Sid Meier's Civilization V

 PC
User Score
8.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 2963 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2,247 out of 2963
  2. Mixed: 454 out of 2963
  3. Negative: 262 out of 2963
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. miccael
    Jul 29, 2019
    8
    Lovely game, even better than 6. 6 looks like a mobile game with some improvements.
  2. Dco326
    Feb 14, 2022
    8
    Pamtim je kao zanimljivu igricu, bila je top oduvek sam voleo civilizaciju ali za mene nema replayability nikaakv realno.
  3. JakGLaDOS29
    Dec 30, 2016
    8
    As my first taste into the Civ series, this game doesn't disappoint. It seems as though the game can go anyway you want to go, which is why it is difficult to review as your journey in the game can be completely different to someone else. I find that when I'm winning, I'm more impressed by the game and want to play more. I find myself biting nails during wars. This game is not withoutAs my first taste into the Civ series, this game doesn't disappoint. It seems as though the game can go anyway you want to go, which is why it is difficult to review as your journey in the game can be completely different to someone else. I find that when I'm winning, I'm more impressed by the game and want to play more. I find myself biting nails during wars. This game is not without fault but with 55 hours of game time I still havent won a game (lol) but its been enough for me to see that this game is not for those who are impatient. A solid game but it can be very interesting, or very boring, it all depends on your style of play.… Expand
  4. Lordjosh286
    Mar 9, 2017
    8
    I'm going to begin with Vanilla Civ V leaves much to be desired but thats just how Civ games are until they begin releasing the expansions revealing what they truly have planned for a game. Now the first thing I was thrown off by was the change to a hex based system but in all honesty it made it easier for me to manage my forces so I am no longer force to compete with death stacks butI'm going to begin with Vanilla Civ V leaves much to be desired but thats just how Civ games are until they begin releasing the expansions revealing what they truly have planned for a game. Now the first thing I was thrown off by was the change to a hex based system but in all honesty it made it easier for me to manage my forces so I am no longer force to compete with death stacks but instead I can make a front to deal with enemy forces. Also the revamp to religion was great since now you have a more tangible benefit to becoming a religious nation other than for example Russia and I share a religious view +4 in diplomacy! While it is still there to help out with deals and negotiation the fact I can get increase production from fishing boats makes coastal cities very viable for you. The DLC is a must buy in my opinion if you don't own it already although you would be better served buying the complete edition from Amazon or Steam. I would highly recommend playing and if you have some friends and play just one more turn...… Expand
  5. Jack5switch
    Dec 19, 2017
    8
    This game is phenomenal. The gameplay is worth every second. The expansion packs are fantastic and add whole new levels to the game that can have you lose hour after hour to their contents. But to top it all off, it has a colossal modding community and a map editor, and was one of the most played games on Steam for a while, despite having been released in 2010.
  6. Pohch
    Feb 21, 2022
    8
    Шикарная пошаговая стратегия, которая не устаревает спустя много лет. Всем советую.
  7. rezo_21
    Sep 19, 2021
    8
    ====================IIIIIIIIII GAME SCORE : 83 IIIIIIIIII====================
  8. YigidOx2
    Feb 3, 2021
    8
    You know, those unnecessary panels in strategy games. This game does not have them. Because you don't need it. It tells you what to do next and you make the choice. So it does not tire you, but you determine the events. In short, it is a game that even those who don't like strategy / can't manage should play.
  9. tagginondawal
    Jul 20, 2020
    8
    This is my frist Civ game. It's a fun turn based game, giving us a wide array of people (commanders/countries) to play as. It has some interesting ways of winning, as culture and getting to space first. Again, this is my first game, so I'm not sure if these have been implemented prior.

    Also, Ghandi...wow. I didn't realize he was a warmonger, until I looked up why he was. However, the    This is my frist Civ game. It's a fun turn based game, giving us a wide array of people (commanders/countries) to play as. It has some interesting ways of winning, as culture and getting to space first. Again, this is my first game, so I'm not sure if these have been implemented prior.

    Also, Ghandi...wow. I didn't realize he was a warmonger, until I looked up why he was.

    However, the AI tends to take the hardest way possible or walk back and forth when multiple units are together. Example: Early game, I'll order a unit and next to him there's a hill and plains. He could make the 2 grid move through the plains, but he'll go over the hill and lose a turn. It's annoying, especially when turns count for war.

    Not much I can say. I got about 50 hours on it.    … Expand
  10. apokalipto
    Aug 10, 2023
    8
    Very good game. I enjoyed playing this game a lot. I strongly recommend this.
  11. Torgall
    Dec 13, 2020
    8
    The only game in this series that I played, and although it's not my kind of a game, I enjoyed it very much. It's extremely addicting, so behave or "just one more round" syndrome. The music in the main menu is beautiful.
  12. Woolee
    Oct 4, 2021
    8
    Having been a Civilization addict for about 5 to 6 years I feel like I can give an unbiased review. First off, as of 2 days after the release of the game I have logged 16 hours of play time. About 12 of them on 2 to 4 player multiplayer games and the rest on single player.
  13. Izoeros
    Apr 26, 2022
    8
    qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
  14. dr-kenobi
    Sep 7, 2022
    8
    Ніколи не був великим фаном Цивілки, але 5-а дійсно найкраща з точки зору балансу, геймплею і загальної атмосфери. З 6-ю вже на жаль не вийшло
  15. HydrophobikFish
    Jun 9, 2023
    8
    Great strategy game. Emphasizes nonviolent victory options through religion and diplomacy that can be very useful even when military. Very replayable and fun to nationbuild in.
  16. Keron_Heruman
    Aug 24, 2023
    8
    The new concept, with hexes in lieu of square grids and with no unit stacks brings a more tactical component and a little more fresh to the saga... But overall is not better game than previous civs
  17. Czar
    Sep 28, 2010
    7
    To be honest I was hoping for more. I have played all the civs starting with the first one. The additions to this version do not remove the jaded feel I have playing it. Its fun, but so was the previous one. The city states are nice addition. Hexes don't add anything. Non stacking of armies is a bit annoying and unrealistic. Gfx are very nice. I
  18. M_Alex
    Mar 26, 2011
    7
    This game is problematic for me. I played the demo, liked it quite a lot, bought the game, and I almost don't play it at all. This probably is tied to the fact that I'm a BIG fan of the fourth installment, which I definetly prefer. But Civ V has a number of elements that I cannot but regard as flaws: not that I'm not used to them, but that i regard them worse than in the previous part. OnThis game is problematic for me. I played the demo, liked it quite a lot, bought the game, and I almost don't play it at all. This probably is tied to the fact that I'm a BIG fan of the fourth installment, which I definetly prefer. But Civ V has a number of elements that I cannot but regard as flaws: not that I'm not used to them, but that i regard them worse than in the previous part. On the other hand, there are some very nice introductions, such as the battle system. recommendable, but if you're a hardcore fan of the previous part, you may be disappointed because the amount of changes.… Expand
  19. Aldunis
    Sep 23, 2010
    7
    Having been a Civilization addict for about 5 to 6 years I feel like I can give an unbiased review. First off, as of 2 days after the release of the game I have logged 16 hours of play time. About 12 of them on 2 to 4 player multiplayer games and the rest on single player.

    Civilization V is an amazing game, but it is not without its faults. The combat system is amazing. The use of hexes    Having been a Civilization addict for about 5 to 6 years I feel like I can give an unbiased review. First off, as of 2 days after the release of the game I have logged 16 hours of play time. About 12 of them on 2 to 4 player multiplayer games and the rest on single player.

    Civilization V is an amazing game, but it is not without its faults. The combat system is amazing. The use of hexes and the fact that only one unit of each type can be on a hex opens the game up to much more challenging combat as well as unique tactics. However, while the combat system is very nice, the computer never uses any tactics when attacking you. Making defeating the enemies in all situations a cakewalk.

    The new culture system is also very nice. The removal of religion and civics will definitely annoy some, but the new system of policies is a pretty good replacement. One is forced to plan ahead by timing the construction of wonders, settlers, and military units to coincide with the adoption of new policies. The new method of expanding ones border is also very interesting, a combination of culture and gold. Gold allows to choose what tiles you wish to buy, while culture automatically claims tiles for you. The AI is typically pretty good about picking the best places, but you can always buy up the places you really want if its going too slow. My biggest complaint for this game is the very very very spotty diplomacy system. For a game that was made with the intention of being more diplomatic and AIs are uncommonly aggressive. Diplomacy is now like taking a shot in the dark. You have a good idea of how to lower it, very little idea of how to raise it and absolutely no idea about how you stand with the other nations. In the previous Civ games my favorite way to win was diplomatic victory. Now, having tried for 5 to 6 games and having not succeeded even once, I'm starting to question if its even possible. If someone figures out the diplomacy system, without the use of a guide, please let me know. Another complaint I have with the game is the very bad multiplayer support. You can't save a multiplayer game, only autosave, and the autosave is not very reliable and is prone to self deletion. Having lost 4 to 5 current games with my friends, this is annoying to say the least. Furthermore I have yet to figure out how to play mods on multiplayer, someone let me know when they figure it out? For a game that comes from a long line of epic multiplayer friendly games, this is a huge disappointment. Many of my friends have already said they're not gonna waste anymore time on this game until the multiplayer aspect is fixed. Yet, if you don't mind single player games. Or if you don't mind multiplayer games that you'll almost never finish. I actually enjoyed the single player games and unfinished multiplayers to refine my strategy (But I am an addict). This is the pinnacle of turn based strategy games, and the design of the game itself outweighs most of the negatives that come from stupid AIs, horrible diplomacy, bad multiplayer support (all of which I hope will be fixed by patches). But until they do, this is not worthy of the legacy of Civilization. For now, a 7 out of 10.    … Expand
  20. bishopknight
    Oct 7, 2010
    7
    Good game but the AI sucks in water and the time between turns takes too long. Even with a great graphics card, expect slowdown, this game is not polished.
  21. Xyz
    Nov 19, 2010
    7
    What to say about this one? The first thing that comes to mind is that it still is Civilization. BUT it's Civilization dumbed down for masses. If you want features that made this series great, go back to Civ4. Don't get me wrong, this is a good game, the thing is, its worse than its predecessors. It has got better graphics, and some improved features (I for one enjoyed the new combatWhat to say about this one? The first thing that comes to mind is that it still is Civilization. BUT it's Civilization dumbed down for masses. If you want features that made this series great, go back to Civ4. Don't get me wrong, this is a good game, the thing is, its worse than its predecessors. It has got better graphics, and some improved features (I for one enjoyed the new combat system), but if you're a Civ fan like me, this one looks like a step back... To conclude: if you've never played a Civ game, this one is the perfect entry point, but when you master it and want more complexity go back to previous games, you wont be disappointed… Expand
  22. TomSEA
    Oct 13, 2010
    7
    Pros: gorgeous graphics, excellent GUI, well thought-out tutorial mode, hexes instead of squares, sophisticated tech tree. Cons: dumb AI (opponent massing armies at your borders and nothing happens, workers who fail to complete roads), etc. It really is an excellent concept and obviously a lot of effort and money went into the development. I just wish I could like it more and give it aPros: gorgeous graphics, excellent GUI, well thought-out tutorial mode, hexes instead of squares, sophisticated tech tree. Cons: dumb AI (opponent massing armies at your borders and nothing happens, workers who fail to complete roads), etc. It really is an excellent concept and obviously a lot of effort and money went into the development. I just wish I could like it more and give it a better score. But there are times when I feel like I'm in a grind. Like trying to level up in a MMORPG. Can't put my finger on it specifically, but to "tidy up" the game so that strategic moves seem more compelling and the game doesn't tend to tread water in places.

    Nevertheless, if you're a RTS fan, you'll definitely want this one. No doubt there will be patches and other content made available and hopefully some of the concerns people have voiced here will be resolved.    … Expand
  23. mpr
    May 29, 2011
    7
    Sure, the game may be too dumbed-down for the experienced Civ. fans, but for newcomers like me, this game is good. I've already played more than 50 hours and I'm still enjoying it.
  24. Rebun
    Mar 25, 2011
    7
    At first i didnt really seem to enjoy this game, it took me a little while to get into it. When i did it was pretty fun, combat is improved from previous iterations, social policies are pretty awesome. diplomacy is a huge let down, it was obviously programmed to make them seem like players rather than nation leaders. moreover theres not much encouragement to make strong allies in the gameAt first i didnt really seem to enjoy this game, it took me a little while to get into it. When i did it was pretty fun, combat is improved from previous iterations, social policies are pretty awesome. diplomacy is a huge let down, it was obviously programmed to make them seem like players rather than nation leaders. moreover theres not much encouragement to make strong allies in the game because you know that eventually they'll just backstab you anyway because there not national leaders they are players trying to win (often very poorly too). My biggest gripe in this game is that you don't feel like you are running a civilization, you feel like your playing just another game. So if your a fan of the civ franchise for the builder aspect of the game, i'd recommend sticking with civ 4.… Expand
  25. dryerlaw
    Jun 22, 2012
    7
    Not too many new features from the previous games. The additional features are minor and mostly unnecessary (the hexagonal tiles end up unmeaningful). Most of the old features are simplified; maybe oversimplified. And the game takes so much memory; around 1GB-1.5GB; textures never load completely after a load.
  26. Sir_Sneaky
    Mar 3, 2011
    7
    A while ago, I bought Civ 4 and fell in love. For several weeks, I could barely detach myself from the game. Even now go back from time to time and enjoy playing it greatly. When Civ 5 was announced, I was excited; But for a while I wasn't able to purchase it. Recently I found it had a demo, so I took a night to play through it. It is very fun, just as fun as Civ 4. Some of the new changesA while ago, I bought Civ 4 and fell in love. For several weeks, I could barely detach myself from the game. Even now go back from time to time and enjoy playing it greatly. When Civ 5 was announced, I was excited; But for a while I wasn't able to purchase it. Recently I found it had a demo, so I took a night to play through it. It is very fun, just as fun as Civ 4. Some of the new changes I enjoyed (particularly combat and culture). That being said, some of the changes I did not enjoy (namely city states and diplomacy with the new AI). I'd say it balances out pretty well and is probably just as fun as Civ 4, but that's exactly what turned me off. I figure, why should I pay 50 dollars to get a game that i'll have as much fun with as the previous title? For this reason, I will not be buying the full version. I'm already familiar and comfortable with the interface of Civ 4 and more importantly, I already own it.

    Overall, Civ 5 is a very good game like Civ 4, and for someone new to the Civilization series who wants an out an innovative and deep strategy game, i'd say definitely go with Civ 5. But if you already own Civ 4, well, i'd say save your money, or at least make sure you play through the demo before you buy it, because you may realize, like me, that Civ 4 is good enough and you can save those 50 dollars for something else.    … Expand
  27. Keplar
    Mar 1, 2013
    7
    I have trouble reviewing this game, because I know it is a good game, but I don't like it. Civ V doesn't feel like Civilization, and Civilization is what I wanted.

    If you're a fan of old-school tabletop wargames, definitely get in on this action. If you didn't like previous Civilization games, give this one a try it's completely different. If you liked the previous 4 Civilizations,    I have trouble reviewing this game, because I know it is a good game, but I don't like it. Civ V doesn't feel like Civilization, and Civilization is what I wanted.

    If you're a fan of old-school tabletop wargames, definitely get in on this action. If you didn't like previous Civilization games, give this one a try it's completely different. If you liked the previous 4 Civilizations, which allowed you to build giant empires of carefully managed cities, spreading like locust across the land as you blazed through the tech tree and slammed out wonders to the beat of the bass, this is sadly not that at all.

    Snail's pace expansion that's severely hampered mechanics even on the easiest levels keeps you from expanding like previous games. Barbarians constantly spawn encampments right on your borders, spewing endless units in to the mists anywhere you don't have it constantly under surveillance. City-States seize vital resources and moan to you about their neighbors constantly, while claiming protection from foreign powers you've barely even encountered yet. Restrictions on support numbers from given resources add realism, but again hamper the expansion and fun of the previous titles in the series. Everything seems focused on creating a series of tiny countries where the cities serve merely as focal points for the fighting, rather than being the actual focus of the game like before. The focus is on the combat, and the combat just isn't very engaging. Even on large worlds, space seems constrained, and you can't bring power to bear the way you can in earlier Civs.

    I don't want this to sound like Civ V is a bad game it isn't. This is a good game for people who like the wargame/simulation genre. Heck, I'd probably even like it myself... if I wasn't looking for a Civilization title! Civilization was one of the first PC titles I ever really got in to, and its successors Civ 2, Alpha Centauri, Civ 3, and Civ 4 all held my attention for hundreds of hours. Civ V is not Civilization, and despite more than 50 hours and several attempts, I just can't enjoy it.    … Expand
  28. joen00b
    Apr 15, 2011
    7
    I got this game the day it was released. Previous releases have warranted this type of action, and, though enamored at first, I kept waiting for the challenge to appear in the game. I've run rampant through the game, getting achievements and it all seems so easy compared to the other incarnations of Civ. I gave up playing it after a month or two of decimating the game on all levels.I got this game the day it was released. Previous releases have warranted this type of action, and, though enamored at first, I kept waiting for the challenge to appear in the game. I've run rampant through the game, getting achievements and it all seems so easy compared to the other incarnations of Civ. I gave up playing it after a month or two of decimating the game on all levels.

    Steam just had a sale on all the expansions, so I grabbed them all and will be playing again. They've done a lot of patches to the AI, so we'll see what changes. The other reviews of the combat system are spot on, only 1 unit per hex is bothersome, and I'll carpet the world with units. This can be interesting for logistics of attacking, but makes it far too easy to defend.    … Expand
  29. LD9000
    May 1, 2011
    7
    I played Civilization since version 2, and this game is ok. It's easier on Prince than civ 4, at least I've never seen over 9000 stacks suddenly appear at my borders. Well, there are no stacks anyway. The game plays differently than previous versions.
  30. spasmoid
    Jul 5, 2011
    7
    Will moving civ towards a social game gain more loyal fans than it loses? Only time will tell. Civ 5 tries to innovate a bit more than being just an incremental civilization UI refresh, but the features get boring ratgher quickly. This is the first Civ game that I did not play 6+ hours the day I got it. Ia few hours then I lost interest. I try it again now and then but, I won't be buyingWill moving civ towards a social game gain more loyal fans than it loses? Only time will tell. Civ 5 tries to innovate a bit more than being just an incremental civilization UI refresh, but the features get boring ratgher quickly. This is the first Civ game that I did not play 6+ hours the day I got it. Ia few hours then I lost interest. I try it again now and then but, I won't be buying anymore civ stuff until the inevitable civ 6. The game mechanics have more of a casual game feel. Heck, I almost epected the city screens to have me play Gems with resources. City states are interesting, but otherwise Diplomacy is marginal. War is launching marching wave after wave onto a city. Archery and artillery was kind of neat at first, but couldn't carry the game. Worth a try if you can pick it up on sale or if you're new to the series. Not for me.… Expand
  31. Mr_HatNClogs
    Aug 9, 2011
    7
    It was good......when I got it to work - which took forever!

    But when I say "good"....not as good as Civilization 4 - not as good as beyond the sword either, it has a lot of the strategy and abilities removed, and to be honest, it is in essence a prettier dumbed down version of Civ 4, it isn't as good as Civ 4 - which is a game I did enjoy, albieit it was a very buggy game I was    It was good......when I got it to work - which took forever!

    But when I say "good"....not as good as Civilization 4 - not as good as beyond the sword either, it has a lot of the strategy and abilities removed, and to be honest, it is in essence a prettier dumbed down version of Civ 4, it isn't as good as Civ 4 - which is a game I did enjoy, albieit it was a very buggy game I was enjoying.

    All in all - you can buy this game, but don't go in expecting much revolution from the older Civ games - and certainly don't go in expecting it to be as good as those Civ games - it's good, but not THAT good    … Expand
  32. Necrotaur
    Jun 13, 2012
    7
    I just wanted to update my review a bit now that the game has been out for a couple years and there's an expansion right around the corner. I previously rated it a 5, but looking back that was a little unfair. Civ 5 has improved quite a bit since launch, though there are still serious issues inherent to its basic design. The biggest issue is 1 Unit Per Tile (1UPT). At its heart, 1UPT is aI just wanted to update my review a bit now that the game has been out for a couple years and there's an expansion right around the corner. I previously rated it a 5, but looking back that was a little unfair. Civ 5 has improved quite a bit since launch, though there are still serious issues inherent to its basic design. The biggest issue is 1 Unit Per Tile (1UPT). At its heart, 1UPT is a poor mechanic that the AI simply cannot handle, making most wars completely one sided, and the management of a large army annoying. Other mechanics, such as happiness, limits on expansion, and diplomacy (as always) are poorly developed. Policies and the various Civilizations themselves feel neutered compared to previous games. Communism and fascism, for example, have NO penalties, whereas previously they were powerful, but had issues you needed to manage to make them work. Despite all this, Civ 5 manages to preserve its 'just one more turn' charm and you can still spend the majority of a day playing without realizing it. Hopefully the expansion will add (well, reintroduce) some much needed strategic depth in the form of religion and espionage.… Expand
  33. Schlafanzug
    Apr 6, 2013
    7
    Overall a great game, but after playing Civ II, III, and IV it seems lacking something. I do not like how there are random city states, and how it is centered on combat. Yes in Civ IV the micro-managing could get annoying, but I enjoyed it all the same.
  34. YeshuaAgapao
    Nov 2, 2011
    7
    Great game for eycandy. Cities max-out radius 3 - much larger (Civ Test of time allowed much larger cities). Took out much of the features of civ 4 but kept most of the war-unfriendly features (I'm not a war person myself, but a lot of other players are). Civ5 forces you to use steam. Mods are centralized like StarCraft II. Civ5 is intellectual tyranny with a 'please don't sue me'Great game for eycandy. Cities max-out radius 3 - much larger (Civ Test of time allowed much larger cities). Took out much of the features of civ 4 but kept most of the war-unfriendly features (I'm not a war person myself, but a lot of other players are). Civ5 forces you to use steam. Mods are centralized like StarCraft II. Civ5 is intellectual tyranny with a 'please don't sue me' atmosphere on the mods. Civ5 and StarCraft 2 are a taste of the coming police state in america. Still addicting game though.… Expand
  35. gyrate
    Jul 21, 2013
    7
    This game in vanilla form is a middle finger to all Civ IV fans. After all the DLC are added it becomes a pretty nice game. You will need ton increase the difficulty level as they didn't do a good job with the AI.
  36. loloynage
    Nov 29, 2011
    7
    Disappointing, but not bad or unplayable. Due to the weird AI, you can always go all military and have some fun for a while. The multiplayer? Doesn't work. It would be actually a really good game if you could have offline player vs player games.
  37. Krepost
    May 7, 2012
    7
    This seems to be a "love it or hate it" game. You have to like turn based strategy games, first of all, which is already pretty rare. Veterans to the series seem to not like this game because it's been "dumbed down." I still liked it, had over 200 hours of fun with it. Taking a day off school to turn a settler and a warrior into an expansive 20 city empire that leads the world inThis seems to be a "love it or hate it" game. You have to like turn based strategy games, first of all, which is already pretty rare. Veterans to the series seem to not like this game because it's been "dumbed down." I still liked it, had over 200 hours of fun with it. Taking a day off school to turn a settler and a warrior into an expansive 20 city empire that leads the world in everything is a rewarding experience. I played Civ 4 and Civ 5, and I have to say I like Civ 5 better simply because of the better UI, the one unit per hex, and the combat system in general. The AI is pretty dumb, though. If you're buying this game for the multiplayer, all I can say is just don't, nobody plays it and the nature of the game just isn't conducive to it. In short, think of it as a more refined Civ 4.… Expand
  38. Fonzy
    May 28, 2014
    7
    The latest installment in franchise games can often be the victim of their own previous success and it appears that Civ V is no exception.

    Taken by itself, Civ 5 is a solid game. In a vacuum, I would say my biggest gripes are that the city-state system feels a bit unloved and leaves a lot to be desired. Additionally, diplomacy is a bit of a black box that's difficult to wrangle with.    The latest installment in franchise games can often be the victim of their own previous success and it appears that Civ V is no exception.

    Taken by itself, Civ 5 is a solid game. In a vacuum, I would say my biggest gripes are that the city-state system feels a bit unloved and leaves a lot to be desired. Additionally, diplomacy is a bit of a black box that's difficult to wrangle with. Plus sides are the level of complexity that allow for different playstyles and paths to victory that provide a lot of replayability.

    Compared to the other Civ games, I feel like the updates are a wash - things have become less complex, but I really appreciate the removal of the infamous stacks of doom we saw in Civ 4.

    Bottom line is, if you're a Civ freak, you might be disappointed with Civ 5 if you compare it to the previous installments. If you're a casual Civ fan, or have little-to-no familiarity with the series, you'll find Civ 5 to fun and engaging and offer you many hours of enjoyment.    … Expand
  39. jim109109
    May 31, 2012
    7
    Great, unique game that actually didn't copy its predecessors AND is good. It's very enjoyable, there are tons of ways to build your empire, making every game unique. The turn by turn aspect makes the game stress-free and strategic, unlike RTS games. The game isn't overly complicated, and well organized, while having a decent amount of content. The actual "fun" factor of the game isn'tGreat, unique game that actually didn't copy its predecessors AND is good. It's very enjoyable, there are tons of ways to build your empire, making every game unique. The turn by turn aspect makes the game stress-free and strategic, unlike RTS games. The game isn't overly complicated, and well organized, while having a decent amount of content. The actual "fun" factor of the game isn't perfect though, because games are very long, and moving units from one part of the map to the other can take like 15 minutes, going turn by turn, it's long and horrible. I find this sad because the game had potential, if it wasn't so long and boring to get anything done. I have played 50 hours, and still have enjoyed it, but I can't say it's a flawless game… Expand
  40. grazr
    Sep 14, 2012
    7
    The hex system is a massive improvement for the Civ franchise, it's just a shame the game was riddled with balance issues for the better part of a year after its initial release. Certain wonders were necessitated for victory, certain Civ's were necessary for particular wins (cultural, etc), but fortunately most balance issues have been resolved. The achilles heal of the game is theThe hex system is a massive improvement for the Civ franchise, it's just a shame the game was riddled with balance issues for the better part of a year after its initial release. Certain wonders were necessitated for victory, certain Civ's were necessary for particular wins (cultural, etc), but fortunately most balance issues have been resolved. The achilles heal of the game is the atrocious AI and the pseudo difficulty setting which is more accurately defined as a "handicap" system.… Expand
  41. Orctownorc
    Jun 8, 2013
    7
    When published this game was still born, the WORST Civ game by far. It had bugs, LAG and constant crash to desktop. THE AI was stupid and the whole thing was just a mess of data that did not add up to a good game. Nearly three years later, and basically three years of WORK on improving the game and we can finally say this is indeed a GOOD game. Gods and Kings is NECESSARY, and all the DLCWhen published this game was still born, the WORST Civ game by far. It had bugs, LAG and constant crash to desktop. THE AI was stupid and the whole thing was just a mess of data that did not add up to a good game. Nearly three years later, and basically three years of WORK on improving the game and we can finally say this is indeed a GOOD game. Gods and Kings is NECESSARY, and all the DLC helps, but bundled together and on sale Civ 5 is finally the game it should have been at launch. Well done Firaxis! Cudos for a rare show of professional pride and persistence! A good game now, worthy of the Civilisation name. Not as good as Civ 4, but close.… Expand
  42. Sean-M
    Jul 23, 2020
    7
    This is a nice game, but comparing to CIV IV, it is not as good. 8 out of 10.
  43. laggypancakes
    May 1, 2013
    7
    I never played the earlier versions of Civ but I got a good amount of enjoyment out of this one. The vanilla version became stale after a while (before Gods and Kings); I do have to admit that.

    Even with that addition however there were still some very annoying/lacking aspects of gameplay. Luckily there is a decent modding community behind the game that ended up fixing a good amount of    I never played the earlier versions of Civ but I got a good amount of enjoyment out of this one. The vanilla version became stale after a while (before Gods and Kings); I do have to admit that.

    Even with that addition however there were still some very annoying/lacking aspects of gameplay. Luckily there is a decent modding community behind the game that ended up fixing a good amount of those issues for me.

    The multiplayer is incredibly lacking- I could only stomach one game before giving up on it entirely.

    Overall the vanilla version of the game seemed incomplete and lacking to me. I'm still not sure if I'll be getting the new DLC as my backlog is a bit deep but if you can get this game DLC on a steam sale I'd definitely give it a shot.    … Expand
  44. MrXLiebezeit
    Jun 18, 2013
    7
    What can I say about Civ V that hasn't already been said a million times.
    It's not like the others, it's not as big, it's not as intricate, etc.
    This is all true, but I've never played any other Civ games, and for me, this one was pretty fun to me. That said, it is a very flawed game. The AI is very wonky, and the barbarians can be a bit weird sometimes, but on the whole. It's a fun    What can I say about Civ V that hasn't already been said a million times.
    It's not like the others, it's not as big, it's not as intricate, etc.
    This is all true, but I've never played any other Civ games, and for me, this one was pretty fun to me.
    That said, it is a very flawed game. The AI is very wonky, and the barbarians can be a bit weird sometimes, but on the whole. It's a fun game. If you've played other civs, you may not like it, but as a first time player, I really like it.    … Expand
  45. mcmanusaur
    Sep 7, 2013
    7
    ---Rating---
    Design: 3 /5 (recycles the same formula, most but not all changes constitute "streamlining")
    Polish: 4 /5 (graphics are acceptable given the game's nature, but nothing too impressive) Value: 4 /5 (decent replay value as always and nice mod support, but limited choice of factions) ---Review--- Civilization V is certainly playable and enjoyable at that, but- perhaps    ---Rating---
    Design: 3 /5 (recycles the same formula, most but not all changes constitute "streamlining")
    Polish: 4 /5 (graphics are acceptable given the game's nature, but nothing too impressive)
    Value: 4 /5 (decent replay value as always and nice mod support, but limited choice of factions)

    ---Review---
    Civilization V is certainly playable and enjoyable at that, but- perhaps unsurprisingly- this iteration of the ever popular series amounts to little more than a re-skinning of previous entries. The hex-based map and in-game mod database are welcome additions, but otherwise most changes could be lumped under the banner of "streamlining" (for better or worse). It's a decent choice for those who somehow still haven't ever tried a Civilization game, but Civ V doesn't make too many significant improvements over previous installments.    … Expand
  46. Xelluse
    Nov 18, 2013
    7
    If forget about that nothing good left from Civ III and Civ IV and that this game is quite lagy and bagy, and none playing it online so quite hard to find ppl to play (must be in groups and need at last 4-5 hours to find someone), game is quite normal, think for economical-political strategy it's very PC depended (heavy) and very expencive that's problem to find ppl for play, but if youIf forget about that nothing good left from Civ III and Civ IV and that this game is quite lagy and bagy, and none playing it online so quite hard to find ppl to play (must be in groups and need at last 4-5 hours to find someone), game is quite normal, think for economical-political strategy it's very PC depended (heavy) and very expencive that's problem to find ppl for play, but if you find 3-4 people it's quite interesting and not bad game...… Expand
  47. PCgamesreviewer
    Sep 4, 2013
    7
    Pros:
    -Keeps you entertained for many hours
    -Lots of buildings, units, wonders and nations in a huge world.
    -Lots of strategy

    Cons:
    -Nations are similar
    -Diplomacy does not work.
    -Late game becomes boring
    -Needs the expansions before its a true masterpiece.

    Conclusion: Without the expansions it has many flaws but is still entertaining for many hours.
  48. kkanoee
    Oct 21, 2013
    7
    Très bon jeu, un bon nombre de civilisation différentes (ce qui rend difficile l'équilibrage du coup malheureusement, une poignet sont avantagés avec leur bonus de départ), de nombreux types de cartes et de nombreux choix disponibles au niveau stratégique en fonction de la victoire que l'on vise.

    Le seul point vraiment négatif est la stabilité surtout côté multi. Aléatoirement le jeu    Très bon jeu, un bon nombre de civilisation différentes (ce qui rend difficile l'équilibrage du coup malheureusement, une poignet sont avantagés avec leur bonus de départ), de nombreux types de cartes et de nombreux choix disponibles au niveau stratégique en fonction de la victoire que l'on vise.

    Le seul point vraiment négatif est la stabilité surtout côté multi. Aléatoirement le jeu peut renvoyer sur l'écran de chargement (qui peut parfois durée plusieurs minute au point de croire qu'il a freeze, voir crasher un moment.) Le fait que les games soit host côté joueurs rend les parties très difficiles jouer (quasiment injouable dés que l'on dépasse les 150-180 pings). Malheureusement une bonne machine ne suffit donc pas pour jouer correctement et ceci cause d'une mauvaise optimisation du jeu la base.    … Expand
  49. NP-complete
    Oct 25, 2016
    7
    The game is fun because it's a Civilization game, but I disprove many of the additions from Civilization IV. Changing your government to adapt your gameplay to the situation is never recommended because of the number of perks you'll lose (why did devs think civics are permanent perks? Politics do not work as RPGs), and the one-unit-per-tile rule is the source of absurd traffic jams. Also,The game is fun because it's a Civilization game, but I disprove many of the additions from Civilization IV. Changing your government to adapt your gameplay to the situation is never recommended because of the number of perks you'll lose (why did devs think civics are permanent perks? Politics do not work as RPGs), and the one-unit-per-tile rule is the source of absurd traffic jams. Also, I don't know why city-states cannot eventually become normal empires. I definitely prefer Civilization IV.… Expand
  50. DeusXCom
    Jul 31, 2014
    7
    My first Civilization experience and I must admit that all the stories of it's addictive nature (just one more turn) were absolutely spot-on. Even though it was my first run ever and I was still learning as I went along, just during my first game I poured about 30 hours of non-stop gameplay into it and that speak for itself more than anything. In the role of Alexander the Great I conqueredMy first Civilization experience and I must admit that all the stories of it's addictive nature (just one more turn) were absolutely spot-on. Even though it was my first run ever and I was still learning as I went along, just during my first game I poured about 30 hours of non-stop gameplay into it and that speak for itself more than anything. In the role of Alexander the Great I conquered the world with my Greek army, destroyed Napoleon, Washington, and once I invented proper technology to cross the seas I massacred the Germans and China hiding behind The Great Wall (praise the siege cannons). Enjoyed it thoroughly, but one the other hand I must admit that one time was probably enough, especially since Civ V lacks any sort of continual campaign with story mode that would engage you and take you on the adventure through time and evolution perhaps, in the Age of Empires style. In this format, it's basically just a randomly created sessions, so there's not much motivation to go on playing for me, but for what it is, it's really good. 7/10… Expand
  51. HaloFever
    Nov 22, 2019
    7
    This review is for Civ V complete, with the Gods & Kings and Brave New World expansions. The "vanilla" game is a stripped down version that offers very little game play. Fortunately for you, the game is so old that the complete edition is super cheap.

    Civ V is a delicacy. The game is missing core features from old civ games but adds a lot of great features for fans of strategy games.    This review is for Civ V complete, with the Gods & Kings and Brave New World expansions. The "vanilla" game is a stripped down version that offers very little game play. Fortunately for you, the game is so old that the complete edition is super cheap.

    Civ V is a delicacy. The game is missing core features from old civ games but adds a lot of great features for fans of strategy games. The good: the hex based strategic combat feels smart for the first time in civ history. No more stacking units to take a city or facing a stack of doom from the computer. You can win wars by playing smart. The bad: the game rewards only a few styles of play and does not offer a risk-reward for player choices.

    On that bad part, the game punishes the player for building an empire. Ever new city increases unhappiness to the point that any amount of cities greater than 4 leads to happiness problems in the early game. Conquering enemy cities generates even more unhappiness, and many a campaign of conquest ended with a peace treaty because of it. The notion of happiness if fine, but the execution is terrible. The result is that most players stick with civilizations that reward small empires.

    More on the bad. While some choices are essential, such as choosing to focus on a few cities to preserve happiness, others are inconsequential. For example, you can choose the Patronage social policy tree to lower the cost of gold needed to bribe city states. Or you can choose a policy tree that increases you gold earnings. Later on, you can choose the Freedom ideology to increase the generation of great people by 25%. Or you can choose Order and to increase the generation of great people by 25%. None of these choices have a drawback. Choosing Patronage will not hamper you ability to generate money or increase science. The same goes for Rationalism, which increases science with no extra cost to your civilization in happiness, culture, or gold generation. Every choice you make is a winner, which makes the choices extremely boring.

    A little side note on city states: you can buy their allegiance or do some very gamified quests to gain their allegiance. There is little nuance, and for the most part, the city states do little to enhance the game. For the most part, I used the city states as shields in the early game and then as a source of votes in the late game for a diplomatic victory. Overall, though, I think they clutter the map and are a sink for gold in the diplomatic game. I often half the number of city states or leave them out of the game entirely.

    Civ V has a great mod support from the community. If you are on PC. On Mac, you have access to many mods, but not the most game changing mods that fix all of the problems I mentioned above. On PC, you want to go with the Steam version (even though I find it bothersome to have to launch Steam to play a game) and find the Vox Populi mod. I would have preferred if the developer opened up the game to tweaking by the user as old civ games did. (For example, I edited some text files in Civ II to increase gold per turn so I wouldn't have to bother moving caravans. Fortunately Civ V automates caravans.) At least the mods add some life to the game. Mult-player still works and people do play it. Head over to the Civ V reddit page if you are looking to find people still playing.

    I would love to score this game higher as Civ is my favorite game series of all time (though I hated, hated, Civ III). Maybe if I would love the game more if had a PC instead of a Mac, and ran the Vox Populi mod. But I don't, and after hundreds of hours of gameplay, I can safely say this game has much less to offer than it seems, which is kind of sad.    … Expand
  52. Sivus
    Jun 5, 2014
    7
    This game feels like it's about half the quality of the previous and famous Civilization 4. It looks better than 4 but it should, it's a newer game. I feel like many of the streamlined changes from "revolution" found their way into 5, as in many of your actions lack depth. Still, hundreds of hours of play has to count for something and it's certainly enjoyable despite being shallow.
  53. usproblogger
    Jul 26, 2014
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I like the game. Was not a first time played. Got addicted. But if you take it a little at a time it is all fun. here is a lot of cool features and other good stuff… Expand
  54. TsukasaHiiragi
    Oct 9, 2015
    7
    Civilization V is the the best Civ game to date and its my favorite in the series, however that being said, there are some highly negative aspects to the game, and that is mainly because the A.I is programmed to cheat at higher difficulty settings instead of being programmed to adapt to player strategies, and this has been a problem since the very first Civilization games and hasn'tCivilization V is the the best Civ game to date and its my favorite in the series, however that being said, there are some highly negative aspects to the game, and that is mainly because the A.I is programmed to cheat at higher difficulty settings instead of being programmed to adapt to player strategies, and this has been a problem since the very first Civilization games and hasn't really improved that much - okay, at least the AI doesn't spawn/teleport nukes next to your cities in this one....but still....

