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. pazmacats
    Apr 14, 2011
    1
    Civ5 is a rather bad action game. Controls are limited and it is best played with a gamepad. It also helps to be intoxicated while playing. I takes about 10 hours to beat the game on STEAM difficulty. Most of the time is spent navigating the mouse pointer and hitting "end turn" about 300 times. Everything else is more or less autopilot. Your opponents (barbarian tribes and barbarian bossCiv5 is a rather bad action game. Controls are limited and it is best played with a gamepad. It also helps to be intoxicated while playing. I takes about 10 hours to beat the game on STEAM difficulty. Most of the time is spent navigating the mouse pointer and hitting "end turn" about 300 times. Everything else is more or less autopilot. Your opponents (barbarian tribes and barbarian boss tribes) don't know who they are what they are where they are and what they are supposed to do, so it is a single player. Mulitplayer is broken, but totally ROCKS according to the devs. I recommend thsi game to enyone who is short of hate and / or boredom.… Expand
  2. 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
  3. Gratson
    Feb 15, 2011
    10
    Great game and I'm an old Civ addict. Has kept me addicted longer than any civ game since civ 1. The new combat system is great. There are a few things I would like to see done better, such as more interesting diplomacy and more of an emphasis on religion. But overall a really addicting, fun addition to the Civ franchise. I'm giving it a 10 because I think it should be 9.5 but can't chooseGreat game and I'm an old Civ addict. Has kept me addicted longer than any civ game since civ 1. The new combat system is great. There are a few things I would like to see done better, such as more interesting diplomacy and more of an emphasis on religion. But overall a really addicting, fun addition to the Civ franchise. I'm giving it a 10 because I think it should be 9.5 but can't choose that here.… Expand
  4. phil24
    May 2, 2012
    2
    This is a very addictive game. HOWEVER. No normal human has the time to play it. I have put 40 hours into this game, finished 1 match (wich i lost in the 1400s) and just lost my second after putting 20 hours into a match. The game itself is so enraging that i almost punched my computer. you should never be able to put 20 hours into a single match and loose the entire game in a matter ofThis is a very addictive game. HOWEVER. No normal human has the time to play it. I have put 40 hours into this game, finished 1 match (wich i lost in the 1400s) and just lost my second after putting 20 hours into a match. The game itself is so enraging that i almost punched my computer. you should never be able to put 20 hours into a single match and loose the entire game in a matter of minutes. its sickening.… Expand
  5. eagleFMJ
    Mar 16, 2011
    10
    Being new to the CIV series, I quite enjoy this game, and it looks great. Seems to me alot of die hard CIV fans are bashing the game, but for me I love it! So I would say if you are new to CIV series defiantly pick this one up!
  6. Mittsies
    Jan 14, 2014
    0
    Trash game. Horrendous multiplayer. Incredibly boring and weak compared to its predecessors. Is 0 out of 10 a fair score? Probably not. But it's an insult to the franchise, disrespecting its own line of games, so why should I leave a respectful review? Even if the game was free to play, I'd be more worried about wasting my time. Go play Civ 4 or something.
  7. Monte28
    Aug 31, 2011
    10
    Imagine Civ 3 but slower. ALOT slower. It seriously is just like civ 3 but a small, tiny, micro-scopic uniqueness to each civilization. Gameplay is the same, graphics are better, and overall its the sam civ game you know, just shinnier. OH OH OH! and its dumbed down. If you are also a fan of Empire earth....imagine empire earth 2 towards 3. Its basically like that
  8. hmjhoss
    Apr 28, 2011
    8
    I've played all of the Civ's. Frankly I'd much rather have a remake of Alpha Centauri than a new civ, but thats beside the point.

    Civ V is just like all the other civs, a remake on the previous one. There's things missing, things done well and things done not so well. No more roads and railroads to no where. that in of itself is awesome. No more doom stacks of units. This is a trade    I've played all of the Civ's. Frankly I'd much rather have a remake of Alpha Centauri than a new civ, but thats beside the point.

