Is Civilization 5 worth it?

[Torplexed]

In the past I have been a big fan of the Sid Meier Civilization games starting in 1996 with Civ2. However, I've heard some some state that with the Beyond the Sword expansions installed on Civ 4 it is superior to Civ 5.. (I have BtS) I also heard the game has lost a lot of it's former depth and complexity. So should I shuck out 50 bucks for the newest version or should I stick to the beauty that is Civ 4? :hmmm:

[Onkel Neal]

I guess there are no Civ players here, what did you decide?

[Penguin]

Oh yes, there are Civ players here, struggling for world domination in a game helps me with my Adolf-complex :DL

50 dollars seems much too expensive, but it all depends what the buck is worth to you. For 50 you can have some hours of fun in a bar, or 10,20 hours testing Civ5.
The graphics are improved (who would have guessed so?), the land combat is better (panzer generalistic), the AI are morons and with a balance like this you certainly don't want to run on a rope over Niagara Falls.

Sure, when you are into roleplaying you can develop a healthy hatred against the brutal, evil Gandhi as you could in previous titles. But having played two campaigns, I came to the point: something's missing: the one-more-round factor. It lacks depth and immersion, I've never really felt to be in control of my own civilization, to have real choices or make decisions that can alter the course ofthe game.
As most people who are on here, I have a faible for deep games, if I wanted to play casual ****, I would be on a Xbox forum, like 1.4.2010 ;) - that might be the reason why civ 5 is not so much a matter of discussion here.

If I could build my own Frankenstein Civ, it would be Civ 4 with the gfx and combat system of 5, the videos of 3 the palace of 2 and the novelty feeling of 1.

[elephantium]

Civ 5 means infecting my computer with Steam, so I'd say it's not worth it. I hang out on another board (civfanatics), and a bunch of people there have tried Civ 5 and didn't like it -- they got bored with it really quickly. The "one unit per hex" was supposed to be a big deal for the game, but from what I've heard, they screwed that up for the AI.

I'm generally a big fan of the Civ series -- just finished playing some Civ 3 tonight. I'd move on and give Civ 4 a try, but my computer can't handle the graphics requirements.

[mookiemookie]

I have both, and my druthers are Civ IV with the Beyond the Sword expansion.

[seaniam81]

I'm with Mookie. Go with CIV 4 with BtS. While I have Civ 5, and did enjoy playing it a few times Civ 4 BtS ended up on my PC again.

[Arclight]

Civ5 is a nice game. It's a lot easier to get into than previous titles thanks to some streamlining, but I think that's also the reason it doesn't hold interest as long (my interest, anyway). There's just less there to really dig into.

Still, definetly something I'll get back to from time to time.

[Torplexed]

I guess there are no Civ players here, what did you decide?

Thanks for the thread bump Neal. :DL I had decided to pass on purchasing it for now. Given the lukewarm reviews I see here so far (thanks guys) I just might pass on it altogether.

Civ 5 means infecting my computer with Steam, so I'd say it's not worth it.

I've seen a physical copy for sale at Fry's. Would that still involve using or connecting with Steam?

[Arclight]

Registering it to a Steam account is required, yes. But you never have to set it online apart from 1-time activation unless you want to update.

[Torplexed]

Registering it to a Steam account is required, yes. But you never have to set it online apart from 1-time activation unless you want to update.

Thanks Arclight. :salute:

[Safe-Keeper]

Bought Civ5 and stopped playing it after a while, ended up "downgrading" by buying Civilization 4 complete (for then to download the awesome Realism Invictus mod, a GWX counterpart of sorts that transforms the vanilla game into more of a deep, realistic simulator, with lots more units, techs and all-new game mechanics).

Civ 5 looks awesome at first glance, but the more you play, the more its problems become apparent. The one unit per tile system leads to "traffic jams", the AI is both psychotic (diplomacy) and just plain dumb (in terms of military strategy). Some game elements have been dumbed down, and the UI, while it looks drop-dead gorgeous, ultimately just means that tasks which took only a click before take several now. The Civilopedia is largelly unfinished and isn't of much help. Use of transports has been removed, now land units just magically turn into boats when stepping into the sea.

The game has its good features -- I love the idea of City States, even though it's incredibly shallow, and I liked the hex system, but it's the Civilization counterpart of Silent Hunter 5 -- good ideas, great looks, needs more work.