My philosophy is that Civ 5 and Civ 6 are just fine. My friend was going to buy 7 on release and I was like “yeah, but you can just go play Civ 6. It’s not like it’s a bad game just because the new one is out.” And I’m glad I convinced him otherwise because of how “okay” Civ 7 has been so far. Nothing against the game, I just already have the last three Civ games with all DLC and there is still a mountain of content that we already have to play with each other.
Has there even been a Civ release that was great at the start? I had the old Civ 2 “Multiplayer Gold Edition,” which my friend, who had the original, said had a much better AI. Give it a little while and see what they can do to make Civ 7 better, then it’ll sell well.
You should replay it. It is imho the highlight of the series because of a few changes compared to other civ games:
Focusing on the terraforming and colonisation of alpha Centauri allowed them to have an actual story where you uncovered stuff about the planet and its indigenous lifeforms while you played. It’s from the 90s, so there is no branching storylines, alternative endings or stuff like that, but even after repeated playthroughs it’s nice to have some progression that’s more than a tech tree.
Having only seven leaders (and having them all in every game, no smaller or larger games) might seem weird and tbh, larger maps feel a bit empty. However, each technology, city improvement or wonder gives you some (well narrated) text bits of one of them, giving them so much more character than the leaders in your average game of civ. The hatred for Miriam has become a meme, which wouldn’t have happened if these characters weren’t extremely well written. Ironically this is imho of of the reasons why the add on didn’t work as well - the few bits that were added for each of the new factions just weren’t enough.
Although there are more differences, like eg a unit design workshop, the game loop feels quite similar to civ. It’s like they took civ 4, polished it and just decided to make it… Dunno, meaningful. And while that’s not per se relevant for in game decisions such as “where to settle” or “what to build”, it just makes the whole experience so much better. It’s still my comfort game that I boot up for another play on my deck every now and then.
I did just hunt through my old CDs, and I’ve still got it! Along with Diablo 1 and some weird burned copy of Roller Coaster Tycoon 2 that has a black bottom, like it’s a PlayStation CD. Anyway, I’ll try to check it out; thanks for the recommendation!
Civilization 4 was good at launch. Naturally it got even better over time.
Worth a mention that 4 is the most recent of these games released primary on physical hardware. That meant patching was a more difficult process so they actually had to hire a bunch of play testers to test stuff (and fix the problems they found). Contrast that to the approach of the most recent three games, which had their customers pay $70 for the privilege of being beta testers.
This is a shitty way to develop games. We should be mad about it because we deserve better.
As the article says, it’s history repeating itself. This one made more foundational changes to the formula than 6 did over 5, and once again, if you’re looking to play a Civ game, the old game is still going to be cheaper. I loved 6 when it came out, but when friends were curious about dipping their toes in, I just referred them to 5 because it was almost as good and far cheaper to try out. Civ 6 charts compared to 5 around the same time period are similar. I haven’t picked up 7 yet just because I’m still trying to get through other games, but I’m looking forward to it.
I just referred them to 5 because it was almost as good
Why do you consider Civ 6 better than 5?
Edit for anyone else wanting to answer: Please specify whether you’re including Brave New World (or Gods and Kings) in your comparison, since those expansions significantly improved upon the original Civ 5 release.
On a technical level, it functioned better. On an artistic level, I liked the look a lot better. On a gameplay level, they were pretty similar, but I liked what they did with city tiles in 6.
I'm not the person that you asked, but I do hold the same opinion. My biggest reasons are:
Civs are far more incentivised to expand in VI, resulting in more conflict
Districts make city placement a much more complicated question
The city state influence game is much more interesting than just a spending race and also has more game-changing rewards
The culture and science victories are much more interactive with other civs now, rather than just hiding away and waiting for a bar to fill
I don't think V is bad by any means. It was the one that got me into the series after bouncing off III and IV. I just think that most of the changes in VI were improvements
I finally managed to invade someone and it happened to be just outside the clinic at the start of my NG+ cycle. My HP was lowered so much, and I did so much damage to the dude while he did basically nothing to me.
I thought BB had the same level/upgrade stuff as the other games? I felt like I just stomped a level 1 character of a player who has never played before 🤣
This is the only post-DemonSouls game i haven’t finished :/ The frame drops in some areas gave me frequent headaches, so i only made it like a third way in
I’ve pretty much come to terms that i’ll either never finish it, or will play it again on an emulator eventually. As it is now, it won’t run any better on my Slim console, and i have no intention of upgrading it
PS4 emulation has come a long way. I haven’t played fully through my copy, but I was going through it at 60fps through the first few areas with little to no issue. You may want to wait until all the kinks are out, but it’s pretty good as it is.
It’s puzzling how stupid of a decision it is leaving it at 30 FPS even on PS5.
It’s literally the same exact game, the system just has backwards compatibility. They never updated it to be faster, and it’s not exactly an easy fix either since the entire animation system is based on the frame rate. You at least don’t see it drop lower than 30 anywhere on a PS5.
DS1 didn’t get native 60fps until the remaster, and the mods that allowed it to go that fast would introduce a bunch of bugs.
I’m guessing they are planning everything. From the official minecraft article :
Now we’re actively working on Vibrant Visuals for Minecraft: Java Edition and our goal is to bring it to the game in a way that serves not only our players, but also our modders and resource pack creators.
They only implemented those in bedrock edition, available in the MS store… I’d rather they add it into Java edition so us Linux gamers can use them, and not tie them exclusively with NVidia
ign.com
Gorące