It took me a long time to come around to some of the changes made in V, but eventually I did so I will give this the same chance.

It may never feel like the old Civ games, but if it is fun, whatever.

jdreyer wrote on May 12, 2016, 13:58:

Beamer wrote on May 12, 2016, 07:24:

jdreyer wrote on May 12, 2016, 04:22:

VaranDragon wrote on May 12, 2016, 04:07:

Beamer wrote on May 11, 2016, 12:14:
I'm fairly certain I'll never leave 4.

Yeah, why people keep buying the same game over and over again is beyond me. Sure its a nice game, but I don't think any more can really be added to the game without changing it into something different. I think CivIV is where the gameplay of the different games has been distilled to perfection. It can't get any better than that.

Civ 5 is a pretty different game from 4. I didn't buy 5 until Gods and Kings came out, so I'd read enough to know it had a ton of differences from 4 while still being Civ. Also, it was, and still is, a gorgeous game and that really helped with immersion and playability.

Yeah, I didn't buy 5 because it wasn't the same game.

Hmm, did you play the new X-Com? It was pretty different from the original while capturing the essence of what made the original great. Ditto for Civ V. It was a ton of fun with tons of strategic options, and by now a bug free and mature experience.

The new XCOM changed what I felt needed to be changed, most notably the graphics and interface. It kept enough of the original, while making some changes I felt were for the better and some I felt were for the worse.

Or did you mean XCOM 2, which I've yet to buy but seems like a more of the same sequel. And will buy when time permits.

Civ V changes quite a bit, and Civ 4 literally has nothing I feel needs to be changed. There's a wealth of depth I have 0 understanding of (or interest in), but it lets me play exactly where I want it to be. A rare game I see no real way to improve on for the time being, and one unit per square doesn't interest me much.

I should point out I'm a very, very lazy Civ 4 player. Very lazy. I automate Workers 100% of the time and can't fathom why anyone wouldn't. War, for me, is producing a ton of units, sending them all to a tile nearest the city I want to conquer, fortifying them until I have a critical mass, declaring war, moving a large stack in, attacking as a stack, after conquering resting as a stack, then moving the stack to the next place. I do maps where I need ships as little as possible as the logistics of transporting units gets tiresome for me fairly rapidly.

The thought of having to move individual pieces of an army individually is nightmarish.

Sacrifice wrote on May 11, 2016, 15:31:

ItBurn wrote on May 11, 2016, 14:46:
Only one unit per tile of V was a complete deal breaker for me. Capturing a city was about bringing a constant stream of single units rather than attacking it with large forces. It wasn't fun. It looks like they improved that a bit, but I don't feel like it'll be enough.

To each his own, but I prefer the one unit per tile mechanic. Made for more strategic maneuvering and easier to manage.

It made cities particularly strong against sieges. Your siege weaponry didn't last long against a properly upgraded city since the attack range of the city and the siege weaponry was about the same and sieges took a really, really, really long time. Which I get, and appreciate on some level, but it needed some tweaking.

Eventually against the AI you'd just fortify a really defensive unit outside their gates first, let it get the living crap beat out of it while you moved your siege engines in to batter the city. Stupid solution for what I consider a design flaw.

Hell, if I remember, my copy of the original Civ was a special edition. $80 with a huge manual and a shitty mousepad.

$80 in 1991: ~$140 now. I don't know what people complain about with video game prices - there are so many cheap options nowadays. If you really insist that the price of the "full game" (base with all the DLCs) should be so low, just have some self-control and wait a year or so after release before buying. Problem solved. Doing it with DA:I now.

Beamer wrote on May 12, 2016, 07:24:

jdreyer wrote on May 12, 2016, 04:22:

VaranDragon wrote on May 12, 2016, 04:07:

Beamer wrote on May 11, 2016, 12:14:
I'm fairly certain I'll never leave 4.

Yeah, why people keep buying the same game over and over again is beyond me. Sure its a nice game, but I don't think any more can really be added to the game without changing it into something different. I think CivIV is where the gameplay of the different games has been distilled to perfection. It can't get any better than that.

Civ 5 is a pretty different game from 4. I didn't buy 5 until Gods and Kings came out, so I'd read enough to know it had a ton of differences from 4 while still being Civ. Also, it was, and still is, a gorgeous game and that really helped with immersion and playability.

Yeah, I didn't buy 5 because it wasn't the same game.

Hmm, did you play the new X-Com? It was pretty different from the original while capturing the essence of what made the original great. Ditto for Civ V. It was a ton of fun with tons of strategic options, and by now a bug free and mature experience.

Linksil wrote on May 12, 2016, 00:19:

Sepharo wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:29:

Cutter wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:25:
Fucking $80? Suck my balls! Can't say I much care for the stylized look either.

$60.
What's the deal with people using digital deluxe prices all the time lately? Same thing was happening with Overwatch.

Because the deluxe is what used to be called the normal game. Not to mention all the "cut" dlc depending on who you ask/what game. Some games you can't even get the best play options without getting the deluxe edition.

So I went to see what the DD version is. Steam has it listed... and doesn't spell out what it is. I feel like Steam always does this - has a more expensive version, but nowhere does it list the difference.

