Civilization V Coming This Fall

[Homerboy]

Everyone is surmising that they may do something in the future, but right now it seems like they are there to 'spice' things up making it sound like you have a pact of cooperation or a secret agreement when in fact they are useless.

wait. So they literally do NOTHING right now? Come on.

 

[StinkyPinky]

yeah but not WHY
The old Civs would tell you "I'm hostile cuz XYZ"
This time around its just "Hrmmppph. I don't like you!"
Well shit... give me a REASON dude and lets work it out!

True. I prefer the Civ 4 diplomacy as well. Not sure why they changed it.

 

[coloumb]

wait. So they literally do NOTHING right now? Come on.

I have noticed that if I form a pact with say "America", and I go to war with "Japan", if "America" has a pact with "Japan" - "America will cancel the pact".

Here are a few ideas floating around [google search]:

Cooperation raises your friendliness with the AI. They'll be less likely to declare war on you, and other hostile acts. They can always end the pact and then declare war though.

The secrecy thing makes the AI stop trading with the selected player. It will make them more hostile towards them with other things too, like no research agreements and worse trades.

It actually says in-game what they do if you mouse over the request.

1.)Pacts of cooperation start you down the road to being buddies. Opening up things like beneficial trade arrangements.

2.) Pacts of secrecy make the two agreeing civs dislike the third Civ. So Rome and Greece sign a pact against Arabia. Both will start to hate Arabia. If you hold up to your end of the deal (meaning you dont' trade etc with Arabia). Otherwise this will cause you do in essence break the secrecy deal. Most useful for starting a war with multiple allies on your side or not on theirs. Since if everyone is in secrecy with you against them, they won't go to war with them.

 

[CPA]

i have a feeling the civ5 they released was designed with future console releases in mind. it's heavily consolized, in fact i've seen several Civ Rev fans on the civ forums saying how much they love the game. they're not trying to appeal to long time PC gamers anymore, they want new casual gamers. civ5 is no more than a glorified Civ Rev. they should've released this game on the consoles as Civ Rev 2 instead on the PC.

In an interview with a CivFanatic poster, one of the developers of Civ 5 basically confessed to that.

 

[CPA]

I just read over at CivFanatics that there is a patch out this morning. Did anyone here get it?

 

[paperfist]

I just read over at CivFanatics that there is a patch out this morning. Did anyone here get it?

Not yet, but hopefully the quote from a civfanatics user isn't an indication of how well it isn't:

WOW the patch killed savefiles!!! YEEEY

Yeah... And thanks for letting me see who's in the game before I meat them via "single player score board".

 

[CPA]

Not yet, but hopefully the quote from a civfanatics user isn't an indication of how well it isn't:

Apparently it's only killing saved games on the Deluxe version, not the standard version, though that's not really a consolation.

 

[paperfist]

Apparently it's only killing saved games on the Deluxe version, not the standard version, though that's not really a consolation.

Yeah after getting an invalid install error on Steam, I relaunched and found that on my deluxe version that reloading old saved games causes a CtD. I don't see what that other user said about seeing leaders you haven't met on the scoreboard though as mine showed no one.

It looks like starting a game has been sped up, however the intro movie now plays longer for me before cutting out to the menu

I'll try out a new game tonight and see how it goes, the patch notes seemed kind of small though.

Patch notes 3 posts down if anyone wants to read up on 'em: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=393447

 

[Bateluer]

http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=23121

 

[minmaster]

In an interview with a CivFanatic poster, one of the developers of Civ 5 basically confessed to that.

those bastards... link please?

 

[zinfamous]

Soooo, shouldn't you guys be playing Elemental by now?

seems to have the same AI problems and similar mechanics issues, but much less of a disappointment since there is no franchise to tarnish?

 

[paperfist]

those bastards... link please?

I haven't had a chance to listen to it, but it's a pod cast http://fronttowardsgamer.com/2010/1...o-episode-28-dennis-shirk-for-civilization-5/

and an excerpt that CPA is referring to on civfantic's front page:

"Shirk mentioned how Civ 4 with BtS was considered to be near "perfect balance" by hardcore fans. Making Civ 5, they knew that making a better balanced game would be--"How do you make something over Beyond the Sword?" So they decided to change game concepts and such. And yes, as BtS pleased the hardcore fans, they decided to make 5 appeal more to those who might have loved Rev and wanted something more--but who may not be ready to leap into Civ 4's complexity.

