Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Civilization V Patched

Steam News has details on a new patch that's automatically available for Sid Meier's Civilization V. Here are the change notes.

  • Modding - Installer and permissions fixes. Should address any remaining mod download and install issues.
  • Full screen crash fix. Game will now restart in Windowed mode if it cannot find a suitable full-screen resolution on first start.
  • Hall of Fame now records data correctly when using a Windows username with special characters.
  • Deal expiration fixes.
  • Fix for Puppet State production exploit.
  • Misc crash fixes.

View
39 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

39. Re: Civilization V Patched Oct 2, 2010, 03:08 Yifes
 
Uh, yeah, after multiple patches, expansions, and fan assistance. The default AI that came with base Civ IV was much worse than the AI we've got with V.

So? Civ 4 having bad AI which they patched somehow makes Civ 5's bad AI less shitty?

No, only a handful are worth building in every city. Specialized cities are going to build the buildings that improve their specialization.

Again, only a handful are worth building. Due to poor design choices, there is a whole list of buildings that are useless/not cost effective in ANY city.

Removing extraneous game elements doesn't make a game more simplistic. It makes it less cluttered. Civ IV, as much as I enjoyed it, was very much an over-cluttered game.

That may be how you feel, but I find it ridiculous that anyone would consider things like religion, with its diplomatic and strategic implications, and synergy with certain civics, extraneous. And removing health turns resources like cattle, once important for city growth, into completely useless tiles of shit.

Oh my god, I didn't realize that they actually made the game not allow you to have everything!! Who knew they'd actually make you make strategic choices that might affect how you decide to play the game?!?

Snarky remark aside, did you even read what I wrote? You tell me how having a large empire prevents you from winning a culture victory makes any strategic sense. Good strategic games forces you to make intelligent, not arbitrary choices. This change from Civ 4 is just asinine.

Just wait until your honeymoon period with Civ 5 is over and you start noticing the giant cracks in the foundation.

This comment was edited on Oct 2, 2010, 03:28.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Civilization V Patched Oct 1, 2010, 14:49 Bhruic
 
At least with Civ 4 stacks the AI can brute force its way to semi-effectiveness.

Uh, yeah, after multiple patches, expansions, and fan assistance. The default AI that came with base Civ IV was much worse than the AI we've got with V.

Building maintenance is so high that, despite a long list of unique buildings, only a handful are actually worth building.

No, only a handful are worth building in every city. Specialized cities are going to build the buildings that improve their specialization.

Some elements which were removed from the game or replaced, like religion, city health and civics make the game more simplistic

Removing extraneous game elements doesn't make a game more simplistic. It makes it less cluttered. Civ IV, as much as I enjoyed it, was very much an over-cluttered game.

forcing you to make the nonsensical choice of having a larger empire, or having better culture and SP's

Oh my god, I didn't realize that they actually made the game not allow you to have everything!! Who knew they'd actually make you make strategic choices that might affect how you decide to play the game?!?

But I'll be shelving it until an expansion comes out and fixes this broken game.

Go ahead. In the meantime, I'll continue to enjoy playing this fully-operational death star. I mean game.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: Civilization V Patched Oct 1, 2010, 12:25 Yifes
 
Bhruic wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 20:16:
It's simplistic, no depth, with no real feeling to the game.
People keep saying it's "simplistic" with no evidence to back that claim up. What exactly supposedly makes it simplistic? And in what way is it more simplistic? Personally, I think that adjusting a slider is much simpler than the economic system they have now. Combat has more depth. Various resources are scarcer, requiring more strategy in planning. I don't find it more simplistic, I do find they stripped away some of the extraneous non-fun parts.

Combat may have more depth, but the AI does NOT know how to handle this new tactical warfare. At least with Civ 4 stacks the AI can brute force its way to semi-effectiveness. With war being such an important part of Civ 5, the AI having the intelligence of a vegetable does not make the game fun.

The game is also lacking from a builder's perspective. Building maintenance is so high that, despite a long list of unique buildings, only a handful are actually worth building. This is especially true given the lower production capability of your cities compared to Civ 4. Food resource bonuses only give you +1 food, which is somehow worse than riverside farms, and totally pales in comparison to the ridiculously broken and overpowered maritime state bonuses.

Some elements which were removed from the game or replaced, like religion, city health and civics make the game more simplistic. Furthermore, the design choices that they put into place instead do not work very well.

