clearly not everybody is of the same opinion as you.
I was referencing my take on the general problems people complained about having in Civ 5. I never said Civ 5 was a terrible game or that everyone in the universe hated it. I'm open minded, I'm not opposed to changing my mind and buying it but I'm more interested in whats better and how they addressed the problems rather than opinion clashes. For the record I could write a laundry list of the problems in Civ 4 so I'm not one of those people who thinks the predecessor was better just because. Civ 5 did a lot of things very well, it just didn't have the same depth or replay value for me and I found the AI very mediocre - particularly in warfare and diplomacy.
The reviews (much like Civ 5) seem mixed and opinions vary on the details, some say the new subsystems are an afterthought and others say they're a large improvement. It's one of the few times I really feel like I need a demo because at $30 well, it's not crazy expensive but I have other stuff to play so I could put it off until its cheaper. If stuff is really improved (and I'd love to hear specifics) then I might grab it.
This comment was edited on Jun 25, 2012, 15:06.
Playing: Fallout 4, Warhammer Vermintide Watching: Ash vs Evil Dead