Social Policies were made permanent because Shafer wanted people to develop a system over time that would be meaningful and not simply switched around. Shafer would be able to answer more fully the question why Social Policies are permanent, Shirk emphasized--but historically the idea is that you put "ideas into your people"--Americans who are democratic would be hard pressed to suddenly switch to Communism, is the *imo pretty good* example Shirk gave.

"Balance is ongoing"--esp. with the Civ series. To quote, Shirk said the testing team was a "fraction of a fraction of a percent of the total number of users" and that therefore future feedback and current feedback will play a part in later balance patches etc.

"We love the people who make enormous complex mods"--Shirk mentioned he knew forumers would include people who analyze, down to tiles and such--who would deliver constructive criticism--and really angry forumers, and people who were ecstatic--and people somewhere in the middle."

 

[coloumb]

http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=23121

A lot of fixes.. yet nothing to resolve issue with the AI taking so damn long between turns [nor barbarians and AI's not randomly attacking each other]. I remember Civ 4 had an option to disable showing AI moves - that definitely helped speed up the game.

This is an interesting power point presentation about the transition from Civ 3 to Civ 4 [and applies to Civ 5 as well] - 3.2mb zip file:

http://www.civfanatics.net/downloads/misc/gdc04soren.zip

As for Elemental - I may give that a try once I've tired of Civ 5 - I'm not a hard core civ fan so that's probably why I'm having fun.

 

[murphy55d]

Someone at Civfanatics determined the workers were causing the slowdown between turns. The more workers in your 'world' at once, the slower it goes between turns, something to do with the way the worker AI evaluates it's moves/improvements.

 

[Maximilian]

God this game bogs down real fast even though ive still got about 3GB free RAM left and the CPU isnt taxed at all...

 

[MrMatt]

wow did this shit fail epically. I honestly played this thing for like 15 hours and never touched it again

 

[minmaster]

haha this game makes black ops seem like a bargain

 

[paperfist]

It's not funny it's sad

How the hell do you take an epic franchise that's been around since 1991 and run it into the ground after coming off the wildly successful Civ IV:BTS?!?!?!

 

[zinfamous]

so you guys bumped this thread only to remind each other how disappointed you are?



I clicked, thinking this was bumped b/c of a new patch or something that finally made it awesome.

 

[SpunkyJones]

wow did this shit fail epically. I honestly played this thing for like 15 hours and never touched it again

You're smarter than me, it took me 19 hours to figure out I can't play this piece of crap any more. Maybe some patching or mods will help in the future, but for now I'm done with it and very disappointed in my favorite game franchise.

 

[QuantumPion]

I tried to like Civ5, I really did. But on the 4th game I played, cranked up to immortal, I basically had the game in the bag after the first 100 turns and couldn't bother trying to finish it off. The game is just bad. There is nothing in it for a builder, there is no meaningful choices in city placement, tile improvements, or buildings. The AI is just so worthless at warfare there is no way you can lose. It's basically just sit there, hit next turn for a few hundred turns until the UN is built, buy alliances with all the city states, and gg.

 

[paperfist]

I tried to like Civ5, I really did. But on the 4th game I played, cranked up to immortal, I basically had the game in the bag after the first 100 turns and couldn't bother trying to finish it off. The game is just bad. There is nothing in it for a builder, there is no meaningful choices in city placement, tile improvements, or buildings. The AI is just so worthless at warfare there is no way you can lose. It's basically just sit there, hit next turn for a few hundred turns until the UN is built, buy alliances with all the city states, and gg.

What's really sucky about that is PC gaming isn't dieing, but instead heading in this horrifyingly numb and simplified gameplay direction. A fate worse then death.

 

[minmaster]

how and why did sid meier approve this garbage and let them put his name on it? is he a sellout or what?

 

[cixx79]

how and why did sid meier approve this garbage and let them put his name on it? is he a sellout or what?

1) Money
2) Money
3) More money

 

[MrMatt]

1) Money
2) Money
3) More money

so yes, sellout.


And I bumped this half hoping someone would say "go to civfanatics someone just posted a mod that brings back cottages, fixes the tech tree, fixes land improvements, and fixes the AI"