    Civ V is just like all the other civs, a remake on the previous one. There's things missing, things done well and things done not so well.

    No more roads and railroads to no where. that in of itself is awesome.

    No more doom stacks of units. This is a trade off really, but a change for the better in my opinion. One unit per city is also more of a good change than a bad one. It does put more focus on open ground than before.

    Social policies are neat, but they need some form of revolution put into them. I can do without religion... but it is something a lot of people liked.

    I'm okay with the tech tree, but one thing that really bothers me is the "Giant Death Robot." Sorry, but that belongs in a scenario not the normal tech tree.

    Diplomacy is just, lacking. It at least needs the little tooltip that pops up when you scroll over another civ's name that tells you the + points and - points. like: -2: Our close borders spark tensions.

    My first attempts at this game were met with mediocrity. I had my issues with it and I put it down for a bit. I gave it a real attempt a few weeks ago and found myself warming up to it. It needs more in the way of leaders and diplomacy, but I've come to really enjoy it. I'm sure the DLC / Exp's will address some of this, while I'm not the most keen on the idea of DLC, whatever works...

    Over all I very happy they are trying such (relatively) radical ideas with the Civ series. That means the franchise is still going at it. There's stuff that will push away some Civ 4 fans, but there's also a lot of novel ideas put into form. Try it, make your own judgement... I've put in 30 hours playing on a huge map with 14 civs going for a military victory. So something was done right if I'm still playing.

    This is more of a 7.5/10 on my scale. Giant Death Robot made it drop that extra .5... However, the most fun I ever had in a Civ game was Civ 1. A save game I put on a 3.5 Disk and lost... Earth map where the aztec's had all of North and South America fortified with better tech. I spent days taking all of it. Good times.

    Just do an alpha centauri remake please... I've lost my copy ages ago and cant find a new one.    … Expand
  9. northwestcore
    Jun 20, 2011
    10
    This was my first time playing a CIV game. I was in no way disappointed and it lived up to all the hype I had heard about it. Anyone looking for a game that has a slow but very fun pace this is the game for you, just make sure that you don't have anything to do because time will fly when you play this game.
  10. viniciusfazio
    Jul 13, 2011
    10
    Great game, best Civ ever. The new combat system where only 1 unit per tile is awsome, makes the battle more tatical. The economics is more clear also, you know what is happening.
  11. xp51mustangx
    Jul 30, 2011
    10
    I love this game. It keeps me in the infinite "just 15 more minutes" cycle. Civ 5 can take the usually Boring TBS strategy and make it fun again. Decent AI, and the desire to play the loads of civilizations until the last empire is crushed keeps bringing me back.

    that being said, it can be frustrating. Playing on marathon will day MORE then a full day to complete. Hours of your gameplay    I love this game. It keeps me in the infinite "just 15 more minutes" cycle. Civ 5 can take the usually Boring TBS strategy and make it fun again. Decent AI, and the desire to play the loads of civilizations until the last empire is crushed keeps bringing me back.

    that being said, it can be frustrating. Playing on marathon will day MORE then a full day to complete. Hours of your gameplay will be just waiting for the game to end the turn. the lag is off the charts and can be tedious to wait minutes to end every turn. Then, you HAVE to give orders to every single unit you own. sure, you can put them into a standby thing, but once you need them, you forget about them into the flurry of constant unit orders. althought it can be a good thing, sometimes dragging out a game so long (days to complete a single one), can be a bit annoying.

    But overall, i give it a 7. its a good game regardless, and worth it.    … Expand
  12. TheTim
    Jan 9, 2011
    0
    Highly overrated game. It can take dozens of turns for a single small event to happen and there's not a single interesting thing in the entire game. Anyone who plays actual games such as Starcraft II will fall asleep watching or playing Civ V because it's such a dumbed down simple game that a 5 year old could play it.

    If you build 1 thing every 15 turns there's no skill or thought    Highly overrated game. It can take dozens of turns for a single small event to happen and there's not a single interesting thing in the entire game. Anyone who plays actual games such as Starcraft II will fall asleep watching or playing Civ V because it's such a dumbed down simple game that a 5 year old could play it.

    If you build 1 thing every 15 turns there's no skill or thought needed.
    Attacks can take dozens of turns to do anything, again making people simply fall asleep.
    Play the demo if you'd like, skip buying it.    … Expand
  13. Lewg999
    Jun 2, 2011
    9
    As a strategy veteran but a newcomer to the civ franchise i thought i would give an honest opinion from an unbiased position.This is straight up the most addictive strategy game (maybe the most addictive game) i have ever played, to start with there are many factions to choose each with varying pros and cons that mean it is not a game that gets old quickly and the gameplay is absoluteleyAs a strategy veteran but a newcomer to the civ franchise i thought i would give an honest opinion from an unbiased position.This is straight up the most addictive strategy game (maybe the most addictive game) i have ever played, to start with there are many factions to choose each with varying pros and cons that mean it is not a game that gets old quickly and the gameplay is absoluteley superb for a strategy game with just the right balance between economics, diplomacy and warfare to keep the game interesting. My only complaint with civ 5 would be that without saves in multiplayer and given the length of most matches multiplayer is difficult to organise and play however this will hopefully be fixed later on. on hte subject of multiplayer it seems to be working pretty well currently and teamed with the massive amount of time you will spend in single player civ 5 has teh best value for money of a strategy game i have played in a long time. The graphics are another area in which the game excels with the game being clear and easy to understand from a zoomed out perspective and yet very detailed up close. Overall as someone who loves the strategy genre but has never before played a civ game this is a game that deserves to be in every strategy fans collection… Expand
  14. Teraksus
    Aug 14, 2011
    9
    It's just brilliant, I've been playing it for 440 hours, and it just never get boring. But, there are still room for improvement:
    I) The AI have to grow, because after some time the problem is that you don't lose. Of course you can use more challenging levels, but still the main difference is that the computer got an upper hand on you at the start of the game, but the AI are still the    It's just brilliant, I've been playing it for 440 hours, and it just never get boring. But, there are still room for improvement:
    I) The AI have to grow, because after some time the problem is that you don't lose. Of course you can use more challenging levels, but still the main difference is that the computer got an upper hand on you at the start of the game, but the AI are still the same.
    II) The online game experience is weak. It is just about to do things faster than the other players, and every time I played it was same thing, everybody just leave the room before someone got the chance to win.
    Still is a nice piece of business.    … Expand
  15. grok70
    Aug 31, 2011
    9
    I love this version. I've been playing since civilization 3. All of my habits are actually developed around Civ 3 Civ 4 still bugs me because I keep expecting to get samurai as knights instead of horseman, and free granaries from the pyramids. Don't know what I'm talking about? This review probably isn't for you.

    But let's talk about Civ V and why I like it. One, the combat is fantastic.    I love this version. I've been playing since civilization 3. All of my habits are actually developed around Civ 3 Civ 4 still bugs me because I keep expecting to get samurai as knights instead of horseman, and free granaries from the pyramids. Don't know what I'm talking about? This review probably isn't for you.

    But let's talk about Civ V and why I like it. One, the combat is fantastic. The visual representation is very effective, and the sounds and details of it feel great. The fact that frigates and such can directly attack units is awesome. The hex system is the perfect system, and it gives the whole combat the feel of the board game Battletech. The fact that you can't stack units introduces meaningful 2 dimensional strategy. The combat now has a degree of depth to it that makes it much more fun, and when manipulating large armies, LESS OF A GRIND. It's the difference in space combat between Star Trek Online and Eve Online. In Eve it's a numbers game, maneuvering, except speed and distance is meaningless. In STO you have to rotate your shields, making 3 dimensional maneuvering vital, and group maneuvering meaningful. Same thing for CIV 4 vs. Civ 5. This is a VAST improvement. The whole combat system is a vast improvement.

    Diplomacy: All the features I look for in diplomacy were there. The diplomacy layout was great, even the new interaction screen gives me a good vibe. When I'm talking to Montezuma I am connected to the culture through his background and body language. Much better than the Victorian portrait.

    Expansion: I like that this is no longer a settler race early game. There is plenty of land. Don't bother expanding to an area that isn't rich in luxuries or strategic resources. I'm currently playing the Iroquois, I've 3x'd my way into being the largest empire, and I'm rich, but my people are unhappy (annexing causing problems) and the English, who only have 3 cities (vs. my 8) are an age further ahead in tech, have a better military, and are better connected diplomatically (I'm playing on prince difficulty). I squandered all my political and human capital on conquering the Aztec. To me this is depth, and I like it. I won the war but lost the greater competition because of my land greed. Tech Tree: There are now two tech trees. There is the traditional science tech tree, which makes a bit more sense and has actually been expanded, and then there is the new social tech tree. Civ5 takes the idea that there is an endgame for policy. I could do either sytem, but I think there is a lot of strategy and depth to pursuing the social tech tree (fed by culture, awesome.) I'm enjoying it, though it was fun before to become a fascist, nationalistic theocracy and go storming the world. Cities: The cities look great and feel great. The funeral dirge of the Fat square is an ode to joy. The end of neurotic micromanagement of workers and tiles is poetry. Managing the city, the purchase model vs the old rush/ slave model makes more sense. THANK GOD FOR EMBARCATION. Makes the whole game smoother and better. The People's revolt that occurs when your citizens are too unhappy is awesome. This is a sophisticated though simplified model for Civ. The city states are an effective way for us To temporarily expand in times of need, and contract as the need ends. They also provide mini-missions and many interesting dynamics to fill vast tracts of time. Everything that was added I like, I miss NOTHING about the old city system, though I can see the roots of the current system in it. The interaction between the city system and the new combat system is fantastic, and now sieges are so much more dynamic and interesting. Far more so than the previous civs. The overall feel of the game is very much improved. There are two big problems with the civilization series: it becomes tedious when you have a large empire, and late game there's a lack of flexibility, if you're not top dog, it's unlikely you will be by 2050. This game has helped a lot of with the tediousness of empire by limiting the size and by streamlining the micromanagement of cities. I have yet to see if late game is improved.

    The Civilization series has a lot of die hard fans who invested a lot of time and energy into the the minutiae of the previous systems. Their conservative view means this game is worse, because it's tactical and strategic depth is different, not immediately apparent, and perhaps simplified, definitely less technical, though intricate in what I think is a better way. The game is very system heavy. The graphics engine a little buggy. Even the opening movie doesn't like to let me escape out. Hopefully these issues will be solved soon. I'm very happy with it. I wake up early to play it before work, I stay up late playing it after school. I'm 27 years old, and if I'm lucky, I might just conquer St. Petersberg before the day is out.    … Expand
  16. Krown90
    Apr 15, 2012
    4
    Total Disappointed... CIV 5 is a FAIL game.. with a fail AI and a fail strategic concept. The only thing I liked is the introduction of city-states and the particular attention to the graphics. The rest is all garbage. Poor diplomacy. Ridiculous combat system. Accelerated timing too much. Do yourself a favor: play CIV III, is the best of the series.
  17. Dethstar
    Jun 17, 2013
    10
    Still playing it, still enjoying it so long after buying it. So nice to find a game with such re playability. The last expansion was a bit weak but looking forward to the next, the more content for this game the better. I am a big fan of the Civ series and while this isnt the strongest in some respects (Weird technical issues it had concerning performance for a long time) its stillStill playing it, still enjoying it so long after buying it. So nice to find a game with such re playability. The last expansion was a bit weak but looking forward to the next, the more content for this game the better. I am a big fan of the Civ series and while this isnt the strongest in some respects (Weird technical issues it had concerning performance for a long time) its still more of a good thing and unlike many great series it hasnt got so far from its roots that it lost its appeal. More of the same and thank god for that!… Expand
  18. Thagun
    May 10, 2012
    4
    I have an 2nd Gen I5 2500K Cpu. A GTX 460 1 GB card, 8GB of ram and new Z68 chip motherboard.

    All my gear was new.mine is the best machine out of all my friends. It runs battlefield 3 on 1920 - 1080p at high/ultra with filters x16. I CAN'T RUN THIS. Early game the jerking is bad, but late game its torturous. The wait from clicking end turn until getting to go is    I have an 2nd Gen I5 2500K Cpu. A GTX 460 1 GB card, 8GB of ram and new Z68 chip motherboard.

    All my gear was new.mine is the best machine out of all my friends.

    It runs battlefield 3 on 1920 - 1080p at high/ultra with filters x16. I CAN'T RUN THIS. Early game the jerking is bad, but late game its torturous. The wait from clicking end turn until getting to go is seemingly endless and if you where expecting to manage a war or something it would send you mental. I have clocked Civ 4 maybe 6 - 8 times. You dust it down ever so often and spend a day of taxing enjoyment, once completed back it goes till the next time. I will not be playing 5 again until probably 2 computers from now, then it might just work well enough for me to enjoy. Yours Thagun.

    Ps There is a demo, so if you want to get it, try that first. Save some heartache later maybe. :)    … Expand
  19. Alex767
    Jan 2, 2015
    0
    Super boring....... such a waste of time and money, I heard from my friends that it was a good game, so I gave a shot , but it was so boring, Total war it is so much better....
  20. Leftyxdd
    Jun 27, 2014
    10
    When 2 Civilizations build a Wonder in the same turn, the first player that entered the room in Multiplayer will build it, and the other player will just lose it. Frustrating.
  21. scotius
    Mar 17, 2011
    0
    well, another game has been dumbed down in order to appeal to the WoW audience. CiV is a real crying shame of a game. Instead of building on the achievements olf Civ 4 they havespoiled it by making an entirely new game.

    A game that is shallow, too easy, dumb and has very little going for it once you get into the industrial age. Be very aware that Firaxis employees are spamming    well, another game has been dumbed down in order to appeal to the WoW audience. CiV is a real crying shame of a game. Instead of building on the achievements olf Civ 4 they havespoiled it by making an entirely new game.

    A game that is shallow, too easy, dumb and has very little going for it once you get into the industrial age. Be very aware that Firaxis employees are spamming Metacritic with good reviews in order to bump its rating up.    … Expand
  22. RamaMan
    Jun 2, 2016
    0
    Civilization, more like UNcivillized, because of terrible characters, boring game play, badly paced story, an unlikable main character, and dull set pieces.
  23. molinator11
    Mar 14, 2012
    9
    As background, I've played Civilization only since the 3rd, which was the one that turned me on to all turn-based games. The intro pooped on my computer, but I'm still running a dual core on a 32-bit OS, so I kind of expect things like that. Right clicking to move is a bit frustrating, was the first thing I noticed. I have played only at the Warlord (4) level so far - they are foolish,As background, I've played Civilization only since the 3rd, which was the one that turned me on to all turn-based games. The intro pooped on my computer, but I'm still running a dual core on a 32-bit OS, so I kind of expect things like that. Right clicking to move is a bit frustrating, was the first thing I noticed. I have played only at the Warlord (4) level so far - they are foolish, but not wholly incapable of taking advantage of your missteps. I think the "denouncement" feature is what drives a lot of the aggressive diplomacy in the AI - at one point after being denounced by a few major civs, every city-state on the continent declared war on me. What I truly enjoy is how the new and the old have been paired in this game. The concepts are true to the core of turn-based strategy - the hexagonal tiles paired with the decision to remove stacking units makes combat and assaults of cities much more engaging. Though it is a lot easier to defend cities from early barbarian attackers, It's also much harder to make impenetrable fortresses of your major cities in the later stages of the game - a proper siege is very possible using artillery and infantry. The new culture system coupled with the happiness and social policy system makes for interesting game choices. Happiness levels in your empire are entirely transparent, and there are many ways to adjust these levels through social policies which are funded by culture. The other thing I enjoy is the lack of universally expansionist AI. In previous titles, the enemy AI would pack their cities like sardines and aggressively nab resources by simply building a new city - even if it meant stifling that city's ability to expand beyond 6 or 7 population. However in Civ V, the AI avoids this and develops each city properly, allowing room for expansion - in one of my marathon/huge games, I still had room just beyond my borders to develop cities at year 1810. Beyond all the new features that have added to the depth of the gameplay, a few simple ones have made it turns go MUCH quicker. The "End Turn" button will be replaced by important prompts such as "Choose new Research" when you finish a tech on that turn, or "Unit needs orders" when a unit that isn't asleep or fortified has not expended its moves. This makes things a lot easier because instead of tediously browsing over a large battlefield, the game simply finds those units for you and prevents you from ending turn without giving them an order or telling them to wait/sleep/fortify - I'd be surprised if every turn-based game doesn't adopt this feature eventually. This review has been a haphazard collection of new features, but I'd like to say that I am very pleased with the game overall - it brought more new features to the game in a single expansion than many of the previous installments, and did so with a surprising amount of grace. This review might be a year and a half after release (time flies- next turn) but I think this is a major stepping stone for the Civilization series and look forward to its refinement in future titles.… Expand
  24. VidsRule
    Jul 7, 2012
    3
    I hate this game, but not for the same reasons as the others. I review this as someone wjo barely played any Civilizations, and I sure wish I didn't play this one. Huge fundamental flaws- you start a civ, you explore a bit and discover that other civs are way too close, and you can barely explore anymore. At the same time you're builing other cities and working the land. And you part onI hate this game, but not for the same reasons as the others. I review this as someone wjo barely played any Civilizations, and I sure wish I didn't play this one. Huge fundamental flaws- you start a civ, you explore a bit and discover that other civs are way too close, and you can barely explore anymore. At the same time you're builing other cities and working the land. And you part on the map becomes a convoluted mess, and every action is a complete chore. And then other civs start complaining constantly. I know some people are very good at the game and they can handle all that, but I would like to have some fun added to the games I play.… Expand
  25. Psyco_
    Dec 3, 2010
    8
    This game is an amazing new addition to the Civ series. The 'feel' of the game is nothing new to experienced Civ player. But do not let this discourage you if you are not familiar with the series though! The game has a variety of difficulty settings, customizable rules and terms of victory to the game which makes it a fun game for the casual and more experienced player. You can choose manyThis game is an amazing new addition to the Civ series. The 'feel' of the game is nothing new to experienced Civ player. But do not let this discourage you if you are not familiar with the series though! The game has a variety of difficulty settings, customizable rules and terms of victory to the game which makes it a fun game for the casual and more experienced player. You can choose many different civilizations with their own specializations and unique units, which can be very enjoyable to explore.The culture trees are a fun way to make long term (but not absolutely decisive) strategic decisions for your empire. The tech tree is realistic and seems to be very accurate to real world dating of similar inventions. You can have hours of game play just experimenting with all these possibilities.
    A huge upside is that the developers listen to the players carefully and consider each proposition. The patches are huge and so far added quite a few extra options to enhance game play. One major flaw however, is that, in my opinion, they made a poor choice by (already) releasing several DLC packs this soon after release of the game which could already be added to the game in the first place. (for example the map packs called 'Cradle of Civilization' released early December 2010). However, it is to be expected these days. Be reassured: the packs do not enhance or alter the game play. So, if you do not want them you won't miss them. All in all it is, and will be, one of the better turn based strategy games with a wide variate of choices and options to win the game.    … Expand
  26. gamer1234
    Nov 28, 2011
    9
    Bought this in a Steam sale for $20 instead of the usual $50, and perhaps that inclines me to be more positive about the game than some people here, but I find this a rewarding and very addictive game. have not played Civilization games for many years (Civilization 2 was the last one I played) so I'm not comparing this to its predecessors.

    To me this seems to strike a nice balance    Bought this in a Steam sale for $20 instead of the usual $50, and perhaps that inclines me to be more positive about the game than some people here, but I find this a rewarding and very addictive game. have not played Civilization games for many years (Civilization 2 was the last one I played) so I'm not comparing this to its predecessors.

    To me this seems to strike a nice balance between playability and depth, and the automation features are a nice option to save you from some of the tedium of doing the same thing over and over again. Just automate those units you don't care about and focus on the units that are most important for your main strategy. You don't have to use the automation if you don't want to, so any "dumbing down" it brings is entirely optional.

    It's fun without being too shallow, there's a fair amount of complexity to it, and it's challenging enough for me. I'm not a really hardcore strategy gamer so perhaps it's not for them and I can see why they might worry for the series if previous instalments were more complex, but it's still one of the best strategy games I have played.    … Expand
  27. SJ_pl
    Jan 31, 2012
    9
    Let me start by saying that it's a special game. Civ V could go for a single player campaign like Anno series. Go for some tutorials + hours and hours of complicated mission forcing you to fulfill the screenplay writers idea. But that's not Civ V! It has tons of freedom in it's gameplay design and it is not ashamed to use it. You can play it for a week, you can play it for a month. You'llLet me start by saying that it's a special game. Civ V could go for a single player campaign like Anno series. Go for some tutorials + hours and hours of complicated mission forcing you to fulfill the screenplay writers idea. But that's not Civ V! It has tons of freedom in it's gameplay design and it is not ashamed to use it. You can play it for a week, you can play it for a month. You'll be thrilled to see your civilisation blossom.… Expand
  28. dreambob
    Nov 20, 2011
    8
    fun if you have the computer power.
    a good board game that can be really fun if played with friends. the endless possibility's of strategy is going to keep you coming back.
    Playing with the ai is good up to 300 turns on a large world, Even with a decent pc, I was waiting a few minutes between turns.
  29. aka
    May 23, 2011
    10
    well this game is one of the best strategy games ever made! however many people believe the game's not good but thatz completely out of the question becuz no other game is a match for this superb game, the addition of the city states was a brilliant idea which make diplomacy win much easier. well over all this game has a lot of exiting features which would completely dominate any fault inwell this game is one of the best strategy games ever made! however many people believe the game's not good but thatz completely out of the question becuz no other game is a match for this superb game, the addition of the city states was a brilliant idea which make diplomacy win much easier. well over all this game has a lot of exiting features which would completely dominate any fault in the game (if it had any), in other words a game that every strategy games players would love!… Expand
  30. twentyfumble
    Feb 14, 2012
    8
    Long Civ fan here, been playing since Civ1 on the Amiga.

    Civ5 was full of bugs and incomplete features at release. Now, 1 year and half later, it's pretty stable and way more balanced. I have played more than 800 hours and the game is great, it's easily the best strategy game around. I don't give it 10/10 because it still has some flaws that need addressing and because I expected more    Long Civ fan here, been playing since Civ1 on the Amiga.

    Civ5 was full of bugs and incomplete features at release. Now, 1 year and half later, it's pretty stable and way more balanced. I have played more than 800 hours and the game is great, it's easily the best strategy game around. I don't give it 10/10 because it still has some flaws that need addressing and because I expected more from a Civ game. In fact some of the problems that rid Civ5 were brilliantly solved in Civ4, it's like Firaxis forgot what they did in their previous game and started from scratch. Despite some flaws, there are no game-breaking problems anymore, the game is great and will give you hundreds of hours of fun, the mod community is alive and there are some excellent mods around.    … 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 »