Social policies for example, depend on culture to unlock what is essentially another tech tree. However, the game punishes you for having more cities - forcing you to make the nonsensical choice of having a larger empire, or having better culture and SP's.

Is Civ 5 a bad game? No. It does a lot of great things. But I'll be shelving it until an expansion comes out and fixes this broken game.

This comment was edited on Oct 1, 2010, 12:56.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 20:16 Bhruic
 
It's simplistic, no depth, with no real feeling to the game.

People keep saying it's "simplistic" with no evidence to back that claim up. What exactly supposedly makes it simplistic? And in what way is it more simplistic? Personally, I think that adjusting a slider is much simpler than the economic system they have now. Combat has more depth. Various resources are scarcer, requiring more strategy in planning. I don't find it more simplistic, I do find they stripped away some of the extraneous non-fun parts.

The differences from Civ3 to Civ4 were small.

Spoken like someone who's forgotten the massive outcry that occurred when Civ IV came out.

but I'm just going back to civ4

Entirely valid choice. If you prefer Civ IV, that's the game you should play. Personally, while I greatly enjoyed Civ IV, I'm finding V to be at least as enjoyable.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 19:45 AirWreck
 
DarkCntry wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 18:18:
I don't quite gather what you're talking about when you say you don't need "various tech to get tech" as I do recall plenty of branching requirements.

I think what was meant by needing techs for other techs is that the dependency tree is more complex than what the arrows indicate. For example in Civ IV, Metal Casting requires Bronze Working and Pottery, but there is no arrow from Pottery to it, because Pottery is far away and an arrow would have to cross over other arrows.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 19:24 Sepharo
 
Yosemite Sam wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 18:56:
You mean besides the fact a half blind person could use it at 20 paces? It takes up twice the space with less then half the information.

Civ4
Civ4

Civ5
Civ5

I just don't know what the hell you're talking about. The information is simply presented better in Civ5. All those panels are collapsible, the stats up top are mouse over for more detail.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 18:56 Yosemite Sam
 
Sepharo wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 17:26:
Yosemite Sam wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 15:29:
a GUI straight out of console land.

This is the second time you've said this, and for a second time I'm going to ask you to explain yourself: How is the GUI like a console GUI?

You mean besides the fact a half blind person could use it at 20 paces? It takes up twice the space with less then half the information. Heh, but of course with this game being gutted like it has, less then half the information is more then double what you need for this simplistic click fest

Really like the new combat though, and the hex grid. I wish they would have just improved on 4, tweaked it, upgraded the GFX and implemented the new combat system. But they didnt, they rebooted the whole franchise and made it casual gamer friendly... meh, saved me sixty bucks and I still got 4 to get my Civ fix... which after being so underwhelmed by 5 I got motivated to play a game of 4 and consequently only got a few hours sleep after staying up way too late the other night... just one more turn...

 
Avatar 21539
 
PSN id PR345(PS3) PST Wanna jam? Hit me up on PSN, Mention Blues News.

Looking for an active crew in GTA 5? I'm a Crew lieutenant for VCCM, adults only, 500+ members.

CIV4 MOD http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=326525
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 18:18 DarkCntry
 
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 17:37:
It's simplistic, no depth, with no real feeling to the game.

This is one subjective complaint, as I'm finding plenty of depth on the harder difficulties to rival that of all of the earlier Civ games in the franchise. Hell, I've found more simplicity in parts of the MOO games than in Civ V.

The differences from Civ3 to Civ4 were small. Personally they broke with what made the game good, I'd expect to see it slipping on metacritic to around 7-8/10. Don't like the new layout for civics, don't like the changes to the tech tree either.

What did they break? There's really nothing missing that wasn't in previous Civ games. They streamlined a lot of extra info that was not needed out of the general gameplay, the turns are more focused and precise to what needs to be done. Not quite sure why you don't like the Policies page, as it's almost pound-for-pound nothing more than a single-screen tech-tree.

As someone mentioned how is it like a console GUI? It's simplistic, easy to click, with big shiny buttons. Unit are super-high-sparkly, no unit stacking. It feels clunky and obtuse compared to previous civ's.

I fail to see how making the GUI focused and easier to navigate a negative, especially when stating that it's "like a console" as if it was a detrimental aspect. I get the same amount of information required in a less amount of intrusive areas, which means to me that it's a grand improvement.

Bad design changes. Wait, you mean a group of 15 guys is gonna take on a city? Nah you're required to have bombard gear now. Transports? Nah we don't need it, they're auto provided. Don't need various tech to get tech, and so on. No direct culture/gold/science adjustments.

