Civilization VI


#3513

I think it was a brave move to explore in a direction which probably didn’t need to be explored. Someone was very keen in gutting pretty much every other system in the game to get their vision implemented. I am not sure it is something that stems from inexperience rather than character.

Going back to stacks with “wargamey” chrome is totally the sensible way to go. But as Adam said, if past record means anything, “sensible” seems to be meaning something different for 2K.


#3514

It’s Cry Havoc, and it’s pretty fantastic. Probably my favourite dudes-on-a-map type game. That combat system is great, and quite flexible, because you don’t always want to conquer a region, and capturing prisoners scores you valuable points, etc. (Honestly, if readers here aren’t familiar with the game, check out the rules PDF in the BGG link; it’s a very elegant system and a great set of rules.)


#3515

Monthly appeal to Civ creators who aren’t listening:

Imperialism solved the 4X bloat problem 20 years ago, while still allowing for worker micromanagement.

Just do what Imperialism did! Or make Imperialism 3 that solves the specific hangups both games had! >_<


#3516

Agreed!

The Eador games took the same approach of only having development in your capital, and they were also wonderful.


#3517

Thought I’d contribute to the thread with the latest leader reveal for the new expansion. I like the idea of what they have done with this leader, but I think if I have two Eleanors in a game, I’ll just as likely quit as I did when I had two Pericles in another Civ VI game. This was back before they had to option to have unique leaders.


#3518

I find it fascinating that with all the hate for this game, the expansion is topping the top seller list

Makes you wonder who is wrong in their view of this game


#3519

Heh, I know what you mean, but really no one’s wrong. It sells well enough because there’s a lot of people that like it. There’s also a lot of people that dislike it, for all the reasons discussed throughout this thread.

I think Qt3 has a lot more strategy game fans than a typical community, so it skews pretty negative here. I think by most strategy measurements, the game is pretty poor. But if you just want to launch a spaceship after spinning plates, it works.

There’s also probably the die hard Civ fans buying the game hoping that THIS was the expansion that was going to make it work for them. That was me in Civ5.


#3520

I had the same thought yesterday.

I read through and got caught up with the dozens of QT3 comments endlessly grumbling about Civ then went to browse the Steam Lunar Sale and noticed that Gathering Storm was the number 1 top seller on Steam when I checked. Heh.


#3521

It’s also a lot better game played multiplayer, as you’d expect for a game where the primary flaw is the AI.


#3522

As a long time Civ fan I find it hard to hate V or VI, just disappointed in it. This is the first expansion I haven’t bought at release. Once I can get it for < $25 I’ll likely get it. My guess is then I’ll play a game with each of the new leaders and then put it away for a long time.


#3523

It looks pretty enough and plays well enough to satisfy those people who just want to mess around with a Civ game for a month or so before moving on to the next new thing. Those that complain are the diehards who spend way too much time on it and want it to be better.

It’s like watching every single episode of Star Trek: Discovery and absolutely hating every second of it. I know by now that it’s terrible, but I also know how good a thing called Star Trek can be, and it’s the hope of the Powers That Be finally coming to the same realization that keeps me tuning in despite my better judgement. Civilization is like that for a lot of people, I imagine. And yet, Star Trek: Discovery, like Civilization, seems to be doing okay commercially, because the people that actually watch it don’t have the same hang ups that folks like me do.

So most people who play Civ6 and watch Discovery and find enjoyment in these things are, I assume, a lot happier than complainers like me. I also know that those people who enjoy these things are terribly wrong. :-P


#3524

I’ve bought ever Civ game starting with the first, and I enjoyed them all in in their own way. I find the whole Civ VI experience to be very meh. I have trouble finishing games. I see there are some like minded people here. But when I peek over at Reddit, I see people wetting their pants with excitement over how the new Civ VI expansion is going to be “the best DLC ever made”. And when I casually observe that it isn’t even out yet, let’s wait and see what how it plays before we rate it, I pick up tons of down votes.

Different demographics? Is that mostly a younger set with different expectations? I really have no idea.


#3525

How does MP work for 6? Did Giant Multiplayer Robot get their stuff working for this releae? Last time I looked it was still Civ 5 specific.


#3526

I’ve played using PYDT for a PBEM-like experience. By all accounts the actual support for MP in the game is pretty awful.


#3527

That’s probably the thing for us here on QT3. We are all Civ veterans. I don’t doubt there is a bit of Civ burnout in play that does not apply to those much newer to the series.

Having said that, I’ve had my fun with Civ6, but not enough so that i am going to shell out for the expansions, at least not at full price.


#3528

Bingo. I dislike Civ, because I have passed it by. The flaws are insufferable to me. Even in the classics, I just can’t countenance to play them now. It’s not them, it’s me.

But if you are lightly into strategy, instead of it being your primary, then it’s probably fine. And for them I would not point them to my preferred options. They would run screaming from EU IV I’m sure.


#3529

Cool. I see in the forums they even have it working for Beyond Earth.


#3530

My sister loves this game. I don’t enjoy it. It’s not really… a view.


#3531

Hey I’ve been playing Civ 5 Beyond Earth. I am not sure which is worse.


#3532

I bought the DLC for the Lunar sale, cause I’m still a sucker for Civ (probably the game that got me into PC gaming way back with CivNet)

Civ 6 is, in my mind, easily the worst of the series. It isn’t even close really. Yet, booting it up I still enjoy the early exploration and expansion. However, the city spam, district mechanics, and awful religious warfare have me burned out by midgame.

Is there any reason to not just have as many cities as possible?

Also - if you look at steamspy at any given time, you usually see about as many people still playing Civ5 as Civ6. That has to be a somewhat concerning statistic for Firaxis. The game might be doing adequately, but it seems to clear to me at least that it isn’t doing as well as it should