Will it fail like the rest of the successful series that had fallen? whats your opinion so far on the progress? comment on what the info you found so far and tell the world what you think of the progress.
Will this fail or suceed?
Will it fail like the rest of the successful series that had fallen? whats your opinion so far on the progress? comment on what the info you found so far and tell the world what you think of the progress.
Last edited by John102; 02-19-2010 at 09:55 AM.
No religion, very good idea from Civ IV scrapped
, this definetly for minus.
Hmm... If they take less attention on graphic, sounds and music (I can buy Civ 5 even, if it be created in preffered by me 2D graphic) and more to gameplay, historical correctness (so no Pikemen upgrated to Musketmen anymore, lol) and balance, unlike today developers I see success here.
Last edited by Imp. Caesar Leo Augustus; 02-19-2010 at 10:03 AM.
I'm excited about it and I don't think it will fail at all. As all I'm about to speculate on is based off 2 screenshots, they seem to have struck a balance between new gameplay elements and keeping what made civ, civ. So in this respect it won't just be civ 4 but remade, yet it also won't be a strange and foreign game for people who know the series.
I think weaver makes a good point tooOriginally Posted by Weaver
they need to aim for everyone not just ppl like us who are the hardcore few.
The few doesn't make money for the company it needs to sell alot and be successful.
Though the removal of religion is a bit of a downer as it's played a huge part in history if not shaped most if it
Exactly. Jihad, Crusades, ethics, development of science, national identify of ancient nations (Copts, Assyrians, to name a few)... Deleting of religions is fail, very big fail. I always thinking that in Civ 5 they add denominations (Orthodox, Shia, etc.) and more importance for religions (i always miss Monks in Civ IV, not only regular Clergy)
Isn't removal of religion still a rumor?
Maybe they replaced it with some other mechanic? I don't know.
I think sects may be one detail too far it wouldb great though ur own civilisation splitting up if u can't keep the religious element happy. U should be able to pander/neglect the religious elite too.
Omg sects should be great element xD. But only ancient and mediæval, cause now "political corretness" names was used (NRM lol, but whole people know what sects I mean)
Arians, Iconoclasts, Manicheans, Monophysites, Gnostics, Bogomilists, Rosicrusians, to name a few heretics and sects in Europe.
Last edited by Imp. Caesar Leo Augustus; 02-19-2010 at 11:06 AM.
I think this will succeed. Mind you, we are basing all of this off of a few screenshots and some stuff Firaxis has told us. We'll learn more as the game continues development, but, what can you say, we're all very excited.
It's a Civilization game, if it fails, then something went horribly, horribly wrong. Firaxis could ship a half finished game with no future support out and it would still sell very well(admittedly, with quite a bit of post-purchase backlash). But the fact is, the reason we all love Civ is because, historically, every Civ game has been a very, very good game that resulted in weeks of glazed-eyed addiction and I don't see Firaxis changing this tone.
The series is built on a firm reputation and the loyal support of hundreds of thousands of gamers. I don't think it is possible for it to fail, the developers love this game as much as the fans.
It's impossible to say until it happens. In another gaming universe, nobody believed anything Halo could be something other than the world's greatest whatever, and then Halo Wars came out and left a lot of kids puzzled and hurt.
Yes, we anticipate V will outdo IV, but as with every iteration of the game I think we can expect an intriguing first edition, followed by weeks of anxiously waiting for patches and fixes, then having our experience with it changed through the expansion packs. That's just the reality of the gaming industry today.
There are only a few games I'm willing to spend every extra cent on after the initial seventy dollars, and the Civ games of the past have been chief among them. That hasn't, however, made me automatically assume Firaxis or 2K won't drop the ball. I understand the prerogative of making money to business too well to have blind faith.
That being said, I hope the time between the versions of the game means a degree of expertise has gone into it that we don't find in the average game. As with my favourite RPG, taking a number of years to develop the next game should indicate pride of authorship.
In the end there have been too many games castrated by money-centric decisions to not be somewhat anxious.
I believe in Sid, and think that this will be another great game, with quite a bit of patching and balancing to really give a polished product
I LOVE religion, as flawed as it is, I hope they figure out a way to keep it.
NO! Nonnononooono! OF COURSE they make enough money to be successful: otherwise, how come we are on the 5th game? DUMBING DOWN CIV WILL NOT BRING ANY GOOD TO THE FRANCHISE, since us hardcore fans won't like it (I hated the Civ Rev demo) and most people who don't already play civ aren't interested in turn-based, management games at all, so dumbing things down won't bring more people at all.
I say this game IS MADE OF WIN. I knew this from the moment I read the press release and realized that they are ****adding complexity**** to it.
Civilization V FTW!
I think we should keep in mind that certain aspects of the game may not be reintroduced until an expansion pack. So even if there is not religion in vanilla civ5, I'll cross my fingers for it in an expansion pack.
if i can't fight for Buddha
why i should fight?
Ahh, beign defender of Christendom, it was very cool. As English, German and French crusaders too.
Last edited by Imp. Caesar Leo Augustus; 02-20-2010 at 11:24 PM.
I am very excited about Civ 5, and I don't think it will 'fail'. What Civ game has failed, by the way? I expect they were all commercial successes, and although there are always features lost or introduced that people disagree on, every edition has its ardent fans. I don't think any of the 4 could be described as anything less than very good games.
Anyway, I am eager to see what the new changes described (combat, diplomacy, hexagons) will be like in detail. I think there is every reason to be optomistic!
Additionally, Civ isn't a game that needs to worry about 'dumbing down' for the masses; unless you think the first was dumbed down! It started off doing what few other games did, which was be faithful to history and reality, much of which would have been obscure to younger gamers (I don't think I had even heard of the Babylonians before Civ). It started off that way, and found a huge base of fans. Civ games appeal to a lot of people, and it doesn't need to stray from the 'hardcore' to keep selling in droves.
Babylonians was popularized mainly by Age of Empires and division of Sumerians and Babilonians in Civ 3 was propably inspired by AoE. And I heard about Babylonians (with Amorites, Akkadians names too) before playing Civ or AoE, in my school book in history lections. What Civ games failed? Call To Power and CTP2 (maybe because they are not Sid's), games are forgotten (shame, I very liked CTP combat system) and CTP2 is only one Civ game with source code published.
Last edited by Imp. Caesar Leo Augustus; 02-21-2010 at 12:07 AM.
Call to Power, was that a spin off or expansions for Civ 2? I seem to remember hearing of a few Civ 2 'extras'. Of the main releases though, I think it is fair to say all have been good games.
By the way, when I said I hadn't heard about Babylonians before Civ, I meant Civ 1 (back in early 1990s, on the Amiga), a long time before Age of Empires.The point I was making was that Civ has had many fans from the start because of what it is, and it doesn't need to change to find new players. If they like this type of game, they will buy it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote