Sid Meier's Civilization V

1. unitas83

   Sep 22, 2010

   10

   A fantastic addition to the Civ franchise. My greatest complaint with previous Civ games, which I've been playing since 1991, was that largeA fantastic addition to the Civ franchise. My greatest complaint with previous Civ games, which I've been playing since 1991, was that large armies were extremely unwieldy and frustrating to manage. Sea transportation logistics were also a frustrating time sink. Both of these problems have been solved with Civ V. Everything about the game screams polish and it runs like an absolute dream, haven't had a hitch yet which is becoming so rare with new releases.… Expand

   • 48 of 93 users found this helpful
2. Dal_ReviewedDat

   Mar 17, 2016

   10

   Lol - some people rated Civ5 a ZERO. Who are these morons?
   
   So... a perfect 10. Well... it's not a perfect 10 on it's lonesome, but holdLol - some people rated Civ5 a ZERO. Who are these morons?
   
   So... a perfect 10. Well... it's not a perfect 10 on it's lonesome, but hold out for a steam sale and get ALL the DLC, and you will have that perfect Civ experience you've craved since you were a 10 year old boy playing the original CIV. Maybe just me, but hey.
   
   I think one issue I'd always had with Civ was time itself. Always starting 4000 BC and finding that by 0 AD you are mostly struggling to keep up with where science would be in real life, mainly because the game goes in huge chunks until it slows down in the 18c. Civ5 addresses this by slowing time right down (optional!) to a snails pace. This makes early exploration and warfare so much more interesting and unlike previous versions whereby I would rush to gunpowder to blow the enemy away, I now can take on other civs much easier with early combat units, and it's great fun!
   
   I found in my early play through's that I was consistently running at negative gold. Civ5 is a lot more rewarding than any predecessor come micro-managing. Never before has time spent on controlling workers yourself or manually doing city resources so effective. On the harder two settings, I find it near impossible to build an early wonder first without using workers to clear forests for extra production towards it. This feels more credible and stops the player running away with all the benefits come the medieval era.
   Trade reminds me of "Call to Power" slightly, in that you build the caravan from a city as you normally would, but you can't control them as normal units, instead you send them from a city on a trade route. The benefits of trading with other civilisations and especially city-states is hugely beneficial. This means I rarely have a play through whereby I'm at war with everyone at once. Balance feels a great deal more strategic than before.
   The culture element I still love. By increasing your culture, you move your boundaries out. Also, once enough has been accumulated, you can take up social policies. Instead of having flat governments, Civ5 gives you all the policies for all the governments and you can build up and unlock as you go, and develop them further in time. It works really well. Also, it affects the desire to build as many cities as you can. Instead, it maybe much more beneficial to have just 4 cities with high culture than 30 cities with rednecks in.
   
   Unlike previous versions, Civ5 rewards players for playing the hand their dealt. Often I would find on older versions that I tend to follow the same path and same achievements to get to any given end goal. In Civ5 this really doesn't pay off. Early research is much better to be aimed at resources and the land you've found yourself on. More than this though, Civ5 requires you to plan ahead. Decide early (by 2000BC at least!) what goal you wish to achieve, how you wish to win and then pursue it using all the elements. I love Civ5 for this. It's much more rewarding playing a 40hour game where the final 30hours have been pre-planned like a masters game of chess.
   
   My steam account shows I've put in nearly 1100 hours into Civ5. I think this says it all. A masterpiece I can always return to. For fans, it may take a little adjusting, but once you get the hang of it you will love it as I have. The DLC does add a lot more to it - but I won't go into that now… Expand

   • 0 of 2 users found this helpful
4. stocean

   Oct 9, 2011

   9

   Civ V is definitely my favorite 4X games out there and I still play it along with Civ IV BTS(Yes! playing both is possible). The core gameplayCiv V is definitely my favorite 4X games out there and I still play it along with Civ IV BTS(Yes! playing both is possible). The core gameplay of Civ series is still there presented in beautiful graphic and slimmed down interface coupled with very engaging combat system. The game had many issues on its first release but since then great effort from both Firaxis and Civ community has improved this game a lot more just like in 2005 they did to Civ IV.… Expand

   • 1 of 4 users found this helpful
5. HONDOMAN

   Oct 15, 2013

   8

   This game is the most addicting game I have ever played. While I have only played Civilization IV and this one, I can say that Civilization VThis game is the most addicting game I have ever played. While I have only played Civilization IV and this one, I can say that Civilization V is fantastic. Managing an entire empire is extremely fun to do. this game is also very visually appealing. My biggest concern with it was that everyone seems to hate you because you settle land that nobody owns, but the leaders "consider it theirs." Also passed about 500 turns, the game can get glitchy no matter what computer I play it on.… Expand

   • 0 of 1 users found this helpful
6. napalm

   Sep 22, 2010

   6

   Let me start of by saying I am a long time fan of the Civilization series. I have owned all versions of civilizations from the day they wereLet me start of by saying I am a long time fan of the Civilization series. I have owned all versions of civilizations from the day they were releases. Heck I am an old timer that was playing games like simearth back in the day.
   
   With that rant over, on the the game. I will give the highlight of it is pretty much the same old civilization we played for 20 years with better graphics with combat changes. There is nothing revolutionary and ground breaking in the game. If you played any of the other Civ's then you already played this one.
   
   Sure you have Hexes now and you can not stack units, but the heart of the game has been the same for 20 years and to be honest the developers are playing it too safe and are not giving us anything unique.
   
   I am not going to give it a zero as it is not a bad game... the problem is they already sold this game 4 times over the last 20 years. If you never played Civ before, check it out... but if you played the others, this the the same old game.
   
   Maybe but Civ VII or Civ X they will give us something new :)… Expand

   • 36 of 72 users found this helpful
7. DGDSN

   Oct 19, 2010

   5

   I have never played Civilization I, II, III, or IV.
   I decided to try the demo and I was hooked.
   However, after a few long games I think it isI have never played Civilization I, II, III, or IV.
   I decided to try the demo and I was hooked.
   However, after a few long games I think it is pretty apparent that the AI is severely lacking.
   AI players don't appear to be motivated by anything but expanding their territory and conquest. They don't appear to ever attempt a victory through, diplomacy, culture, or technology. The leader/diplomacy screens look great and are fully voiced, but the AI doesn't seem to respond to diplomacy in any meaningful way.
   Basically, in single-player, any type of victory besides conquest, and any action besides building up your military is a waste of time.… Expand

   • 1 of 2 users found this helpful
8. volumass35

   Jul 13, 2019

   0

   It's a boring copycat of previous games. The graphics is adequate, the gameplay too. The Civ cant get any fresh idea.

   • 0 of 8 users found this helpful

See all 589 User Reviews