According to Amazon, the DD is:

Expand your empire further with the Civilization VI Digital Deluxe which includes the full base game, the 25th Anniversary Digital Soundtrack, and access to four post-launch DLC packs* that will add new maps, scenarios, civilizations and leaders for a bundled discount.

So it's a special soundtrack and a season pass. Sorry, that was never called the "normal game." How many expansions did Civ 4 have? That wasn't the "normal game."

Hell, if I remember, my copy of the original Civ was a special edition. $80 with a huge manual and a shitty mousepad.

jdreyer wrote on May 12, 2016, 04:22:

VaranDragon wrote on May 12, 2016, 04:07:

Beamer wrote on May 11, 2016, 12:14:
I'm fairly certain I'll never leave 4.

Yeah, why people keep buying the same game over and over again is beyond me. Sure its a nice game, but I don't think any more can really be added to the game without changing it into something different. I think CivIV is where the gameplay of the different games has been distilled to perfection. It can't get any better than that.

Yeah, I didn't buy 5 because it wasn't the same game.

Civ 5 is a pretty different game from 4. I didn't buy 5 until Gods and Kings came out, so I'd read enough to know it had a ton of differences from 4 while still being Civ. Also, it was, and still is, a gorgeous game and that really helped with immersion and playability.

VaranDragon wrote on May 12, 2016, 04:07:

Beamer wrote on May 11, 2016, 12:14:
I'm fairly certain I'll never leave 4.

Yeah, why people keep buying the same game over and over again is beyond me. Sure its a nice game, but I don't think any more can really be added to the game without changing it into something different. I think CivIV is where the gameplay of the different games has been distilled to perfection. It can't get any better than that.

Civ 5 is a pretty different game from 4. I didn't buy 5 until Gods and Kings came out, so I'd read enough to know it had a ton of differences from 4 while still being Civ. Also, it was, and still is, a gorgeous game and that really helped with immersion and playability.

Sepharo wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:29:

Cutter wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:25:
Fucking $80? Suck my balls! Can't say I much care for the stylized look either.

$60.
What's the deal with people using digital deluxe prices all the time lately? Same thing was happening with Overwatch.

Pretty sure Cutter is giving the price in Canadian dollars?

Beamer wrote on May 11, 2016, 12:14:
I'm fairly certain I'll never leave 4.

Yeah, why people keep buying the same game over and over again is beyond me. Sure its a nice game, but I don't think any more can really be added to the game without changing it into something different. I think CivIV is where the gameplay of the different games has been distilled to perfection. It can't get any better than that.

I can't expect any further development on Beyond Earth? That's disappointing. I was looking forward to at least one more large add-on.

Linksil wrote on May 12, 2016, 00:19:

Sepharo wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:29:

Cutter wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:25:
Fucking $80? Suck my balls! Can't say I much care for the stylized look either.

$60.
What's the deal with people using digital deluxe prices all the time lately? Same thing was happening with Overwatch.

Because the deluxe is what used to be called the normal game. Not to mention all the "cut" dlc depending on who you ask/what game. Some games you can't even get the best play options without getting the deluxe edition.

No. Sorry that's not why people are mistakenly giving the digital deluxe price instead of the actual base price.

Hell, the majority of the additional content in Overwatch's digital deluxe edition wasn't even for Overwatch.

Sepharo wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:29:

Cutter wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:25:
Fucking $80? Suck my balls! Can't say I much care for the stylized look either.

$60.
What's the deal with people using digital deluxe prices all the time lately? Same thing was happening with Overwatch.

Because the deluxe is what used to be called the normal game. Not to mention all the "cut" dlc depending on who you ask/what game. Some games you can't even get the best play options without getting the deluxe edition.

Cutter wrote on May 11, 2016, 23:25:
Fucking $80? Suck my balls! Can't say I much care for the stylized look either.

$60.
What's the deal with people using digital deluxe prices all the time lately? Same thing was happening with Overwatch.

Fucking $80? Suck my balls! Can't say I much care for the stylized look either.

SWEEEEEEET! Enjoyed all the civs, so looking forward to this.

Civ 2 and Civ 1 were my personal favorites though.

That's a nice way of saying Sid Meier isn't the designer of Civilization 6. The only Civ he was lead designer of was the very first.

Number 4 was my personal favorite in the series so far, but I have enjoyed each entry very much. I have gotten my moneys worth out of it every single release and there just aren't many franchises I can say that about. I will obviously watch the preview trailers etc as we get closer to release, but I am having a really hard time imagining myself being in a position where I wouldn't be buying this game in the first week of release...if not on the first day.

ItBurn wrote on May 11, 2016, 14:46:
Only one unit per tile of V was a complete deal breaker for me. Capturing a city was about bringing a constant stream of single units rather than attacking it with large forces. It wasn't fun. It looks like they improved that a bit, but I don't feel like it'll be enough.

A constant stream won't even work. They made capturing cities more about pounding with artillery, ships, and/or bombers. The way that it should be.

Paragraph #1:

Sid Meier’s Civilization VI is the next entry in the award-winning Civilization franchise...

Paragraph #2:

Originally created by legendary game designer Sid Meier...

You don't say!? I was puzzled as to who the creator of this series was, since his name is right in the title of the game, and the first two fucking words of the press release!!!! Even the PR people are getting too stupid...