think the last two are just splitting hairs, they had schisms and purges over that. In fact so severe was the purge done by the Byzantines in Armenia over such a hair-splitting issue that it basically removed any Armenian support or know-how in dealing with the Turks and, in a too long story for this message, it paved the road for Manzikert and the start of the fall of Byzantium.
And then political or nationalistic interests caused further splits. E.g., the Husites ravaged Germany in the name of their own interpretation of the bible, but that in turn was more fuelled by anti-German sentiment than by actually what was in the bible. E.g., earlier, the fight for religious hegemony between Rome and Byzantium ended up with something as ridiculous as the Pope and Byzantine Emperor excommunicating each other over whether the communion hosts (the Jesus-flavoured chips;) should be leavened or unleavened bread.
Really, nobody could have a monopoly on a religion like in Civ 4, much less a monopoly on a _type_ of religion. Inventing Monotheism didn't prevent someone else from inventing their own, much less keep it from splintering.
Re:CAN'T FREAKIN WAIT (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Not sure I'm keen on them dropping religion from the game, but nearly everything else I've heard about seems like a shift in the right direction.
Now if we could just get civilization to drop it from RL...
Can we have a Linux version... Please... (Score:2)
I paid for both Loki releases and I would have loved to be able to waste time again and again and again with Civ old and new :) A linux version of a new Civ would be most welcome and I will be glad to pay for it.
However, that does not seem to be on the menu so until then it looks like the "commuter train game" will still be Nethack again and again.
DRM? (Score:4, Insightful)
I didn't see anything in the review related to DRM. That's an essential subject for any game review these days.
Re: (Score:2)
The DRM is steam based. So it's either amazingly good, or it will consume your first, second, and third born in order to let you play.
Re:DRM? (Score:5, Informative)
I didn't see anything in the review related to DRM. That's an essential subject for any game review these days.
It uses Steam, the opinions on which are divided. You might like it, or you might not.
Multiplayer is done over Steam.
The demo also requires Steam.
Even if you purchase an actual retail box with the game, you still have to create a Steam account. The only thing the box gives you is less time spent downloading the initial game. But you'll get your patches through Steam, not separate downloads.
That's pretty much it.
Re: (Score:2)
I kind of hate Steam (disclaimer, it works great for lots of my friends who love it, etc.) because out of the half dozen or so games I've bought through it so far, 0% have worked without extra Steam-related problems. I assume it's something about my machine but I'm in the "this shit should just work" camp and avoid Steam whenever I can now.
I hate Steam, but I don't hate it enough to skip Civ 5. Woe is me.
And for those who don't use Steam (Score:5, Informative)
An explanation of how their DRM works:
The executables for the game are built to need to launch Steam (it can be cracked, of course). When you run the game, Steam must be running on the system. If it is not currently, it will be spawned. Steam will then need to log in with a user and password that has purchased that game. By default, it will log in online which gives access to things like achievements, online chat, multi-player and so on. Also any game the person has purchase is available. If it is not installed on the system, it can be downloaded. There is no restriction on the number of downloads, you can download to new systems or reinstall as often as you like.
However if an Internet connection is not available, or if requested by the user, it will log in offline mode. You will have access to any games that account has purchased that are currently installed on the system. Obviously you can't download any new ones if you aren't online.
As you might guess you do require an Internet connection the first time a game is installed. You either need to be online to download it, or if purchased retail, online to activate it and add it to your account.
However no matter what, Steam has to be running and has to be logged in with a legit account, be it online or offline.
Also because of the activation, the game may not be resold. It becomes tied to your Steam account. I suppose you could make an account just for that one game and then sell the account with the game, but as a practical matter Steamworks games cannot be transferred or resold.
So it is not the least invasive DRM, but it isn't horrible. It does come with some bonuses too, like the download capability. Buy a game retail, it is associated with your account. Losing the DVD is no problem, just redownload it. The Steam interface provides nice perks too. However it does mean no resale and you have to run Steam to play.
I consider it an acceptable DRM, but some do not.
Re: (Score:2)
Also because of the activation, the game may not be resold.
I thought that you could "gift" games away after you bought them. Am I wrong about that?
You are incorrect (Score:2)
You can only gift new games. So if I wanted to buy you a game, I could do that. I'd purchase it, say it was a gift, and then specify who for. However existing games can't be gifted:
https://support.steampowered.com/kb_article.php?p_faqid=549 [steampowered.com]
It blocked installs till 10 AM local time too (Score:5, Insightful)
One person on CIV Fanatics reported they got the game early but were unable to install it till the appointed time. Steam blocked them.
To me this is unacceptable. They had the boxed game. We have a DRM system which states that that is not enough to play a game. They reserve the right with thirty days notification to change/void the agreement.
In other words, they can prevent you from using the product you purchased. No longer is the $50 for having a game you can play when and where you want to, it only applies when and where they permit you.
Steam is invasive and essentially arbitrary.
I did find it humorous how many derided the retailer at being at fault for selling the game. With users like this what hope is there for the old model.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, because of one person, who got prereleased game ahead of schedule, you're not going to buy any Steam games because of some nefarious potential problem that may, or may not ever exist.
First off, I have no problems with Steam or Apple or some other DRM that is minimally invasive. It is a fact of life. The key for me is that I don't need to be logged into Steam Servers to play the game, excep
Re:It blocked installs till 10 AM local time too (Score:5, Insightful)
That's entirely correct. It proves there's a way for steam to decide when you can and can't run the game. Just the fact it's possible at all is so loathsome I will never pay a cent for such a thing.
No, it's not a "fact of life". It's an arbitrary limit imposed by the company which could not be there.
Activation is unreasonable. What if the activation server goes away in 5 years from now? I still play 10 year old games sometimes.
Because those potential problems were demonstrated multiple times to be actual problems. Like the several music services with DRM that went out of business and left people unable to play the music they paid for.
A car that never crashes is not possible due to the "fact of life" as you put it, that wear exists, humans and roads aren't perfect and so on.
However, DRM is an entirely artificial addition and there's no physical law that says it has to be there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which has nothing to do with steam. The publisher had steam set a run date.
Other then someone trying to install the game before the publisher want's you to, steam does not restrict you from playing.
It sounds like the seller violate their agreement with the distributor/publisher.If that is the case, then it is the sellers fault for selling an item they know wouldn't work.
Steam is not invasive...yes, it is fairly arbitrary. In that the publisher wants some sort of DRM so they select steam.
There is the practi
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's what I do. I have a primary Steam account with credit card info that purchases the games; I set up a throwaway gmail account for every game, create a Steam account for it (primarily 'cause Steam doesn't accept "+" in e-mail addresses), and gift the game to it. The steam accounts are named $myprimaryaccount_$gamename, so I have xxx_hl2, xxx_heroesV, and soon, I'll have xxx_civ5.
I'm not doing it in order to be able to fine-grainedly resell games from my account, but instead in order to get around the "
I'll give the shortened version (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's psychological value in owning a game that's worth a lot more than $1.30. I'm simply going to be happier playing my game, as opposed to one that's been lent to me, even for free.
Public libraries work for a lot of people. They have no problem getting a book, reading it, and never touching it again. Other people buy books and hang on to them, spending thousands of dollars amassing a private library that they can refer to whenever they need. Steam may be a good option for the first group, but it wil
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can go down to the library and borrow a book for 0 dollars. By your logic this must be the utmost value proposition in entertainment. 0 dollars per hour, you can't get any better than that. Yet people continue to spend money on books they can keep forever. Why is that? Figure that out and you'll understand why Steam isn't acceptable to many of us.
Re: (Score:2)
LAN play works in Steam offline mode according to the FAQ [2kgames.com]. You still have to install the Steam client and get spammed with their ads even if you buy a boxed edition, but you can still play on a LAN (unlike certain other LAN gaming franchises we could name - which have been cracked anyway).
I'm curious whether they did this more for "zomg the pirates" or because they want to force people who play it at home with their family to buy multiple copies. Personally, I'd be more inclined to worry about hampering mig
Re: (Score:2)
It uses steamworks [gamepolitics.com]. YMMV, as far as that being a good or a bad thing is concerned. (Good thing, in my opinion.)
Re:DRM? (Score:5, Insightful)
My review: It forces Steam on your machine. Therefore, it's a "don't purchase" title.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I agree. I refuse to purchase anything contaminated by Steam.
Sorry, Sid. I've bought every Civ game that's ever come out, but you've lost me as a customer.
Re: (Score:2)
yup seconded. I stopped FPS with Half Life and now that Civ has gone with steam I will have plenty of time to go do other things, like go out.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So why not buy a copy of the retail game, then download a cracked torrent? The devs get their money, you get another Civ game minus the DRM, and everyone's happy.
DRM is generally a publisher's decision anyway. Don't take it out on the developer.
Re:DRM? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because that's providing all the wrong incentives. If you financially reward those who put DRM on their games, you'll just keep getting DRMd games. Simply refusing to buy punishes those who put DRM on their games at essentially no cost to yourself, since there are always other ways to entertain yourself.
I don't particularly care that the publisher demands DRM. That publisher, and any developers they sign, do not get my money. If you're a developer and you want my money, don't sign with a publisher that requires DRM. It's that simple.
In the day of digital distribution... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
So we Americans can go "Neener neener!"
Retailers probably (Score:3, Informative)
Like it or no, most games sales still happen in the retail market. Don't believe the online surveys, they suffer heavily from selection bias and are not properly conducted. Go ask a developer/publisher (Stardock has talked about this, as they do both). Retail still outsells online by a large margin. That means you have to keep retailers happy and part of that means not selling online before they can sell it retail.
As to why it is taking longer to get to retail there, that's the real question. Did they fuck
Re: (Score:2)
To keep the Germans from taking over France. Duh. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Play.com appears to be shipping it but it'll probably still take 3 days to arrive.
Haven't played it yet... (Score:3, Interesting)
But I did do the steam unlock on my laptop and copied over the music directory to play while I'm at work today. The 15 hours and 58 minutes of oggs (and, I think, one wav) I copied over have -- at least so far -- been top notch. Not that I've listened to anything near the 15 hours of them, only about 2-3, but still.
Nice background music too; mostly instrumental, not too quiet nor too loud.
Re: (Score:2)
REALLY happy to hear that. I've been looking forward to trying to pair different albums with the game [livingwithanerd.com], but I'm still really glad to hear that the included soundtrack is good.
How "worldly" is it? As in, does the music cover different genres from different parts of the world, or is it all similar?
Re: (Score:2)
The musical styles are substantially different and at least from what I can tell, culturally(/period?) appropriate. In particular there is one really neat Japanese-style (at least I assume from the track name) drum piece that is pretty long and very nicely done. Similarly, a couple of the Chinese pieces are accurate of what I've heard from student/foreign parent "culture shows/celebrations" from the university's laboratory high school.
But I'm not exactly an expert in world music. I don't think it will disap
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Are there any good tunes like Christopher Tin's Baba Yetu: http://www.civfanatics.net/downloads/civ4/music/BabaYetu.mp3 [civfanatics.net] ? I am not even a Civ. fan (don't like turn based strategy games).
How in the hell can that possibly be praise? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't want three blind men describing an elephant incorrectly. I want Civ.
Re: (Score:2)
So... why not play it? It's not like giant Civilization V robots have stomped all over the world and destroyed every copy of the original game with their overpowered death-lasers. If you still want to play the old Civilization, just load it up and play.
Re:How in the hell can that possibly be praise? (Score:5, Interesting)
Just finished a couple hours of Civ 5. Honestly, it's disappointing. The new no-stacking concept has solved the stacks-of-death problem, but just created serious roadblocks in the game itself. And I do mean roadblocks - movement is a major hassle. Cities and the effects of what you do with them are more opaque than ever. In an attempt to simplify, they ended up just glossing over the gameplay. Same with diplomacy. They didn't actually make things simpler, they just stopped giving you the numbers involved.
I can get behind a number of the new mechanics - embarking land units is a great idea, the hexes are swell, the game is very pretty. But if feels more like a cheap rip-off of Civ than an advancement.
The pull-back strategic view is great in concept, but poor in execution.
I hope it will grow on me, but for now, Civ5 is one step forward, two steps back from Civ 4 (which itself had serious issues).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No, but I am going to complain if I end up with an elephant ass.
Color Blindness Support? (Score:4, Interesting)
Can someone comment on the support for red/green color blindness? I often had problems being able to read certain map features and recognizing some units in Civ III and Civ IV because of it.
Re:Color Blindness Support? (Score:4, Insightful)
Warfare "Enhancements" vs City Simplification (Score:2)
Maybe it's just me, but I HATE micromanaging battles, or micro-managing anything for that matter. I'm the Emperor / President / King so I like deciding the blend of units to produce, general city enhancements to pursue, when and where to build new cities, diplomacy,
Goddammit stop being so happy you guys (Score:5, Insightful)
That's all I ever want.
Nothing else.
Just that.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Whew, for a while, I thought nobody would mention Alpha Centauri in a Civilization article. Since somebody does every single freaking goddamn time, I was getting worried.
Re:Goddammit stop being so happy you guys (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Goddammit stop being so happy you guys (Score:5, Informative)
Why wouldn't they? It was a unique Firaxis product. That's like saying MS doesn't have the rights to Windows. You're confusing it with Civ itself, which used to be a MicroProse IP.
http://www.firaxis.com/company/faq.php [firaxis.com]
Question :
I really loved Alpha Centauri! Are you planning to make Alpha Centauri 2?
Answer:
We’re all big fans of Alpha Centauri as well. However, the rights to that game are owned by Electronic Arts (we were making games for them at the time) so any decision to make a sequel is up to them..
PCGamer review: braindead AI (Score:4, Insightful)
For single player, wait for an expansion to fix the AI. The review in PCGamer said the AI does really stupid things with its combat units, like send them headlong into battle without regard to unit type, so its ranged units go right up to your melee units, and its melee units get trapped behind its own ranged units. The game balance is preserved simply by giving computer players more units. Given that this is the most tactical Civ yet (due to elimination of unit stacking), it's clear from the review it suffers even more from AI limitations than Civ IV did (before the Civ IV expansions).
Eventually (Score:4, Interesting)
I was itching to buy it, but then found out that the Mac version will be ready "eventually", not a simultaneous release. Bugger. Back to Civ IV for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if they ripped _Age_of_Wonders'_ Adjacent Hex rule... Every unit immediately adjacent the hex where the attack could occur were also pulled into that hex for combat.
Diplomacy had this first, at least some variation of it.
Re: (Score:2)
One of our many memorable Civilization IV LAN games involved one of my friends starting to take over the world with Christianity. Then, my friend playing as the Arabs came in and wiped him out...then, myself, trying to spread Judaism, shifted gears and started churning out units (I was on an island). I went on to murderate everyone and won a domination victory.
Classic stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No offense, but are you surprised? People seem to forget how ludicrous Civ IV's specs were at release...
Re:A veteran Civilization fan... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously? That's too much for you? I'm sorry that you haven't bought (or upgraded) a computer in 4 years, but I don't see why developers should have to cater to you by making their products worse for the rest of us. A system meeting these requirements wouldn't cost more than MAYBE $200 used.
They need better hardware to make the AI smarter, not just for better graphics.
No kidding (Score:4, Insightful)
The only thing on there that is even remotely "heavy hitting" is requiring a discrete graphics card. However if you are a computer gamer, well then you should be well aware that games need a discrete graphics card, and they aren't expensive (A 5750 runs it great and costs $110-130 or so and is current technology).
A dual core with 2GB I consider to be the minimum sort of system you should have these days for desktop usage. It is not expensive, and well worth it. A dual core CPU really makes things much smoother and more responsive, even if you are just doing basic office productivity stuff. The ability for the processor to actually do two things at once is a big gain in terms of responsiveness. RAM is also big performance wise, and really cheap. I recommend 4GB, even for desktop usage, but 2GB minimum. Less than that and you are swapping when you don't need to.
Those are NOT onerous system requirements, particularly for a game. They aren't demanding the highest end system. Hell even their recommend requirements are tame: 1.8GHz quad, 4GB of ram and a 4800/9800 series GPU.
Personally, I'd say if you can't afford a dual core system and a mid range graphics card from a few generations ago, you probably can't afford a new $50 game either. In that case, stick with Civ 4 or Civ 3 (or 2 or 1). They haven't stopped working. You can still play them. Hell if I end up not liking Civ 5's gameplay and can't mod it to my likes, I'll go back to Civ 4 since I do like it.
I do not find it very legit to whine about not having the rather reasonable system requirements, while still saying that $50 is a fine price to spend. Save that $50 for a better computer, something that will do better for EVERYTHING you do, rather than spending it on a new game.
Re:A veteran Civilization fan... (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually it's the graphic card requirements that break it for me. They're above 99% of laptops, and certainly above mine which does have a separate graphic card with dedicated memory but it's an ATI 3200, way below their specs. Plays many games well, but I won't even try to get anywhere near civ5 knowing what their minimum specs are - or else it'd be wasted money. Also, my laptop is my only computer right now.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What?
Did you forget your meds this morning.
$100 is the price for a 9800 equivalent in a desktop (sorry, I made the mistake of assuming you were smart enough to figure that out on your own).
If you have trouble meeting the Civ V minimum specifications, you will have trouble affording the game.
Here you go [dell.com] and these are Australian prices, which due to
Re: (Score:2)
and I, for one, won't play Civ V in the foreseeable future. Why?
Because I still haven't beaten Civ III at Deity, and have not even started on Civ IV.
On a more serious note, I think the graphics on Civ IV and now V are actually detrimental to the game. It's like going to war with the wrong kind of map. As an old board- and war-gamer I prefer my maps and graphics simple. Top-down, no (fake)3D, animated, colourful shrubberies or flocks of birds please. It's nice and all, but I'm trying to annihilate the free p
Re:A veteran Civilization fan... (Score:5, Insightful)
You are in grad school and have three kids. When were you planning on playing video games?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
There's a reason grad school takes 5 years to finish.
Re:A veteran Civilization fan... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Jeez if it consumes more resources than Civ IV I won't play it, and I have a pretty good setup. That was a bear.
Re:A veteran Civilization fan... (Score:4, Funny)
May your +100% happiness not expire with the discovery of toddlerhood, or worse yet, teenagery.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm living the best days of my life, currently. No strategy game comes close to the wonder of holding your own baby in your arms.
When my last child was still an infant, sometimes I would sit with her in my arms... while I played Civ IV. Beat that.
Re: (Score:2)
Any schmuck can make a baby, but it costs $50 to get Civ 5. Now who's laughing poor boy?
Re: (Score:2)
But it DID cost him $50 to make the baby!
Re: (Score:2)
One question I'd have is why the CPU requirements keep getting jacked up. Shouldn't a turn based strategy game be a bit easier on the CPUs than that?
There is an insane amount of behind the scenes tracking and calculations going on in a Civilization game. Frankly, I find it impressive that the game only requires a dual-core.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you think Starcraft II is more complicated than it really is. Think about it, honestly...what is there to keep track of behind the scenes, second by second? Hit points, unit locations, resources, and build queues. That's about it. Now look at a Civ game, and all of the things that simultaneously happen each time one turn ends and another begins.
You honestly think there is less to compute in a Civ game than in Starcraft II, just because Civ is turn based?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You forgot real-time path finding with a horde of units interfering with each other.
Now look at a Civ game, and all of the things that simultaneously happen each time one turn ends and another begins.
What simultaneously happens? The unit orders are sequenced.
You honestly think there is less to compute in a Civ game than in Starcraft II, just because Civ is turn based?
Well, um, YES. There's a difference between localized, separate battles at the end of every turn versus battles that update dozens of times a second all over the map. That you have thought about this and tried to equate the two is mind boggling.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What simultaneously happens? The unit orders are sequenced.
Economic calculations. Research calculations. Diplomatic calculations. Borders expanding/contracting. Etc, etc, etc. These things don't just happen on their own...every little nuance, every single little piece of data you see in a Civilization game (which, lets face it, can be overwhelming at times) has to be calculated.
Well, um, YES. There's a difference between localized, separate battles at the end of every turn versus battles that update dozens of times a second all over the map.
A map that, by comparison to an endgame Civilization map, is pretty small. You are also still continuing to focus on just fighting. You do know there's far more to Civilization games
Re: (Score:2)
They're both very different games.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yep, but you can only really play one of the two at a time.
I'm in much the same boat as that poster -- Starcraft 2's nice enough for what it is (although it still pales to SC1 in most respects for me) but Civ 5 will probably be getting my gaming time for a while.