Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Civ 5 expansion pack!

MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2012 8:52:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Read this brainless zombies: http://www.garath.net...

If you want realism and gameplay, Civ IV is the only option. Civ V is what happens when Firaxis has no competition and thinks that they can push some crap off on us.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
UnStupendousMan
Posts: 3,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/22/2012 10:52:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hey, I respect your decision to prefer Civ IV to Civ V. What makes you happy makes you happy. However, what person A hates doesn't mean that Person B doesn't like it also. I personally like Civ V (even though, TBH, I can't really say why) but that doesn't mean that you have to go all crazy on me telling me that it horrible.

I agree that the AI isn't smart. That's probably the game's biggest flaw that maybe does put it below Civ IV in overall goodness. It also has issues with it gobbling up memory and with city expansion. In fact, I rather like some of Civ IV's (expansion pack) scenarios. And of course, "Baba Yetu" is THE BEST menu music ever.

However, Civ V is not "sh!t." It's not so easy as ICS to win the culture victory. In fact, ICS is the exact WRONG way to win the culture victory. Culture needed to gain a new social policy goes up every time a city is placed, so placing city after city after city is not going to get you anywhere in winning the culture victory. (I can't say the same with science, diplomatic (economy), and domination victories, though.) In addition, it arguably has a better interface than Civ IV, it looks better (although that's really a non-issue), Civ V doesn't have battle of the stacks, and Civ V has better and clearer win conditions. (Try getting a diplomatic victory in Civ IV before vassals)

Finally, the topic is really disrespectful. I maybe was a little (a lot) over-hyped about the Civ V expansion, but that's no excuse for creating a topic that's the same as mine. At least say something that's pertinent to the thing that you want to discuss, like "Civ V sucks," etc. It would be appreciated.

Signed,
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 4:25:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
First of all, you clearly did not read the "five problems with Civ V's design" part. Sulla talks about the cultural victory: "It's simply impossible for a large empire to win by culture in Civ5; in Civ4, the large empire simply has few advantages over a small empire in winning by culture. Big, big difference. The right way to do this sort of design is to create subsystems in which small and large empires compete on even terms (Civ4 cultural victory). The wrong way to do this sort of design is to penalize/exclude large empires. See the difference?" And yes I probably shouldn't have called it the same thing.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 4:21:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
To each their own.

And then there are people like me who don't really like the Civ games all that much. I miss the days of the old Civ (like Civ 2) when you could go into space and build leviathan space cruisers and the orbital ladder.

Those were the days...
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2012 4:20:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Here is a nice rant on Civ V straight from Civfanatics. I show it to anyone who says Civ V is any good.

"I've loved civ quite a bit, and so argue for it heavily. In late civ IV patches and continuing on to civ V, I'm watching it die while a bunch of people watch it happen and don't even notice/care. I'm watching basic controls degrade to the point where yes, 90's games show them up. I'm watching the company LIE to us about "recommended" specifications, where if you were to run a machine on them playing for example a huge map you'd spend more time waiting than playing. I've watched failaxis leave civ V MP unplayable for more than 3 people at a time (out of sync!) for OVER a year and counting since release, spending their time to introduce ANIMATIONS () to MP and work on an expansion + DLC while a CORE FEATURE (MP) still doesn't work.

Yes, I still play civ IV, though frustration over GAMEPLAY 101 has drained my will to play it over time. It isn't fun when the game decides you can't play for stretches of time. You know what game I don't play though? Civ V. Is it because of hexes? No. Is it because of the tech method/tree? No. Is it because of 1upt? Hell no, I'm on of the faster players on the forum so that has very limited impact on me. Is it because the AI diplo is retarded? No, civ IV AI doesn't try either.

Why don't I play it then? Because it doesn't work. Because failaxis lies about recommended specifications. Because when playing civ V, it takes the COMPUTER more time to process its turns than I do, processing movements and animations in the fog regardless of settings. I literally spend more time waiting than playing. Because when I tell the damn game to do a "ranged" attack and the UI clearly shows it as such, the unit instead simply moves closer to the target. Because the governor switches tiles after end turn to the point where you can't use it. Because MP, an important feature for people looking for a weekly mp game, has never worked for even an instant, and still doesn't. Ultimately, because civ V does not work, and yet the company disgraces itself by continuing to sell it as a finished product. I don't know what to say about people who are OK with that, because it isn't nice.

I made that point to prove that the reason failaxis blows at programming isn't because it's too hard or that it is undoable. I've already mentioned a few titles. I don't really care why you don't like other games that work but for one reason or another aren't fun. Being able to play a game is a critical element, and borked controls really puts a hamper on that. If you fail there, you failed the game.

The only reason I still play civ is for the TBS fix. The gaming industry has taken a dump on the genre, and much like with EA and sports games, failaxis can get away with disgracing itself with titles like civ V because the competition isn't there anymore. However, they're a major contributor to the reason TBS is a declined genre in the first place.

If bullfrog, SSG, and the 3d0/nwc marriage that produced HOMM III were still around for example, civ V would be having its pants pulled down.

If you don't believe me, compare how civ II was to the games warlords II/III and HOMM II/III. The difference is staggering; the latter titles are some of the finest TBS ever made and the 3rd installation of each series are probably still top 10 tbs all-time (HOMM III might be the best). These games *did* manage to take advantage of graphics typically available at the time...but they also had working controls, shortcuts that always worked, units that always did as ordered without exception, and balanced options.

So now we have some modern titles which do things that should be more processor-intensive than civ V, and yet don't have any of the general optimization problems:

- ANY Call of Duty game (balance and net code bad as they are, the game plays well)
- Starcraft 2 (better than any civ title ever in both balance and gameplay, and though it's a slightly different genre due to being real-time, can easily handle more units in real time than civ can going turn-by-turn...proving my point rather soundly that COMPETENT developers can still make good controls)
- Madden. Yeah, glitchy, but so is civ. So both games are glitchy, but only 1 has controls that don't work, and it isn't madden. That's right, our beloved civ designers have fallen behind EA. Keep that in mind.
- Mass Effect: You know what happens when you press to shoot? You shoot. You don't dolphin dive and do the worm in the middle of the battlefield and die. Too bad firaxis has your units do the equivalent of that in civ V, and has workers auto-suicide in both games.

Basically, every non-tbs genre ducks this issue...but without competition failaxis isn't even trying. An expansion before the game engine works...and before they stop the governor from starving cities AFTER end turn should tell us everything we need to know.

I don't see the civ franchise being good in the hands that currently hold it. I say this despite the new expansion coming out. They've made their message very clear. They don't care, even a little bit, about how good the game is at the design level. They'd much rather trick people into getting it, which will only work so long."
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)