Yes, because making Civ more realistic is a bad thing. Transports were just 'extras' and after a few tech advances you were having less and less transports in previous Civs and were just using your military craft. The change in Civ V made things far less tedious and, again, more streamlined to fit. Attacking a city should require bombarding units, as considering the aspects of a city it's highly doubtful you'll find one 'unprotected' without a wall in Civ games.

I don't quite gather what you're talking about when you say you don't need "various tech to get tech" as I do recall plenty of branching requirements. As for the direct adjustments to C/G/S, apparently you didn't look hard enough..

Meh I'm hoping some mod will fix the game, but I'm just going back to civ4, and away from the consolization.

Yes, because using it as a derogatory word makes you just that much more a gamer. Rolleyes
 
Avatar 24330
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 17:37 Mashiki Amiketo
 
Bhruic wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 12:51:
Yeah, I'm quite annoyed about how many negative comments about the game are based on "it doesn't do X from Civ IV". This was never meant to just be Civ IV with newer graphics. It was a re-tool of the franchise, just like Civ IV was quite different from Civ III.
It's simplistic, no depth, with no real feeling to the game.

The differences from Civ3 to Civ4 were small. Personally they broke with what made the game good, I'd expect to see it slipping on metacritic to around 7-8/10. Don't like the new layout for civics, don't like the changes to the tech tree either.

As someone mentioned how is it like a console GUI? It's simplistic, easy to click, with big shiny buttons. Unit are super-high-sparkly, no unit stacking. It feels clunky and obtuse compared to previous civ's.

Bad design changes. Wait, you mean a group of 15 guys is gonna take on a city? Nah you're required to have bombard gear now. Transports? Nah we don't need it, they're auto provided. Don't need various tech to get tech, and so on. No direct culture/gold/science adjustments.

Meh I'm hoping some mod will fix the game, but I'm just going back to civ4, and away from the consolization.
 
--
"For every human problem,
there is a neat, simple solution;
and it is always wrong."
--H.L. Mencken
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 17:26 Sepharo
 
Yosemite Sam wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 15:29:
a GUI straight out of console land.

This is the second time you've said this, and for a second time I'm going to ask you to explain yourself: How is the GUI like a console GUI?
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 15:29 Yosemite Sam
 
Based on the DEMO, its pretty much everything I feared it would be, simplified for the masses. Everything cut to the bone, whats left was made simple and a GUI straight out of console land. This isnt Civ5, its Civ:Rev2. Only get 100 turns with the demo, with Civ4 I'd be hooked and pissed that the game wouldnt let me play anymore, with this one I could not have cared less. Of course I like the complexity and options of Civ4, so if Civ4 was too much for you and you just want a simple Civ game that you can just jump in and play, Civ5 maybe for you.

 
Avatar 21539
 
PSN id PR345(PS3) PST Wanna jam? Hit me up on PSN, Mention Blues News.

Looking for an active crew in GTA 5? I'm a Crew lieutenant for VCCM, adults only, 500+ members.

CIV4 MOD http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=326525
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 12:51 Bhruic
 
not sure why people need it to be just like Civ4

Yeah, I'm quite annoyed about how many negative comments about the game are based on "it doesn't do X from Civ IV". This was never meant to just be Civ IV with newer graphics. It was a re-tool of the franchise, just like Civ IV was quite different from Civ III.

Frankly, the only negative comment that I've seen that has a lot of weight (besides bugs) is the combat AI. Or lack thereof. While the computer is capable of using brute force to achieve its goal, it's incredibly stupid about how it goes about it. But, then, the base AI in Civ IV was quite poor too, it wasn't until later BTS that it really started to get decent, and even then, it was never particularily stellar. I'm sure they'll be able to tool this one up as they go.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 12:25 Brubold
 
I'm enjoying the game so far. I've won a Space Race victory but that was on Chieftain. I've got several Prince level games in progress as I'm trying out different Civs to see how they play.

The worst thing I've found and others have confirmed is that computer Civs don't seem to ever explore beyond their own starting continent. This means that if you conquer your own continent you can basically sit back free of worry and try for one of the other victory types.

Other than that I am really liking the game. It's buggy but hopefully this patch will start to address those issues. I seem to be in the minority in that I actually like City-States. I like to let them get captured and then liberate them so they are Allies for the rest of the game with very little upkeep required.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Civilization V Patched Sep 28, 2010, 11:42 StingingVelvet
 
It's different and different is good... not sure why people need it to be just like Civ4, that game still works and plays well. This game is about more tactical battles, RPG-like social progression and a slower, more streamlined growth mindset. For everything they simplified they added complexity elsewhere... try staying happy as a nation on anything higher than prince difficulty while also expanding to get the resources needed to beat the other civs in tech. It takes a LOT of management.

In any event, it's different, yes. If you don't like it play Civ4... I personally love both, and for now at least the amazing improvements to warfare and expansion make Civ5 much more appealing.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Civilization V Patch Sep 28, 2010, 09:59 creatorswhim
 
I really feel like Civ V is directly descended from Civ I. It's like they threw out all the things that Brian Reynolds brought in to Civ II (and AC as well) and chose a new evolutionary path.

Not a bad thing, but it's an entirely different game from Civ II, III and IV.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Civilization V Patch Sep 28, 2010, 09:45 briktal
 
gray wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 08:57:
Firstly loved previous Civs and spent alot of time on them. But this just seems like Civ-lite.

The combat system for instance is just broken, Archers are ranged units but Tanks aren't? Which has the larger engagement range would you say .

Why add ranged units but still have melee combat at all after say 1800.

I also found the gunpowder transition to be really weird, which is when archers get phased out. However, once you get past that it doesn't feel so weird that tanks and infantry don't have a ranged attack.

City-States start off being really expensive. However, Patronage really helps, allowing you to decrease the rate you lose influence, increase how much influence you get for x amount of gold, and adding the 20 influence minimum. Overall the cultural ones are the least useful, but the food bonus from maritime city-states is really strong. Military city-states, later in the game at least, are cheaper/faster ways to get units with Patronage and/or being Greece, though you might not get what you want and I don't think you'll ever get naval or air units. They can also be a useful ally in a war if they are near the enemy, though at the moment the AI is kinda bad at fighting (not doing a good job of protecting ranged units, not managing wounded units well, maybe some bad priorities in targets).

One unit per tile works well, but it can be a pain for non-combat units. It also makes multi-turn moves annoying as a unit will cancel their movement (though you'll get alerted so no movement points are lost) if a unit ends their turn in a tile that will block the path, even if it's several turns down the line.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Civilization V Patch Sep 28, 2010, 09:26 gray
 
Being complicated is what made Civ great, you could go as deep as you liked. Accessibility should be kept for console titles.

Also, I'd hardly call bayonets the primary weapon of a modern infantryman. Apparently the use of one is in itself newsworthy!

Anyway, it's a new take on an old title. Kudos to them for having the guts to do it. Over time I'm sure they will get the balance correct.
 
Avatar 54867
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Civilization V Patch Sep 28, 2010, 09:23 eunichron
 
gray wrote on Sep 28, 2010, 08:57:
Why add ranged units but still have melee combat at all after say 1800.

Yeah, because melee combat never happens in modern warfare ;); British officer kills some Taliban with his bayonet

But really, all it seems to me is that the interface from the last few games has been streamlined. It's less clunky, more intuitive, and for those reasons I never was a huge fan of the earlier Civs, but I'm loving Civ V so far. I wouldn't call it "consolized" (how the fuck is a TBS game consolized?), or Civ-lite... just uhh... Civ-without-the-steep-learning/frustration-curve.
 
Avatar 13977
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Civilization V Patch Sep 28, 2010, 08:57 gray
 
Firstly loved previous Civs and spent alot of time on them. But this just seems like Civ-lite.

The combat system for instance is just broken, Archers are ranged units but Tanks aren't? Which has the larger engagement range would you say .

Why add ranged units but still have melee combat at all after say 1800.
 
Avatar 54867
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Civilization V Patch Sep 28, 2010, 04:48 Mashiki Amiketo
 
Eh I'm almost done my first game. Personally the entire thing feels consolized. Something lacking or missing, and I've played Civ->CivIV and enjoyed them all.

I agree that the city state prices are too high, I'd just rather capture them instead. Land seems 'small' for the cities you make, and I dunno overall the game seems off. I'd probably give it a 7 or so, it's fun, but it hasn't hooked me like Civ4 or Civ3 did where I lost an entire night of sleep.

Maybe once some mods are out, that fix the sluggishness of the game it'll be better.
 
--
"For every human problem,
there is a neat, simple solution;
and it is always wrong."
--H.L. Mencken
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo