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. Jerik02
    Oct 4, 2011
    3
    Having enjoyed each Civ game, this was a total let down. Civ 5 is a giant step backwards in terms of complexity and is not even worth the $15 I paid for it as a steam special. Once you get past the new graphics - which I'd happily do away with for greater game complexity - Civ 5 feels hollow and dumbed down. It is obvious which game review sites/magazines are paid off for positive reviewsHaving enjoyed each Civ game, this was a total let down. Civ 5 is a giant step backwards in terms of complexity and is not even worth the $15 I paid for it as a steam special. Once you get past the new graphics - which I'd happily do away with for greater game complexity - Civ 5 feels hollow and dumbed down. It is obvious which game review sites/magazines are paid off for positive reviews as the user reviews are resoundingly negative and disappointed. I agree with comments stating how the AI is poor, diplomacy is neutered and practically meaningless. The new civics program doesn't gel well with the historical policies of civilizations. It is also virtually impossible to maintain a large army due to special resources being required for certain units. Please tell me why I need aluminum to build modern armor or a missile cruiser, when neither use aluminum in the "real world". Overall the game is poorly designed and rushed to the market. It is a crappy product hidden in a nicely wrapped box. I want my money back.… Expand
  2. Jumper_351
    Oct 4, 2011
    4
    What a disappointment! This game is basically a dumbed down version of Civ 4, with slightly better graphics. The AI is a joke. The cutscenes are gone and the game gets very old quite fast. With the removal of religion, civics, espionage and meaningful diplomacy, Civ 5 represents what is wrong with the gaming industry. Namely, "dumb it down and add shiny graphics - but not cut scenes orWhat a disappointment! This game is basically a dumbed down version of Civ 4, with slightly better graphics. The AI is a joke. The cutscenes are gone and the game gets very old quite fast. With the removal of religion, civics, espionage and meaningful diplomacy, Civ 5 represents what is wrong with the gaming industry. Namely, "dumb it down and add shiny graphics - but not cut scenes or movies when you win, because that is hard." Lame.… Expand
  3. haileris2
    Sep 11, 2011
    5
    Civilization - Lite Edition is what I call this. If you want the complexity of the last games look elsewhere. If you want a turn based strategy game with average to poor AI and the depth of the shallow end of the paddling pool then this will be just for you!
  4. DrIron
    Sep 8, 2011
    1
    Get Civilization 4 and BtS instead (you don't need Warlords, BTS has all of Warlords in it).
    5 has worse AI, only just barely matches the visual quality of modded Civilization 4, is much harder to mod and thus barely enjoys any modding community unlike 4, and the game is just too damn easy due to how unbalanced everything is. On top of that, there's hardly any multiplayer support.
    Just get    Get Civilization 4 and BtS instead (you don't need Warlords, BTS has all of Warlords in it).
    5 has worse AI, only just barely matches the visual quality of modded Civilization 4, is much harder to mod and thus barely enjoys any modding community unlike 4, and the game is just too damn easy due to how unbalanced everything is. On top of that, there's hardly any multiplayer support.
    Just get Civ4. Want more civilizations than 4 has to offer? They've been modded in. Want better graphics? They've been modded in. Hell, you can get mods that make each nation's units look unique, so that a Portugese and a Dutch unit will not be clones like they are in 5. Then to make things worse, Firaxis has actually started -selling- civilizations, putting less work into them than modders do, for $5 each.
    This sequel doesn't even deserve to exist if it can't compete with its predecessor on any field.    … Expand
  5. ThugLife
    Sep 8, 2011
    10
    I initially bought Civilization V on release, having played it for about an hour I wrongly believed it was inferior to its predecessors and didn't play it again until July. This time I embraced the new combat system which was my main problem with game when I first played . The new combat system allows for a more strategic approach and is ultimately more satisfying than the stacking ofI initially bought Civilization V on release, having played it for about an hour I wrongly believed it was inferior to its predecessors and didn't play it again until July. This time I embraced the new combat system which was my main problem with game when I first played . The new combat system allows for a more strategic approach and is ultimately more satisfying than the stacking of units in previous games. In other areas things have been simplified which makes the game feel faster, some people would consider this a negative but I feel it is a step forward for the series and will open the game up to more casual player new to the series. One issue with the game is that the A.I is not the best, that said I have only played on the normal difficulty level. The game's graphics are very nice indeed the downside to this means that a good computer is needed to run the game well. I have never had any technical problems with the game and always runs with zero lag and and seems very stable.… Expand
  6. moengo
    Sep 5, 2011
    10
    super jeu de stratégie alliant réflexion et plaisir de jouer. Seul petit bémol, même si le graphisme est amélioré par rapport à CIV 4 cela aurais pu être un peu mieux. je trouve dommage qu'un jeu d'une telle qualité n'est pas su profiter d'une meilleur conceptionsuper jeu de stratégie alliant réflexion et plaisir de jouer. Seul petit bémol, même si le graphisme est amélioré par rapport à CIV 4 cela aurais pu être un peu mieux. je trouve dommage qu'un jeu d'une telle qualité n'est pas su profiter d'une meilleur conception graphique.néanmoins; jeu absolument à recommander… Expand
  7. Doublecross
    Sep 3, 2011
    1
    Wow, what a load of disappointing crap. If this game would just have the exact same graphics and the same game mechanics CIV 4 had, this game would be already better lol. But they dummed it down that my dicks dick could be my advisor in the game. Very dissapointed and sad :(
  8. Quasi
    Sep 3, 2011
    9
    Heck - how can such a great game have such a low score? Yes, there are new aspects. If there were none, people would complain even more. Civ 5 is better than all other games in the series.
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. Strategist_78
    Aug 27, 2011
    10
    I played every single one of this game since the first Civ came out, it was just 2D icons on a 2d map, I think was the time of Simcity etc. When I got the Civ5, by just looking at the cover, I saw major difference. First I could use the ships for ground support, ground troops could attack ships, and units could fire 2-4 squares away. Great. I was quite excited until about the middle of myI played every single one of this game since the first Civ came out, it was just 2D icons on a 2d map, I think was the time of Simcity etc. When I got the Civ5, by just looking at the cover, I saw major difference. First I could use the ships for ground support, ground troops could attack ships, and units could fire 2-4 squares away. Great. I was quite excited until about the middle of my first game on huge map. The game was extremely slow after some turns and the game was freezing, and shutting down. I improved my system from recommended configuration to quad CPU, 8GB ram, SSD drive, 1GB fast graphics, 64Bit W7 etc. just to feel playable, still very heavy on hardware in later parts of the game on larger maps. The reason is that the AI players are set to mass produce units to the point where the entire area within their borders and beyond is covered with them. I mean every single square. I saw better strategy from barbarians and city states, they would probably get to the same point eventually. About the game. Not talking about all the things and concepts that are left out, there is one major problem. The AI has no strategy. There is no difference in strategy if you play on Settler or Deity difficulty other than completely unfair advantage at the start of the game. Ai just gets more units, better production, you name it. If you can barricade yourself for long enough time and fend off onslaughts of more advanced units, then you'll make it on any level. you may end up fighting arrows against infantry but only until you catch up with your research. Retreat wounded units, promote them, you'll be amazed what ultra elites can do. If AI just would sent all those units at you you would have hard time to make it, but there is only certain amount of points of attack every turn. Terrain comes handy. There is no defense against nukes, other than to attack with a nuke first especially at the city that has one. Which destroys all units at that city. I am not gonna go into more details but basically the game is fun at the beginning where you are fighting for survival, trying to get to the resources, but at some point it becomes very boring and sort of routine cleanup of other players. The whole game was very simplified, has good concepts with air-force and navy but lacks in diplomacy, tech tree, gameplay. Also after you spend all that time hunting for an iron for example, you won't need it anymore. Anyhow I can't say anything dab about, I take it with all pros and cons, just a little bit disappointed. But I see a great potential in multiplayer, human against human. AI just knows how to make "2" types of units at the end, and as long as it puts them in the water, it is just a good target practice for the airforce. So don't be afraid to be the last guy in the games based on the score sheet, with thousands of points difference, city by city unit by unit...
    If you make your economy strong by combination of culture and city management, you can spent most of the time in golden age, and also you can literally buy the world with all city states. Nuclear missile is a good cleanup tool, and since it is nothing special to build, providing that you have uranium access, just keep buying them... It is a good game but no real challenge in it. If there ever is the Civ6 I hope they keep
    this one as a base and fill in all the good features from previous versions with possibility to switch it on and off. But the main focus I would put on AI adaptive tactics and overall strategy.    … Expand
  12. flipkin
    Aug 27, 2011
    0
    Big fan of the franchise, but this game sucks. Big pet peeve of mine is when the AI opponent is able to do moves the human player is not. Lot's of bugs. Very slow loading. Slow in general. Hangs. Obviously rushed out before it was done.
  13. Reo
    Aug 22, 2011
    1
    I have been a CIV 1 to 4 addict. I am trying to get into CIV5, but over the last 4 months every time I get a good game going I get to around turn 390 to 410 and then somthing always goes wrong. It wont load, or validate. The game crashes. I am sick of it. The only game I have completed is one I started in the industrial age and beat the game in under 200 turns. It seams you can only playI have been a CIV 1 to 4 addict. I am trying to get into CIV5, but over the last 4 months every time I get a good game going I get to around turn 390 to 410 and then somthing always goes wrong. It wont load, or validate. The game crashes. I am sick of it. The only game I have completed is one I started in the industrial age and beat the game in under 200 turns. It seams you can only play the game on standard or quick speed, on normal or small worlds. Have not been able to play past 400 turns on a large world. The game looks great and plays great only on standard settings with very few civs. The whole steam thing sucks! It takes for ever to load a game and then it crashes. Worse, it freezes and you dont know, becouse it normaly takes 5 minutes to load. Check integrety? This has never worked. It says it cant be verified and it has to be reloaded. You wait and wait and finaly its done and you go threw the 5 min wait to load another game and the it freezes. You try to post about the problem and they tell you a patch is coming, only I get the patch and it works fine on a new game, so you play it and boom the same thing at about the same point. I like the social policy thing and the game is balance tword world domination, thats ok. But I think the MODS may be the problem becouse all my crashes and freezes tend to happen during a mod game. But the vanilla civ 5 is not that fun. There are alot of aspects to this game I like, but what good are they if you cant play a game from ancient to futer with alot of turns. I am trying for a culter victory or a science, but I always end up freezing or crashing. Gonna try Historic speed as the only mod on a random map and see if that crashes or freezes, if it does I am putting this game away.… 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. 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
  16. nicktaste
    Aug 7, 2011
    0
    The fact this game was given such high reviews by so many critics and sits now at a "90" is a testament to the lack of credibility of many professional critics. I played civilization 4 as well as other previous civ titles and I can easily say this game is a huge disappointment. The game is simply boring, tedious, and not fun. You can not stack units and the AI is far inferior to the AI ofThe fact this game was given such high reviews by so many critics and sits now at a "90" is a testament to the lack of credibility of many professional critics. I played civilization 4 as well as other previous civ titles and I can easily say this game is a huge disappointment. The game is simply boring, tedious, and not fun. You can not stack units and the AI is far inferior to the AI of Civ4. This game simply does not live up to its predecessor.… Expand
  17. Greenlemonade
    Aug 1, 2011
    10
    Long time Civ player. The hate this game has received is fueled mostly by:
    1. Peoples' tenancy to expect the release of a squeal to fulfill all their wildest dreams.
    2. Peoples' fear of change. Some specific changes for the good: The graphics are smooth and beautiful. The gameplay is streamlined and requires less micromanaging. No more stacked units!!, MUCH easier for units to travel    Long time Civ player. The hate this game has received is fueled mostly by:
    1. Peoples' tenancy to expect the release of a squeal to fulfill all their wildest dreams.
    2. Peoples' fear of change.
    Some specific changes for the good: The graphics are smooth and beautiful. The gameplay is streamlined and requires less micromanaging. No more stacked units!!, MUCH easier for units to travel across water, far superior user-friendly interface. There are plenty of other little changes to come and more gameplay balances, tweaks and fixes to come (remember everyone, EVERY civ game had bugs).
    Steam makes installation, updates, friend management and communication easy as well as adding achievements.    … Expand
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. skuby
    Jul 24, 2011
    2
    I would recommend either part IV and or part III over part V.
  21. 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
  22. maettsook
    Jul 19, 2011
    1
    Played Civ on the playstation, then moved to PC for II,III and IV. Loved IV and spent many many hours playing it. Installed Civ V, what a dissappointment. It's very slow, no fun, ultimately tedious. I'm back on Civ IV these days and Civ V sits on the bookshelf gathering dust, they won't catch me out again!
  23. 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
  24. 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.
  25. mrvirtue
    Jul 12, 2011
    0
    I love this game. The game and its developers don't love me back. I won't buy another Fireaxis game again. My major issue with this game is the lack of effort on the developers part. On loading the direct x 11 option is not even selectable. I have to do some backdoor entry just to play the game properly. When I'm actually in the game I get the worst FPS in the history of a game whoisI love this game. The game and its developers don't love me back. I won't buy another Fireaxis game again. My major issue with this game is the lack of effort on the developers part. On loading the direct x 11 option is not even selectable. I have to do some backdoor entry just to play the game properly. When I'm actually in the game I get the worst FPS in the history of a game whois graphics look like crap. Just to be clear I'm not complaining about graphics. I like civ because it is turn base. The graphics could look like chess figures for all i care. I just don't like how I can play a game like Crysis on max settings and I get terrible fps in a game like Civ 5. I don't normally write reviews but this game compelled me to complain. Almost a full year into the game and still no major patches to correct this issue. I refuse to play on the lowest settings or direct x 9 when my computer can handle the best graphic intensive games out to date. This game and its developer have lost a fan of many years.… Expand
  26. DeadlyCornbread
    Jul 12, 2011
    9
    I am new to Civ. I never played the old ones, only seen them played, so I'm fresh to the series, since I only recently acquired a PC capable of playing decent games. Civilization V is one of my favorite games in recent memory. I've spent well over 30+ hours playing it, and I am not tired yet. Each race and location adds an exciting change and it's fun to attempt a victory in the manyI am new to Civ. I never played the old ones, only seen them played, so I'm fresh to the series, since I only recently acquired a PC capable of playing decent games. Civilization V is one of my favorite games in recent memory. I've spent well over 30+ hours playing it, and I am not tired yet. Each race and location adds an exciting change and it's fun to attempt a victory in the many different ways you can in this game. But as I mentioned, I feel the game is well worth the money you spend, but I am also new to the series and have nothing to base this game on other than the fun I get from it. And from my perspective, this game is an instant classic.… Expand
  27. rstencel
    Jul 11, 2011
    0
    Have to log into steam and have it running to install and play this game. Steam isnt an app I am willing to run on my machine cause of issues had in past with it, and even through bought from brick and morter store, have to run steam in order to use it. They do not take returns cause they say it says need steam in fine print on back of box, after looking for 10 minutes was able to findHave to log into steam and have it running to install and play this game. Steam isnt an app I am willing to run on my machine cause of issues had in past with it, and even through bought from brick and morter store, have to run steam in order to use it. They do not take returns cause they say it says need steam in fine print on back of box, after looking for 10 minutes was able to find the fine print about steam. Will never buy another 2k game and cant play this unreturnable game at all now. Am very displeased.… Expand
  28. 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
  29. CD001
    Jul 5, 2011
    9
    A late review based on the game as it is now - with patches. If, like me, you remember playing the original Civilization on the Amiga, you'll see how much the game has changed over the years - and this one is a big change in the series - if you can get past the "this isn't Civ 4" factor it IS a great game - hell, I've clocked up 576 hours on it according to Steam. The diplomacy systemA late review based on the game as it is now - with patches. If, like me, you remember playing the original Civilization on the Amiga, you'll see how much the game has changed over the years - and this one is a big change in the series - if you can get past the "this isn't Civ 4" factor it IS a great game - hell, I've clocked up 576 hours on it according to Steam. The diplomacy system isn't gone, it's just been streamlined - you don't need to send diplomats out - and the NPCs respond to you according to how you act (well, they'll all hate you if you're WAY out ahead)... it's actually better. Espionage IS gone though as is religion - which takes away a couple of layers of depth from the game unfortunately. The difficulty curve has been tweaked so that it doesn't jump from "too easy" to "impossible" in about a step and the cultural system has been overhauled, as has the combat (massively) it's no longer a matter of stack a thousand units on a square and romp in, you now need to utilise your ranged units, stand them behind "melee" units and fire over them - yup, no more stacking on the squares. Oh, and cities can defend themselves now. In short, so much has changed that this is a totally different game - I suspect the low scoring here is largely due to people carrying baggage over from previous Civ games. If you're prepared to approach it with fresh eyes you'll probably find it a rewarding, infinitely replayable, turn-based strategy game - much like any other Civ game (except Civ 3 which I never really liked for some reason) - Civ 5 is more about tactics, strategy and exploration and less about micro-management so an important thing to bear in mind is - THIS IS NOT CIV 4! - (it's more like a supercharged version of Civ 2 - with less railways)… Expand
  30. BlueBangkok
    Jun 29, 2011
    4
    I have played all the Civ games since the very first one. After playing Civ 5 for a few days and fiddling with mods, I've finally decided to give up. This game probably has the most inconsistent gameplay I have ever seen.
    THE GOOD
    The graphics look really nice, especially if you run it under DX11 and have a pretty beefy PC. The new combat system, ranged attacks, and one hex = one military    I have played all the Civ games since the very first one. After playing Civ 5 for a few days and fiddling with mods, I've finally decided to give up. This game probably has the most inconsistent gameplay I have ever seen.
    THE GOOD
    The graphics look really nice, especially if you run it under DX11 and have a pretty beefy PC. The new combat system, ranged attacks, and one hex = one military unit rule are just brilliant. Too bad AI is unable to utilize it effectively. Oh, and I like the new UI. That's about it.
    THE BAD
    Everything else is just plain broken. The AI is so stupid it's breathtaking. It is simply not an option to evade war and win a non-combat victory. AI just keeps insulting you and declaring war for no reason. I've tried playing as Gandhi and did everything the AI asked (even not settling near their borders which is, frankly, retarded request). Still, they kept denouncing me and declaring war. No matter what you do, no matter who you befriend, you always end up in a global conflict with AIs declaring war on you and each other. And when you actually get in combat with AI, it is laughable. They NEVER send more than 4-5 units at once, even on higher difficulties.
    It's fascinating someone is actually able to program an AI that is stupider than Civ 1's and slows down to a crawl even on high end quadcore systems (late turns during an epic game on huge map slowed down to 1-2 MINUTES on 4Ghz i7 processor). Moreover, there are annoyingly long load times. Add poor optimization and frequent crashes to the mix and realize you will be spending a LOT of time doing virtually NOTHING!
    Granted, Civ 5 was developed for multiplayer - but even multiplayer is somewhat disappointing due to the lack of any depth and features (no espionage, no religion, no government...). You could redistribute your national income any way you saw fit even in Civ 1. You cannot do so here. No research or culture boosting... In other words, Civ 5 has been bastardized in every possible way. Fewer playable civs (without DLCs) than in Civ 4? Check. Idiot-friendly micromanagement (no wealth redistribution, global happiness...)? Check. Stupid AI and super-easy gameplay? Check. No vanilla Earth map? Check.
    After playing a few games, I realized Civ 5 is not a game. It is more like a framework for future DLCs, patches, and most importantly, mods. The AI, balancing (you research really really fast while everything else takes ages), engine.... nearly everything is either broken or in stages of beta version (even AFTER many patches Firaxis has released!). Wait for a year or two before buying this game. Hopefully by that time it will be patched properly and some nice modpacks will allow you to play a balanced game with more features. Until then save your money for something else.    … 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 »