    I'd really hope to see a really decent AI in a future game, something that is a challenge to the player, but without getting insane bonuses, or spawning instant units or more or less breaking the rules that the player is forced to follow - such as having extremely large armies whilst ignoring caps, happiness and upkeep or instantly building wonders when you have 1 or 2 turns left on building them yourself.

    Playing at higher difficulty settings the cheating starts to become obvious and heavily lets the game down - we've all witnessed it, there isn't any denying it. Even Firaxas themselves have openly admitted it that is just easier to program AI with bonuses and 'unseen' abilities working in the background to give the player more challenging gameplay, this is fine when its hidden and not openly obvious, and that is where Civilization V fails the most, because it is that obvious.

    Sid Meier//Firaxas - I openly dare you to create a proper adaptable AI for Civilization VI without resorting to these cheap AI tricks of the trade. Give us something that can best Civilization V -

    For new players to 4X games - Civilization V is the best of the best, but just be warned on its infamous AI.

    + Best turn-based strategy
    + Best in class 4X
    + Classic and loved franchise
    + High replayability

    - Poor AI
    - AI cheats at high difficulty settings    … Expand
  55. XenonGTX
    Sep 9, 2014
    7
    It feels rushed. A lot of hardware compatability issues. Over all a unique experience. Great mods and scripts available. Features many civs and map choices. Pushes your CPU to the limit though.
  56. godunow
    Sep 19, 2016
    7
    Great game, most of the changes (unstacking, switch to hexes) turned out good.

    Maybe policy system was bit better in Civ 4, and I will miss Leonard Nimoy saying "Meditation brings wisdom; lack of meditation leaves ignorance. Know what leads you forward and what holds you back and choose the path that leads to wisdom."
  57. VoxMare
    Mar 15, 2017
    7
    Настоятельно рекомендую к покупке. В общем-то, я не знаю чего можно написать о Циве такого, все знают, что такое Цива, но выделю моменты, которые мне НЕ понравились.

    1. Боевые действия невыгодны. Может я неправильно воюю, но куда проще нафармить злата и подружиться со всеми взятками и уступками, чем тратить деньги на армию, время не перекидывание войск и вообще все осуждают войну. Мой    Настоятельно рекомендую к покупке. В общем-то, я не знаю чего можно написать о Циве такого, все знают, что такое Цива, но выделю моменты, которые мне НЕ понравились.

    1. Боевые действия невыгодны.
    Может я неправильно воюю, но куда проще нафармить злата и подружиться со всеми взятками и уступками, чем тратить деньги на армию, время не перекидывание войск и вообще все осуждают войну. Мой милитарист негодуетЪ

    2. Убрали статистику в конце игры, а ту, что оставили, порезали до примитива и это весьма плохо!

    3. Дипломатия здесь сводится к тому, кто больше заплатит. Можно, например, подкупить все города-государства на выборах ООН и победить в дипломатической победе, даже если вы будете страной-изгоем. Да и вообще, вся дипломатия тут -- один сплошной недостаток.

    4. Долгие загрузки. Игра довольна стара и почему она так долго грузится -- мне не понятно.

    5. Стратегический режим слишком громоздок, а некоторые значки неинформативны. В 6 с этим, вроде как, получше будет.

    6. Шпионаж бесполезен(времени на воровство технологии нужно столько, что к тому моменту вы уже на 10 технологий вперед уйдете), а зачем нужна религия -- я так и не понял, ее единственная польза -- в закупках за очки веры. А, ну и возможность создать веру в Бога-Императора радует.

    Если говорить в целом, то 4 часть мне нравилась больше. Может со временем, я смогу снова запустить Циву5 и наконец-то распробую ее сполна и тогда начну ее любить, но пока что 4 лучше. Но это не значит, что пятую часть нужно проигнорировать -- в пятой части много интересных фишек, как то новая система войск или "артефактов", которая позволяет создать страну-"курорт". А учитывая низкую цену игры -- то сомнений быть не должно, надо поиграть.    … Expand
  58. hiltong55
    Jul 16, 2018
    7
    Before I start my ramble I would like to say that only played the base game and from what I hear the game was greatly improved with DLC. My personal taste for turn-based strategy was shaped by the Total War series so naturally, I have that bias so take my opinion for what it is.

    With all that being said I can tell you that Civ V definitely has that one more turn, addictive nature to it.    Before I start my ramble I would like to say that only played the base game and from what I hear the game was greatly improved with DLC. My personal taste for turn-based strategy was shaped by the Total War series so naturally, I have that bias so take my opinion for what it is.

    With all that being said I can tell you that Civ V definitely has that one more turn, addictive nature to it. I actually really enjoyed the beginning moments of the game as you are trying to discover new blocks and getting into small battles with barbarians. This element of discovery and not knowing what is around you gives the game a sense of wonder. Building and expanding your nation is pretty easy to figure out without many handholdy tutorials in your face. You can find what you need to learn in the menu fairly easily. The technology upgrade system has a lot of different choices and is surprisingly detailed. The combat is kind of dull and simulation-based but that was to be expected. I was just hoping for some varied animations and creativity.

    The game for me really started to show its flaws around mid-game as I was discovering other nations. I quickly started to realize that the diplomacy system is not in anyway detailed or functional enough for what I would expect out of a civilization game. Trading seemed overly simplistic. If the nation likes you they will trade, if they don't they won't. From the very beginning, I was very confused as to what the winning conditions were and equally confused as to who I should be attacking and who I should be allying with (this just may be my lack of experience with this specific game).

    Overall I guess I can say I enjoyed the game but was disappointed with the overall mechanics of the AI. I would say to the developers that if this is the style of turn-based strategy that you are going to present you really need to focus on the depth and detail of your diplomacy. Also, just be a little more clear on what I should be focusing on to achieve victory. Good game 7/10.    … Expand
  59. auditbadger
    Jul 30, 2017
    7
    I think that this is truly a unique game and I would recommend that if you are a fan of this type of genre then I think you should give this game a try.
  60. Schism78
    Nov 27, 2018
    7
    It is an entertaining, a little addictive, but it can be boring once you have won a couple of games because by then the game will be easy for you.
    At first glance it seems a complex game and full of options, but once you get to know it it can become boring and simple.
    AI is one of the worst aspects, because it is very predictable and often irrational. You can not trust anyone because if    It is an entertaining, a little addictive, but it can be boring once you have won a couple of games because by then the game will be easy for you.
    At first glance it seems a complex game and full of options, but once you get to know it it can become boring and simple.
    AI is one of the worst aspects, because it is very predictable and often irrational.
    You can not trust anyone because if you neglect your army, it is very likely that they will betray you and declare war on you even though you have had a good relationship with that civilization.
    Sometimes they make you deal with unfair and meaningless trades.
    For all this, winning by conquest is the most entertaining and satisfying way to play because in the victories for culture or science is boring and you know that you will win after the industrial age since literally not much to do besides produce buildings and wait many turns to reach the limit year to win.
    The AI ​​is so incompetent as to do something to overcome the game. If your borders are on the other side of the map of another civilization with more power, it is likely that you declare war but can not do anything because it is on the other side of the map, and in the end it will make you sign a peace treaty with a Couple of luxury resources or a free city for you. That is why after those of more difficulty modes than "Normal" they put advantages to the AI, any player minimally experienced can win a game.    … Expand
  61. Svetlendrius
    Jun 19, 2020
    7
    A good strategy for playing a party, with many varieties of victory, good dls, but a poor device for online games. Chilli game. Of the minuses, a long one, they never played out to the end.
  62. kezzyhko
    Jan 9, 2021
    7
    ‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍
  63. EsteticBomzh
    Jun 23, 2020
    7
    Люблю эту игру из-за тех воспоминаний, которые она дарит, когда я о ней вспоминаю.
  64. BobbyTarantino
    Aug 15, 2020
    7
    a man goes to the doctor. says he's depressed. he says life seems harsh and cruel. says he feels all alone in a threatening world where what lies ahead is vague and uncertain. the doctor says "the treatment is simple. the great clown pagliacci is in town tonight. go and see him, that should pick you up." the man bursts into tears. he says "but doctor... i am pagliacci."
  65. KevLooney
    May 12, 2021
    7
    The game is inaccessible. I had at one point felt flow while playing though.
  66. KTheSlayer
    Jun 18, 2021
    7
    The upgraded 4'th Civ. A lot of new mechanics, some of which are not that great
  67. Hyperfailure
    Nov 27, 2022
    7
    (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
    ┻━┻ ︵ ヽ(°□°ヽ)

    ┻━┻ ︵ ＼( °□° )／ ︵ ┻━┻

    ┬─┬ノ( º _ ºノ)

    (ﾉಥ益ಥ）ﾉ ┻━┻

    ┬──┬ ¯_(ツ)

    ┻━┻ ︵ヽ(`Д´)ﾉ︵ ┻━┻

    ┻━┻ ︵ ¯(ツ)/¯ ︵ ┻━┻

    (╯°Д°）╯︵ /(.□ . )

    ʕノ•ᴥ•ʔノ ︵ ┻━┻
  68. e_k
    Sep 26, 2010
    6
    **If you've played, and enjoyed, the previous installments, you may be disappointed.** The changes that are neutral or positive are : ditching the religion (neutral) and corporation elements (good), a hex-based grid (good), full ranged warfare (good), end of roads-everywhere (good). The changes that are negative are: 'embarking' where almost any unit can cross water without the need for a**If you've played, and enjoyed, the previous installments, you may be disappointed.** The changes that are neutral or positive are : ditching the religion (neutral) and corporation elements (good), a hex-based grid (good), full ranged warfare (good), end of roads-everywhere (good). The changes that are negative are: 'embarking' where almost any unit can cross water without the need for a ship, incomplete information regarding your diplomatic relations, a simplified tech-tree. These and other tweaks make the game 'smaller' in it's feel. (There are also some oddities - e.g., great person buildings are now built outside of the city, and are harvested like any other resource). Somehow, even on larger maps and longer duration games, it doesn't feel as absorbing as the previous versions did. Sure - the 'stack of doom' is now gone, but defending against such a force was a drama of its own, and doesn't result in the strange mechanic that only one unit can be stationed in a city (which makes it feel more like a board-game then an empire simulation). Overall, I am sure this is a good game, but it has to be compared to Civ IV, which was excellent. And in that comparison it fails. My guess is that future expansions may address some of these issues.… Expand
  69. K1ller
    Oct 3, 2010
    6
    Simplified so a chimapnzee can play it, full of bugs and crashes, it is the worst of all Civ games. One leader for each nation? So if you want to play a specific nation, but do not like the leader traits, you are screwed. One unit per tile? Nice idea until the map is full of spawned units blocking each other's way. And how the is it possible for another empire units to come through mySimplified so a chimapnzee can play it, full of bugs and crashes, it is the worst of all Civ games. One leader for each nation? So if you want to play a specific nation, but do not like the leader traits, you are screwed. One unit per tile? Nice idea until the map is full of spawned units blocking each other's way. And how the is it possible for another empire units to come through my units as the are not there? How are we suppose to protect our city states at war with another major when not beiing at war witht the said major?… Expand
  70. Tridus
    Sep 29, 2010
    6
    Civ 5 starts off awesome. The graphics are great, the new combat mechanics are cool, and there's lots of neat things to explore...

    Then you start getting good at it. The empire building aspect is shallower then it was in Civ 4. There's less to build. There's incentive for building a lot of cities but not letting them grow. You can buy most of your food from city states if you want to, and    Civ 5 starts off awesome. The graphics are great, the new combat mechanics are cool, and there's lots of neat things to explore...

    Then you start getting good at it. The empire building aspect is shallower then it was in Civ 4. There's less to build. There's incentive for building a lot of cities but not letting them grow. You can buy most of your food from city states if you want to, and come out ahead by just spamming trading posts. You notice that only a few Wonders are really worth their cost, let alone the difficulty in building them when the AI gets building speed boosts on higher difficulty.

    Combat is awesome, except that the AI is REALLY BAD at it. Once you know how to use rivers, hills, great generals, and ranged attacks strategically, you will dismantle armies significantly larger without difficulty.

    That's the problem here. The AI is bad and it makes the game really easy once you know how to play it. The shallower nature of the game means there's less fun without a challenging AI to push you.

    The game isn't bad, and if you're not a Civ fanatic you will probably find a lot to like. But for the people who are good at the TBS genre and Civ in particular, there won't be much to hold your attention over Civ 4.    … Expand
  71. 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 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    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 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
  72. Adzmc
    Sep 26, 2010
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The short of it is: if you have, and like Civ IV BTS, then don't bother. The only people who don't think that this is major dumbing down of the series obviously just don't 'get' strategy games. I've played through two full games now, one marathon and one normal. I like to play Huge, Marathon, Earth maps because of the 'epic' feel. this virtually can't be done on CIV V. Marathon is simply too slow (my rig exceeds recommended specs and hasn't crashed once). City-states make ridiculous demands eg "build a road to my town (on the other side of the planet) and they get really old really fast. On normal it was a bit better, except there's no way of telling if your neighbours are happy with you, so it's easy to descend into bloodshed if you're not disciplined. The end screens on Civ IV were short little movie, depending on which victory you attained. Civ V doesn't even have this - it's more like a "Conglaturation!, you have completed a great game" screen, and that's it. Combat is better, but the dumbing down of naval invasions means it's really easy to snatch the enemy's capital from sea. Capture all the enemy capitals and you win the game. That is of course if your units don't get lost on the way. Civ V has a really annoying habit of 'losing' units. it's a bit like the Total War series, where you have the remember where your units are. Not cool if you come back to a game after a long break. Likewise their "goto" commands break when they embark, often leading to a huge build up of units on the wrong coast. Aerial combat isn't much better, animations for the planes don't play properly. The ranges of combat missions aren't clear. etc etc. It just doesn't 'feel' epic anymore.
    I'll be looking forward to the first patch for this game and expansion, but at the moment my advice is to steer clear, definitely not worth the $$$    … Expand
  73. Torger
    Sep 27, 2010
    6
    As a longtime fan of the series, I unfortunately have to say that Civ5 has been vastly overrated by professional reviewers. That's probably because the game looks great and the real flaws don't start to show up until after a few hours of play.

    There are certain things I really like about this game. City states were a great addition and make the game a lot more interesting. Being able    As a longtime fan of the series, I unfortunately have to say that Civ5 has been vastly overrated by professional reviewers. That's probably because the game looks great and the real flaws don't start to show up until after a few hours of play.

    There are certain things I really like about this game. City states were a great addition and make the game a lot more interesting. Being able to purchase land is awesome and realistic. Easier rushbuying is a lot of fun and doesn't unbalance the game.

    The new combat system is pretty goofy (for example, archers are a ranged unit but riflemen are not). It's a bit more fun than the old "stacks of doom," but I see reviewers praising the new combat system as "more streamlined" when it is definitely not. Moving an old stack of doom required 2 clicks (click on SOD, click on destination). Now you need to do the same thing 5-10 times as much to move an army.

    The new Civic talent tree offers more customization of specific traits, which is fun to plan around. However you can't swap civics to match a change in strategy in-game (eg. teching up at the beginning of the game and then turning to a warlike theocracy once you realize you're likely to lose the space race). This is disappointing. Overall, when Civ5's civics are compared to Civ4 its a wash. In-between-turn load times suck. On a normal size map in the modern age, I was sitting and watching the hourglass for an average of 15 seconds in between each turn--even when I wasn't watching animations of enemy moves. I'd blame my computer but it runs pretty much every other game at high settings without a hint of a problem.

    Music is bad, particularly the asian themed music. I can't believe they wasted time animating leaders and making them talk in their own languages. It doesn't add much to the game and some of their voices (Queen Elizabeth) actually detract from it by being annoying.

    The lack of science/gold/culture sliders takes away a lot of customization potential that was fun to tinker with in previous Civ games. This became painfully apparent when going for a cultural victory. A cultural victory doesn't require the last 25% of the tech tree, but you can't stop researching until you run out of money. And in the meantime, because you're still researching new tech, your puppet states are building more and more new buildings and costing you more money. And when you run out of money you can't do a LOT of things, like rush-build or more importantly buy luxury resources and establish good relations with city states that provide culture. Basically you lose the ability to do the things that make the game fun. This is especially frustrating when it have been so easily solved with the old-school sliders, which were never that difficult to manage in the first place. Overall, it's a good, but not great game. It reminds me of Civ3, in that it attempts to add interesting new game concepts and surprisingly flops at aspects in which its predecessor excelled. On the bright side, Civ4 did a great job of combining the best of Civ2 and Civ3, so hopefully history repeats itself and Civ6 will be awesome.    … Expand
  74. sams
    Sep 30, 2010
    6
    Great game. Fun. Worth picking it up if you enjoy the genre.

    This game is a 6/10 because some things are currently not working right. Diplomacy is pretty useless at the moment, the tech tree is still just a "research all of it" thing, and the AI is anything but intelligent.
  75. thehiredgun
    Oct 5, 2010
    6
    I'm baffled that "professional" critics rated such a buggy mess of a game so high. Perhaps they only played a few hours or were limited to a demo or some other nonesense, because if you go read the 2K Support forums, you'll see that CIV V is filled with buggy AI, missing features, and straight up silly bugs. If you are considering purchasing this game for Multiplayer LAN games with yourI'm baffled that "professional" critics rated such a buggy mess of a game so high. Perhaps they only played a few hours or were limited to a demo or some other nonesense, because if you go read the 2K Support forums, you'll see that CIV V is filled with buggy AI, missing features, and straight up silly bugs. If you are considering purchasing this game for Multiplayer LAN games with your family, strongly reconsider until they have a chance to fix numerous issues plaguing this game. This game was definitely not ready for release.… Expand
  76. kram789
    Jul 27, 2011
    6
    Some good stuff in this game, but also a lot of idiocies. The good stuff, is that the multiple paths to winning really work. Previous versions were all about expanding, but in this version a compact civilization can do very well. The bad is that the game is unecessarily hard to manage. A lot of techniques that existed in prior versions are missing. Such as being able to set your citySome good stuff in this game, but also a lot of idiocies. The good stuff, is that the multiple paths to winning really work. Previous versions were all about expanding, but in this version a compact civilization can do very well. The bad is that the game is unecessarily hard to manage. A lot of techniques that existed in prior versions are missing. Such as being able to set your city preferences across the empire from one city. Or, being able to go to a city screen from the F2 city summary view, or being able to change production in the same F2 view. It also is cheap that you the game does not take into account production to date when purchasing a building. All of these were probably left out to help sell the sequel in typical Sid Meir fashion.… Expand
  77. profusious
    Oct 20, 2010
    6
    I'm a huge fan of the series, but this was just a let down. They took some interesting mechanics and tried to push the genre forward, but ended up introducing a lot of buggy gameplay -- barely working multiplayer, poor matchmaking and lobby efforts, bugs all over the place, and an unbalanced game. This one should have been left in the oven another 6 months to bake. Too early, and leavesI'm a huge fan of the series, but this was just a let down. They took some interesting mechanics and tried to push the genre forward, but ended up introducing a lot of buggy gameplay -- barely working multiplayer, poor matchmaking and lobby efforts, bugs all over the place, and an unbalanced game. This one should have been left in the oven another 6 months to bake. Too early, and leaves me with a doughy taste in my mouth.… Expand
  78. moonkies
    Oct 20, 2010
    6
    This new game lack of in-depth which Civ IV has. I am quite disappointed. There are less systems and civilizations to play with.

    I also appreciated the hex-grid and new battle system, but can please make the AI more LOGICAL and SMARTER in battle? I literal kill 15 units without damage 1 of my unit by defensing . I beat deity level within 60 hours.(I wasn't able to beat deity in civ4)    This new game lack of in-depth which Civ IV has. I am quite disappointed. There are less systems and civilizations to play with.

    I also appreciated the hex-grid and new battle system, but can please make the AI more LOGICAL and SMARTER in battle? I literal kill 15 units without damage 1 of my unit by defensing . I beat deity level within 60 hours.(I wasn't able to beat deity in civ4)

    This game is mediocre and didn't live up with the hype. I hope they will do better on the next expansion.    … Expand
  79. Nandoalbando
    Aug 3, 2012
    6
    pro: the exagon strategy system
    cons: no religion, no espionage, empire limitation system, the cost of the road system, console-enterface of city management
  80. Seraphael
    Nov 1, 2010
    6
    Civilization V has promise, but is ultimately a very flawed game riddled with bugs and poor or even unfinished implementations. Coupled with sluggish performance on decent computers, my advice would be to stay clear of the game until it can be patched to a decent level. Check back in in 6 months or more.

    5.0 out of 10.0.
  81. Incogntiodies
    Nov 6, 2010
    6
    A good but simply incomplete release. This is an overhauled version of civ, there isn't much remaining of the previous game's finely tuned mechaics. So as you might expect there are some aspects that work well, and some that make you scatch your head. Overall the game makes a refreshing change from its predecessor, and still retains that addictive civ feeling. Why 6/10 then? Simply put,A good but simply incomplete release. This is an overhauled version of civ, there isn't much remaining of the previous game's finely tuned mechaics. So as you might expect there are some aspects that work well, and some that make you scatch your head. Overall the game makes a refreshing change from its predecessor, and still retains that addictive civ feeling. Why 6/10 then? Simply put, the AI is atrocious. It has absolutely no idea how to fight a war, and engaging in diplomacy is both confusing and frustrating. The only way to play a decent game against the AI is to give it ridiculously large handicaps on the highest difficulty settings, which just feels stupid (and it's still not that hard). Multiplayer is OK. Barebones, but it works. Frankly if you haven't bought civ 5 yet and are thinking about it, I would wait 6 or 12 months for the game to be fully patched up before considering it again.… Expand
  82. JesusHKriest
    Mar 14, 2011
    6
    I think Civilization 5 is an okay game by itself, but if you compare it to Civilization 4 it... yeah. To sum it up as best as I can, I think Civilization 5 is just "dumbed down" a bit. You don't have to focus on as many things, religions were completely removed from the game, and hexagon upgrades were way more obvious. Speaking of hexagons, I absolutely hate the hex system. It means youI think Civilization 5 is an okay game by itself, but if you compare it to Civilization 4 it... yeah. To sum it up as best as I can, I think Civilization 5 is just "dumbed down" a bit. You don't have to focus on as many things, religions were completely removed from the game, and hexagon upgrades were way more obvious. Speaking of hexagons, I absolutely hate the hex system. It means you have way less plots of land available per city, which took away a lot of the fun. The city-state system was a little lame too; I didn't want to have to bother dealing with greedy and disobedient city-state allies when I could just conquer them and use them and their land for myself. The AI has some of the same, if not worse, problems that Civ 4 had. Why in the world my best ally spontaneously decides to declare war on everyone, including myself, is beyond me. The expansions for Civ 4 were definitely worth it on Steam when you could get Civ 4 + all expansions for like, 20 USD/Euros, but Civ 5's DLC that adds just one civilization choice makes me want to vomit. Honestly, most games of this current era tend to "dumb down" their gameplay, but the Civilization series is all about strategy.… Expand
  83. 1010101
    Jun 11, 2012
    6
    My first Civ game was Civ2. I loved it. I've played each Civ game to follow. Maybe I've just become jaded and bored with the series, but Civ5 didn't capture my interest at all. The first game I played, I went the entire game without ever attacking anyone or being attacked. All I did was click 'next turn'. In my second game, I decided to try the expansionist strategy, only to discover thatMy first Civ game was Civ2. I loved it. I've played each Civ game to follow. Maybe I've just become jaded and bored with the series, but Civ5 didn't capture my interest at all. The first game I played, I went the entire game without ever attacking anyone or being attacked. All I did was click 'next turn'. In my second game, I decided to try the expansionist strategy, only to discover that the game designers hate the expansionist strategy. As for new features, the no unit stacking rule is kind of cool, and city-states are OK but clutter up the map. Some things never change, though: the AI is still a joke.… Expand
  84. AlekKolchak
    Apr 12, 2011
    6
    With the fifth series the developers made some radical changes for the civilization series, including some bold new choices. I spent a long time playing the game before commenting as it is difficult to review a classic franchise. The best improvement is the combat system. Combat is now on a hex system. One army per hex. Ranged units can fire from hexes away but are generally weaker fromWith the fifth series the developers made some radical changes for the civilization series, including some bold new choices. I spent a long time playing the game before commenting as it is difficult to review a classic franchise. The best improvement is the combat system. Combat is now on a hex system. One army per hex. Ranged units can fire from hexes away but are generally weaker from attack, making the organization of your army critical. Non fast units move as fast like scouts in prior game (2 hexes over open ground, 1 hex over rough terrain), which makes terrain important. One bad change, and a baffling design choice, is the UI. In Civ 4 the UI told you everything you needed to know. You could tell how you were doing in points, and could hold your pointer over a resource to instantly know how many you have. No longer, for some reason. Advisors are back, but they only give general advice that most experienced civ players should already know. They are not an adequate replacement for Civ 4's excellent information screens. Cities take much more time to produce both buildings and units. Which means you must be selective about what you build. I can see why this was done, but the effect is that the game feels much slower than its predecessors. Happiness is now an empire wide trait. Instead of having happy and unhappy cities, every city has an equal amount of happiness which rises and falls together. Unfortunately, this means that a game of conquest and annexing conquered cities (which is now much harder, as cities take several turns to fall and can defend themselves with ranged attacks) can cripple your entire kingdom. This also slows down the game. I'd give this game a hesitant recommendation. I would also strongly advise having a very fast hard drive if you wish to play on any map beyond the smallest.… Expand
  85. emeraldstorm
    Jul 17, 2011
    6
    The days of plunking down $50 dollars for something in the Civilization series without thinking are over for me. As many of the other reviewers said, this game was just not ready to go. If it were a first release of Civ ever I'd give it much higher marks. But it's not. It's the 5th major version of the main game, and has had a ton of other manifestations, patches, add-ons, etc. Because ofThe days of plunking down $50 dollars for something in the Civilization series without thinking are over for me. As many of the other reviewers said, this game was just not ready to go. If it were a first release of Civ ever I'd give it much higher marks. But it's not. It's the 5th major version of the main game, and has had a ton of other manifestations, patches, add-ons, etc. Because of that, Civ 5 should be an embarrassment to the franchies. A new version of a game should build on the positive things in past versions. But there are features (particularly in the user interface) that are MISSING. They didn't bother to include a lot of the things (mostly little) that they included in *previous* versions. It's very difficult to get easily accessible information about profits and cities in a format that is intuitive and informative. It feels like one step forward and two steps back. It could be recoverable with some relatively minor fixes, but if they haven't done so yet, I doubt they are going to. As others have said, they lost their credibility with me on this game and the 'brand trust' has been eroded. -- I've raised my rating 2 since the last patch.… Expand
  86. Scanton
    Apr 20, 2011
    6
    This is a fantastic game to play when it works a buggy, laggy frustrating mess of a game when it doesnâ
  87. jeanphilt
    May 27, 2015
    6
    Background :
    I bought the complete edition with all DLCs on the Humble Bundle store for about 15$. Younger, I played similar games a little but I've not played any since years. I played the default game mode using all default settings (difficulty beginner). Usually I rarely rush a game but this game feels more like work than entertainment so I rushed it like I would rush finishing a task    Background :
    I bought the complete edition with all DLCs on the Humble Bundle store for about 15$. Younger, I played similar games a little but I've not played any since years. I played the default game mode using all default settings (difficulty beginner). Usually I rarely rush a game but this game feels more like work than entertainment so I rushed it like I would rush finishing a task and it took me 2 days (16 hours) to finish the game.

    Review :
    I'm pretty new to Civilization so obviously I don't review it like a fan would. Personally, I think that they should change the default settings to make the game simpler/shorter and more fast paced. Despite the in-game tips provided, the complexity felt overwhelming. I know you can somehow change the settings but I would like the default settings to be more "user-friendly". I'm a programmer and I hardly see how a casual gamer can start being interested in this game, except a kid with tons of hours in front of him. Personally, I would prefer a game where the focus is more on the war and less on culture/religion/faith/science/happiness.    … Expand
  88. Nmesk22
    Jul 23, 2011
    6
    Civilization V is a deep, refreshing take on the Civilization franchise. In past iterations the player needed to be diplomatic in order to rule the world. Oh, did I say deep and refreshing? Forgive me, I meant to say that Civilization V, in comparison to its predecessors, is shallow in game mechanics which ultimately left me regretful for not reading more reviews before the big purchase.Civilization V is a deep, refreshing take on the Civilization franchise. In past iterations the player needed to be diplomatic in order to rule the world. Oh, did I say deep and refreshing? Forgive me, I meant to say that Civilization V, in comparison to its predecessors, is shallow in game mechanics which ultimately left me regretful for not reading more reviews before the big purchase. Luckily I found Civ V on sale for about $20 dollars and that's just about what this game seems to be worth. Why Sid Meier and his teams left critical gameplay features on the cutting room floor escapes me. Religion, a major staple of the Civilization franchise, has been completely removed. Diplomacy consists of few clickable options such as trading, war, and "discussions," which truly only serves as a shortcut to the trading screen. However, Civilization V is not a hole-filled game.

    After playing several long matches on standard settings I will say that Civilization V picks up the slack of its former iterations. Cities are much harder to capture. They require the coordination of several units, all on the offensive against powerful city cannons that can brush away small forces. Military combat is much more streamlined; with hexagonal tiles and no unit stacking, smart tactical management of the player's units takes a major role in world dominance. Although combat is much improved, other methods of winning matches are shadowed by the polished combat systems. In every match I played, online and offline, I found that players and AI opt for the Dominance victory instead of the more peaceful options such as cultural or scientific victories. Towards the end of long games, many players will have a hefty income of gold and will be able to instantly purchase whole armies or buildings, easily turning the tide of a battle. Whether or not this option is a glorious feature or a mechanic hinderance still eludes me, perhaps some sort of penalty for abusing the new system could be set in place.

    Civilization V would have worked at a higher plane had it choose to adopt the micro mechanics of Civilization IV while keeping the new military system. Diplomacy definitely needs more depth; the detail of the different world leaders and their backdrops are fun and animated, but it's only the icing on a cake made from rocks.    … Expand
  89. julian_zizzle
    Oct 8, 2011
    6
    I have been playing strategy games (rts and turn based) ever since Age of Empires 2. I prayed god like a thousand times to finally see a game which is as good as my old and beloved Age of Mythology. And civilization 5 was no exception on this. This game grabs you with a weird kind of addiction if you start playing. You may sit to play this for 30 minutes and find out that 2 hours areI have been playing strategy games (rts and turn based) ever since Age of Empires 2. I prayed god like a thousand times to finally see a game which is as good as my old and beloved Age of Mythology. And civilization 5 was no exception on this. This game grabs you with a weird kind of addiction if you start playing. You may sit to play this for 30 minutes and find out that 2 hours are already passed. But the important part is the Civilizations actually have no difference than the other in particular. This makes the game really basic in variety. For godsake the only difference Between Aztecs and French are 1 different unit for each and 1 more unit/building if you are in luck. And uh there is also 1 more bonus between any 2 countries(For example Aztecs get some culture bonus for each enemy units they killed). I don't study history but even i can tell you at least 10 difference between the Aztecs and French People. This game really needs some more variation.… Expand
  90. OneVoice
    Nov 20, 2012
    6
    It's a good game, but just not nearly what Civ IV was (or Civ III for that matter). I've been playing Civ since the original was released many years ago, and have never been disappointed by anything the series has ever done. But once I played Civ V I became worried about the future of this series. Civ V has been dumbed down significantly from it's predecessors. It's a sad change.
  91. Triggerhappy
    Oct 15, 2013
    6
    An decent strategic game, grossly overpriced at the release. It looks quite fine and has some great art, but not even that justifies the terrible performance issues, meaning you won't be able to play huge maps, as the waiting time between turns grows unbearably long.

    It felt not complex enough at release, having no religions, a silly culture mechanic, no spying at all and absolutely    An decent strategic game, grossly overpriced at the release. It looks quite fine and has some great art, but not even that justifies the terrible performance issues, meaning you won't be able to play huge maps, as the waiting time between turns grows unbearably long.

    It felt not complex enough at release, having no religions, a silly culture mechanic, no spying at all and absolutely horrible, worthless diplomacy. It was still decent. If you really want to give it a shot, I'd say you have to purchase the GoTY edition, which only gives this games enough complex features to justify playing it. Or even calling it Civilization.

    That said, this review concerns only the original release priced now at 30EUR. I would say there are better options of spending your money right now.Only with all the DLCs, it feels somehow complete and fully enjoyable. You would have also had spent 100EUR on it, if you were buying it one DLC after another, so. Alpha Centauri cost me some 20 when it was new. Just sayin'.    … Expand
  92. dionissos
    Dec 31, 2011
    6
    I am fan of civilization franchise but i think this game is not the best of them and didn't has the same quality and deep gameplay of the previous games.
  93. greywolf00
    Jun 3, 2013
    6
    I hated the death stacks from the Civs of old and loved the actual ranged attacks from ranged units from Civ 4 mods so was really stoked for Civ 5. However, they vanilla game, not sure how patches have addressed it, game was never properly balanced around the changes. Late game it was common to see every single square on the map occupied by a unit. Unlike Civ 4 where you had toI hated the death stacks from the Civs of old and loved the actual ranged attacks from ranged units from Civ 4 mods so was really stoked for Civ 5. However, they vanilla game, not sure how patches have addressed it, game was never properly balanced around the changes. Late game it was common to see every single square on the map occupied by a unit. Unlike Civ 4 where you had to strategically select city sites, Civ 5 brings back ICS (Infinite City Sprawl) as the best strat. Essentially, it doesn't matter where you build a city, it's a net gain. That 1 square tundra island surround by useless water? Yes,build on everyone you find. Overall, Civ 5 is a mixed bag. Glad to see the hex system, ranged units, and death of death stacks but the overall tuning and balancing didn't keep pace with the changes.… Expand
  94. bosnian
    Apr 9, 2012
    6
    There are few changes from previous iterations that work great, namely 1 unit per tile. But bad AI and incredible resource hog on larger maps, as well as the unecessary simplification of the game take away from the experience brought on by the previous versions.
  95. ifnotmoreso
    Mar 26, 2012
    6
    Fun game. Once. But surprisingly little replay value. If you're looking for depth, the buildings/tech/armies/culture aren't elaborate enough to make you want to slog through it more than once or twice.
  96. MayhemMike83
    Mar 23, 2013
    6
    I'm a big fan of the Civ series but this one is the first civ game that bored me after only a couple of hours. Tons of dlc but no innovation, odd new combat mechanics (1 unit per hex but the maps are too small), a lot of missing features from the old games, less management,....

    Feels like a "Civ Light" for newcomers to the genre
  97. mikhail_lem
    Nov 17, 2012
    6
    Most of the time it feels like a dumbed down version of Civ 4. No religion, no public health and diplomacy options have been badly pruned, providing a most straightforward gameplay, if well lacking many features. On the good side, the hex tile is well implemented and, combined with the inability to stack units, renders most of the old "square tile" tactics useless, which is a good thing,Most of the time it feels like a dumbed down version of Civ 4. No religion, no public health and diplomacy options have been badly pruned, providing a most straightforward gameplay, if well lacking many features. On the good side, the hex tile is well implemented and, combined with the inability to stack units, renders most of the old "square tile" tactics useless, which is a good thing, since it encourages tactical thinking instead of just sending the infamous "Stacks of Doom" and watching things burn. The graphics look awesome, yeah, but I would have sacrificed the eye candy for some gameplay depth. In a nutshell: If you liked Civ4, odds are you won't like this.… Expand
  98. Dozmo
    Oct 14, 2014
    6
    Oh dear. While the graphics have improved, many core gameplay elements have been changed from prior versions of the Civ series, and not typically for the better. For example, you can now only put one unit on each tile - which makes moving your army a massive chore compared to previous games. City-states also require a lot more micromanagement than previous games where you dealt only withOh dear. While the graphics have improved, many core gameplay elements have been changed from prior versions of the Civ series, and not typically for the better. For example, you can now only put one unit on each tile - which makes moving your army a massive chore compared to previous games. City-states also require a lot more micromanagement than previous games where you dealt only with the big empires. All in all, it feels like the game has been dumbed down, with too much focus on graphics over gameplay, relative to the previous titles in the series. If you haven't played strategy games before, you can try it. If you have, though, you're better off with Civ 4, or one of the older games in the series.… Expand
  99. AWG
    Jul 21, 2013
    6
    I've never been a big fan of strategy games, and in fact I'm not a big fan of this fifth installment of the Sid Meier's Civilization saga, even if it looks and sounds cool.
  100. pierrem
    Sep 28, 2014
    6
    This game series needs some work. They seem to try to do the same game over and over, and this one gets boring quickly. Not much to tell against it, it is clearly not bad, but it is not fun either. Hex & no stack is a good feature (for combat units, for others it is not), but otherwise, what changed since the first of the series? 6 is a bit harsh, but punishes the lack of improvements &This game series needs some work. They seem to try to do the same game over and over, and this one gets boring quickly. Not much to tell against it, it is clearly not bad, but it is not fun either. Hex & no stack is a good feature (for combat units, for others it is not), but otherwise, what changed since the first of the series? 6 is a bit harsh, but punishes the lack of improvements & the DLC politics.… Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

4
#4 Best PC Game of 2010
5
#5 Most Discussed PC Game of 2010
3
#3 Most Shared PC Game of 2010

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
90

Universal acclaim - based on 70 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 66 out of 70
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 70
  3. Negative: 0 out of 70
  1. Thunderbolt
    Apr 3, 2011
    90
    Despite my gripe with the animations in multiplayer, Civilization V is the perfect entry for the series' debut in the current generation of gaming.
    Read full review
  2. games(TM)
    Jan 20, 2011
    80
    We're just a little bit disappointed that this Civ evolution isn't as polished as we'd expected. [Issue#102, p.108]
  3. Eurogamer Spain
    Jan 15, 2011
    80
    An old franchise that knows who to evolve to adapt to modern times. Its latest new ideas might not be perfect, but serve the purpose of making the game even more interesting.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »