Sid Meier's Civilization VI

 PC
User Score
7.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1628 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 947 out of 1628
  2. Mixed: 376 out of 1628
  3. Negative: 305 out of 1628
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. euu
    Oct 23, 2016
    6
    It's better than vanilla Civ 5 but nowhere near as good as Civ 5 with all the expansions. The main problem it suffers from is lack of innovation. Not a lot of things have changed since the previous title. Combat is the same, trade routes work the same, so does religion, enemy AI is just as stupid, etc.

    There are some areas where the game did some modifications though, the most    It's better than vanilla Civ 5 but nowhere near as good as Civ 5 with all the expansions. The main problem it suffers from is lack of innovation. Not a lot of things have changed since the previous title. Combat is the same, trade routes work the same, so does religion, enemy AI is just as stupid, etc.

    There are some areas where the game did some modifications though, the most noticeable being the Districts. This makes you "specialize" your cities as you can no longer build all types of buildings in the city and have to think very well what you build considering the amount of tiles you have available. The social policy system has been changed as well, for the worse in my opinion, as now you gain some social cards when researching a social policy and you can select the bonus of a number of these cards depending on what goverment you have. Again, like in Civ 5 there is no downside to any form of goverment and some of the combinations you make don't even make sense(for example you can drag the Rationalism Card to a Theocracy and you don't get any penalty).

    One thing that I liked is that you can boost your research of Tech and Social by making certain actions in the game. For example, building a number of Quaries can boost your Research towards Mansory, reducing the time you need to reserach this tech, or defeating barbarians can boost you research of Bronze Working and so on. This is the best addition in my opinion as you are no longer need to put a lot of effort in creating Science and Culture, especially if you like to play Military.

    I would rate this higher if it wasn't however for the horrible presentation of the game. I think everyone is already familiar with the horrible iPad graphics. Look, nobody expected this to have GTA 5 graphics and you can talk all you want about muh unique art style but there is no excuse for a 60 dollar game in 2016 to look like a Fremium iPad game, especially when it looks worse than its predecessor. The sound isn't any better either. The Main Menu theme is fine and the choice of Sean Bean as the narrator is excelent, but the music in the main game sucks. Previous Civ games had classical music to listen to as you built your empire. This game has the type of generic crap that you usually hear in Facebook games.

    My 2 cents? Wait for the price to drop or at least for some mods to show up.    … Expand
  2. Machinegunkenny
    Oct 24, 2016
    5
    Totally uninspired. HORRIBLE AI. Have been a huge fan of Civ since the first one and have hundreds of hours on Civ 5 on Steam. Very upset at this pathetic iteration. The graphics are so bad, they must want the game to play on any potato. Civ 5 was not optimized well and I can say that Civ 6 is butter smooth but it should be with such horrible graphics.
    Sad...very sad. The game feels like    Totally uninspired. HORRIBLE AI. Have been a huge fan of Civ since the first one and have hundreds of hours on Civ 5 on Steam. Very upset at this pathetic iteration. The graphics are so bad, they must want the game to play on any potato. Civ 5 was not optimized well and I can say that Civ 6 is butter smooth but it should be with such horrible graphics.
    Sad...very sad. The game feels like early access.    … Expand
  3. 123456
    Oct 23, 2016
    7
    The game looks really nice to me - it seems to have divided opinion. It looks a lot like Torchlight. Animations are OK, but as with all Civ games they become tedious by your second world. Leaders on the diplomacy screen are nice and detailed but again they are boring quickly.

    More me this is the biggest negative in the game - repetitiveness. Doubling up the tech tree with the new    The game looks really nice to me - it seems to have divided opinion. It looks a lot like Torchlight. Animations are OK, but as with all Civ games they become tedious by your second world. Leaders on the diplomacy screen are nice and detailed but again they are boring quickly.

    More me this is the biggest negative in the game - repetitiveness. Doubling up the tech tree with the new culture tree just feels like a pop up window style annoyance. The buffs they give are extremely specific and narrow for the most part - a lot of making up the numbers. Each one is accompanied by a quotation read by Sean Bean. A lovely voice I never thought I got get tired of hearing. Well welcome to Civ 6. Other leaders will occasionally send you messages which take a very long time to voice, and they have very few to choose from - again you find yourself hammering the esc to get on with things.

    War is still fun, and the obnoxious warmonger penalty has had some revisions to make it slightly less so. However you can be friendly with one civ, neutral with another, and declare war on a third, and expect to be denounced by the first two in the same way.

    City distracts are a fun feature, adding a visual element and slight tactical placement to the specialising aspect of city development. A campus (science) near several mountains and another district is far more effective than alone in the desert for example.

    It's not bad, and I got it for £36 instead of £50 (seriously?) but it is quite boring and a little bit annoying.

    Too many little crappy buffs to click through, repetitive dialogue, diplomacy still pretty dumb, war is fun, districts are fun too.    … Expand
  4. Xxdaniels751xX
    May 13, 2017
    6
    I was looking forward to playing this new delivery since I found out I was going to leave. The advances that I had seen excited me, it seemed a good twist to a game that goes for the sixth installment and does not have a story to follow like those of other genres. I tried it and I must say I was quite disappointed.

    AI is schizophrenic. One shift asks you to send a delegation, you accept    I was looking forward to playing this new delivery since I found out I was going to leave. The advances that I had seen excited me, it seemed a good twist to a game that goes for the sixth installment and does not have a story to follow like those of other genres. I tried it and I must say I was quite disappointed.

    AI is schizophrenic. One shift asks you to send a delegation, you accept it but if you want to do the same, they will not let you. Five shifts hate you. At ten they declare war on you and you do not know what the **** you did to make them angry.

    The novelties, although I think they are noble in their proposals, they lack to be polished. The districts take too long to do, and although I understand that the idea is specialization, forcing you to do the aqueduct and the workshop (because you do not grow more) does not leave time for the rest.

    Religion is very annoying. If you do not fund an entry gives you much advantage, not to mention how unbearable it is to see hordes of missionaries bothering where they should not.
    The technological tree is the same as always. Eurekas are fine, but they help a lot to finish the tree quickly. If only they added more technologies ....
    The resources that are almost surplus, are very abundant, almost that you do not need to trade the strategic ones, and the luxury ones without the happiness lose much grace.

    Anyway, I hope they take out one or two expansions to fix it. Although it has good intentions in the changes, they are badly shaped    … Expand
  5. krj38
    May 10, 2017
    5
    RE: Civilization VI including the Spring Patch, with all DLCs up to Macedonia.

    I am so torn with this game. On the one hand, there is much to like here. To list just a few pros, the city development is great (though, you will often find yourself with "nothing to build", apart from military units); the game is as addicting as ever; the split tech and culture trees is exceptionally well    RE: Civilization VI including the Spring Patch, with all DLCs up to Macedonia.

    I am so torn with this game. On the one hand, there is much to like here. To list just a few pros, the city development is great (though, you will often find yourself with "nothing to build", apart from military units); the game is as addicting as ever; the split tech and culture trees is exceptionally well implemented; the mini-quest boosts are nice (though, can be often a hit-or-miss); the turn-processing times are rather good; the policy cards are amazing. Overall, the aspects of the game related to building your empire are well-though-out and well-executed. I sometimes wonder whether I'd be able to get back to Civ V.

    But, I might try to do just that because, on the other hand, when you're over with enjoying the empire-building aspect and think about the international relations in the game you'll be greatly disappointed. The AI either poses little or no challenge, or competes with you on extremely unfair terms. If you thought that AI in Civ V was bad, think again. Despite the patches, other leaders will still behave in an unpredictable manner (in the negative sense). What strikes me as most odd is that the AI seems not to upgrade tiles and builds not so many districts. Also, it is extremely reluctant to upgrade military units and is virtually useless when it comes to waging wars.

    So, the game has some good ideas, good mechanics, but the awful AI ruins the experience for me. In addition, there is the art style, that I'm not very fond of.

    All things considered, I give the game a 6.5. As stated above, it has great potential, but is ruined by the moronic AI.

    However, I'll give it a 5 for ideological reasons: the price is just way too high for the quality of the product and rather sparse content. And the prices of the DLCs and additional Civilizations are unacceptable. So the final score is affected by the cancerous policy game publishers and developers have, that is milking their fans: firstly they sell half-finished products with limited content for a premium price, and then sell additional content (which may be good), but in very small chunks for a high price.    … Expand
  6. WalterDisney
    Nov 14, 2017
    7
    Bought this game the day it released, and I kind of regret it. CIV VI doesn't come close to CIV V. CIV V is a lot more fun, the workshop is more developed, and the content is abundant. I'm also not a fan of the "cartoony" style CIV VI offers (though I thought I would have been). The fact that I'm not able to make it through a complete game on CIV VI should tell you everything you need toBought this game the day it released, and I kind of regret it. CIV VI doesn't come close to CIV V. CIV V is a lot more fun, the workshop is more developed, and the content is abundant. I'm also not a fan of the "cartoony" style CIV VI offers (though I thought I would have been). The fact that I'm not able to make it through a complete game on CIV VI should tell you everything you need to know about it. It just doesn't flow as smoothly as CIV V does, and it hinders your ability to have fun.… Expand
  7. Oshiri_Maeda
    Aug 7, 2020
    6
    Great game, very pleasant to start your own empire. But God, it is so tedious later in the game, every turn takes sooo long, and there is no action. Just building stuff and waiting for it to be built
  8. Lex_x
    Jul 19, 2020
    7
    Игра довольно хороша, но всё же слишком похожа на 5 часть. Я не уверен, что готов считать эту игру полноценной частью серии, ибо она довольно вторична. Да отличия есть и они заметны, но их не так много как хотелось бы. Я бы предположил, что разработчикам стоило подождать с выходом игры 1-2 года и добавить больше интересных и новых механик, НАПРИМЕР НОРМАЛЬНУЮ ДИПЛОМАТИЮ! По факту этоИгра довольно хороша, но всё же слишком похожа на 5 часть. Я не уверен, что готов считать эту игру полноценной частью серии, ибо она довольно вторична. Да отличия есть и они заметны, но их не так много как хотелось бы. Я бы предположил, что разработчикам стоило подождать с выходом игры 1-2 года и добавить больше интересных и новых механик, НАПРИМЕР НОРМАЛЬНУЮ ДИПЛОМАТИЮ! По факту это просто дополненная 5 часть, не плохая, но и не отличная.… Expand
  9. MirekVys
    Oct 31, 2016
    5
    The Civ 6 leave really mixed feelings on me.
    In first glance – amazing concept and game mechanics. It is really pleasure to play. It is really improvement from Civ 5. In many aspect. At this point game could take 10/10.
    But one thing annoying me most. Again AI is totally worthless. Annoying and stupid. There is totally no challenge in play. AI is not able to use or build army. I tried    The Civ 6 leave really mixed feelings on me.
    In first glance – amazing concept and game mechanics. It is really pleasure to play. It is really improvement from Civ 5. In many aspect. At this point game could take 10/10.
    But one thing annoying me most. Again AI is totally worthless. Annoying and stupid. There is totally no challenge in play. AI is not able to use or build army. I tried King. Only thing that change with difficulty is bonuses to AI and punishment to player. I hate this. Still on high levels AI sit like duck and complaining about my expansion, unable to do anything. Only Romans build some units and then send it to nonsense death. (army spread in my lands and kill itself from cities defenses, it does not try take city or withdraw for healing.) In late game AI do totally nothing. It seems that AI is totally broken.
    Firaxis Games – fix this. Try Endless legend, Age of wonders, or even total war, please. This is really shame.:(

    If they fix AI it could be 10/10.    … Expand
  10. TheWaffle
    Oct 22, 2017
    6
    Six years after Civ 5, I wish this game were more of an improvement. It's nowhere close to the massive step forward from Civ 4 to 5. And while some elements have improved, others feel lacking. I'm glad to see the return of the government system, but it feels underdeveloped, and the ability to simply swap out policy cards with no political blowback feels very out of place. You're ostensiblySix years after Civ 5, I wish this game were more of an improvement. It's nowhere close to the massive step forward from Civ 4 to 5. And while some elements have improved, others feel lacking. I'm glad to see the return of the government system, but it feels underdeveloped, and the ability to simply swap out policy cards with no political blowback feels very out of place. You're ostensibly rewriting the social fabric of your civ, and yet it's just pick and choose. I'd like to see more penalties for switching, and some synergies with certain governments and policies. While I appreciate the faster pace, the maps seem much tighter, with almost no neutral ground left after the first 50 or so turns. The religion mechanic is mostly unchanged, and still feels like an afterthought, with little decision making beyond send-moar-missionaries. There's even less difference between great writers, artists, musicians now, which is a shame. This really just feels like another game released with missing content just to force the player to buy the expansion pack. The district system is more of a gimmick than a new mechanic, since having more districts doesn't allow multiple production queues or anything. The AI is still mystifying, with the computer proposing horribly one-sided deals and rejecting perfectly reasonable deals, and they seem to love declaring war on me even when I have a massive army/tech advantage. Diplomacy victory is gone, there's no economic victory. If it weren't for the wonky new graphical scheme, it would be hard to pick Civ 6 apart from a Civ 5 expansion.… Expand
  11. joebobfrank
    Nov 24, 2016
    5
    AI is a serious mess.

    On difficulty 6+, prepare to have *all* of your land tiles covered by opposing player's missionaries when not even at war with them. Oh, you wanted to move your worker onto a tile? Too bad, there's going to be a missionary there for the next 10 turns until the AI missionary swarm chooses to move away. Do you like it when the AI requests to see your capital 10    AI is a serious mess.

    On difficulty 6+, prepare to have *all* of your land tiles covered by opposing player's missionaries when not even at war with them. Oh, you wanted to move your worker onto a tile? Too bad, there's going to be a missionary there for the next 10 turns until the AI missionary swarm chooses to move away.

    Do you like it when the AI requests to see your capital 10 turns in a row? I sure don't. How about demanding things from you every few turns even though you're ahead of them in everything but unit count. I'm sure those cavalry pose a major threat to me, with my mobile infantry.

    I've yet to have an AI accept a trade that I proposed and thought was reasonable. I give you 2 luxury goods, you give me one? No? You want 100 gold per turn as well? When the AI proposes a trade NEVER MODIFY IT. Once you modify it they'll just reject it outright, even if you've made it better for them.

    Is there a nice spot on the map you want to claim? Better produce a settler as your first unit, because the AI will magically have like 3 by turn 30.

    Prepare to have AI constantly declare war on you for no reason, yet not get labelled as war mongers and teamed up on. Then when an AI settles in the center of your territory and you declare war to raze the obnoxious city, you're a warmonger and everybody gangs up on you for the rest of the game.    … Expand
  12. raadoo
    Nov 26, 2016
    5
    after the update, the ai still braindead, though in a bit different way. no wonder, since it seems the only changes they made to the ai are the ones in the changelog, and these are minor tweaks, not real changes. so... it's 1906 AD, standard size map, i have 16 cities, 6 remaining ai civs together have 18 cities. they haven't even settled all of their continents... ai keeps breakingafter the update, the ai still braindead, though in a bit different way. no wonder, since it seems the only changes they made to the ai are the ones in the changelog, and these are minor tweaks, not real changes. so... it's 1906 AD, standard size map, i have 16 cities, 6 remaining ai civs together have 18 cities. they haven't even settled all of their continents... ai keeps breaking promises, so it's impossible to play peacefully, unless you're ok with them converting your cities and stealing your technology boosts. if someone breaks a promise and you declare war - it's still your fault and you get the warmonger penalty, so there's no point in keeping promises (unless you're far weaker - but that also doesn't stop ai from breaking those promises repeatedly). i've conquered the strongest ai civ in 20 turns (he broke a promise not to spy on me three times), he had almost no military, his best unit was a cavalry, i had tanks, bombers, artillery and mechanized infantry. i brought back to live gandhi, so he denounced me after 5 turns, because i was in a war with a civ that i liberated his city from... and so on... some bugs were removed, new ones appeared. if you're wondering whether to buy the game, wait for a sale, patches and dlcs. the game has potential, but it's simply not finished.… Expand
  13. LosOutlier
    Nov 20, 2016
    5
    A real missed opportunity.

    The successful changes to the game are mostly around the logical regrouping of existing features. Perfect examples are the districts which coerce the player into specialisation early on or the rethink of happiness (now Amenities) to be local to each city. I also like the intro of support units (medics, obs balloons etc). Beyond that, it has been an    A real missed opportunity.

    The successful changes to the game are mostly around the logical regrouping of existing features. Perfect examples are the districts which coerce the player into specialisation early on or the rethink of happiness (now Amenities) to be local to each city. I also like the intro of support units (medics, obs balloons etc).

    Beyond that, it has been an extremely lazy development. It 'plays' very much like Civ 5 and I cannot detect any changes/improvements to the actual game mechanics. This is mostly due to the AI which, as per the other reviews, really does suck. I got caught with my pants down by a stronger Civ while my army was warring in the west. Arabia came by sea from the east and declared war with 8 land units in the sea outside my capital. Rather than disembarking and taking my capital, his units just sailed around without attacking until I was able to bring in the Navy and destroy them all... ridiculous.

    It's not just the battle AI which is bad, the 'pathing' has actually regressed from Civ 5. You can no longer just right click your destination tile because the unit will rarely take the shortest path. I actually had it where I right clicked an adjacent tile and the unit went in the opposite direction... took 3 turns to arrive rather than just moving one tile. Seriously guys?? Not for a £50 game please.

    The diplomacy - as always - is ridiculously bad. If I want a luxury resource to rent from another Civ, they will generally be looking for 30/40/50 gpt. When they offer money for mine, you can't negotiate them to beyond 2 gpt.... again ridiculous. The ensuing negotiations are a farce - if you try to negotiate them higher, after they refuse you will not even be able to get the original deal. You ask 'what will make this more equitable' and all of a sudden they ask for obscene amounts of stuff.... again, pathetic, illogical, nonsensical AI.

    Finally, it'd be remiss to not mention the new graphics. Yes, they are objectively uglier than Civ 5 and the colours are garish. However, the games is now much quicker between turns while the AI players take their turns and I suspect the down sized graphics may have something to do with this. If this is the case then I think it is a good trade off because you get used to them, whereas long waits are always annoying.

    My final gripe is with the map types. The preset ones were bad on Civ 5 and have received no improvement for Civ 6. They have however, greatly reduced the amount of available map types and have taken away options to tweak water levels etc so therefore you now have fewer to choose from and no scope to improve them. Continents - one of the few maps available - is SO DULL. Always the same, 2 big lumps next to each other surrounded by sea with nowhere to explore. Fractals always makes ugly maps.

    Considering the above you may wonder why my score isn't lower. Well, as I said, it plays like Civ 5 so its still a decent game but as I said at the start, a total missed opportunity and a lazy development.    … Expand
  14. Tazilon
    Nov 19, 2016
    5
    I have now played ~250 hours of Civ VI. It seemed stable for me at first (although many others have reported problems with crashes on Steam). But Civ's first patch introduced crashes to me, too. Despite having a high end system, I get 100-200 turns into some games and it crashes - and continues to crash on that same turn even if I go back 7-8 turns in the auto saves. Additionally, theI have now played ~250 hours of Civ VI. It seemed stable for me at first (although many others have reported problems with crashes on Steam). But Civ's first patch introduced crashes to me, too. Despite having a high end system, I get 100-200 turns into some games and it crashes - and continues to crash on that same turn even if I go back 7-8 turns in the auto saves. Additionally, the patch introduced a flicker to certain colors on my screen if I zoom in more than about 1/2way.

    Overall, there is a lot to like about Civ VI. With the exception of the newly introduced flickering, the graphics are nice. The many paths to victory allow one to replay even the same Civ multiple times in pursuit of new types of victories. The addition of religious wars, although disliked by many, is a kewl new feature. Allowing one to chain a builder or settler to an army is a nice touch.

    But there are so many issues...

    1) No Mongols. Seriously Firaxis? A game entitled "Civilization", all about Man's history on earth ignores the civ that created the largest empire EVER? /smh epic fail.

    2) AI is horrible at war. It starts wars it has zero chance of winning. It retreats when it should attack. It too frequently attacks with only 1 unit despite having 10 other units (and almost certain victory in the battle) within 7-8 hexes. It often fails to use units which are even adjacent to enemy forces even when the unit could kill yours. As a war gamer, it boggles my mind how horrid the AI is at combat. I want to feel like I won a tough engagement but all too often feel like I just beat up a first grader and stole his lunch money.

    3) It leaves builders and settlers scattered about the map just waiting to get hijacked, even with the sanctuary of a friendly city 3-4 hexes away.

    4) It appears to have no concept of how to conduct naval warfare.

    5) "Islands" are frequently entire continents, connected to both north and south poles and impossible to sail around. So, despite deliberately picking "Island Plates" so you can play a game in which navies are more meaningful, you end up unable to move your fleets around the globe because most of the "islands" connect to the poles and are not possible to go around.

    6) The large number of playable Civs (but no Mongols) are borderline false advertising because it seems one can pick any civ and achieve any type victory with similar ease. Despite what they claim, civ and leader bonuses exert very little influence on how you need to play.

    7) Even more so than many games of this genre, Civ VI becomes a giant, boring slogfest about 50-60% of the way into it. You have great fun in the beginning, work your butt off to set your Civ up on as path to victory and are rewarded by being bored to death for the next 30 hours of game play while you mindlessly press ":Next turn" praying for the gasme to finally end so you can start a new one and make it fun again.

    8) Then again, since Civ VI didn't see fit to include a Hall of Fame or any other way of recording your god-like gaming skills for posterity, who cares if you finish? When you finally reach the last turn or achieve a victory prior to the turn limit (very easy for culture and religious victories),, you get whisked away to page giving you a meaningless score and then when you advance to the main menu, all record four win disappears into the ether, never to be seen again.,

    For $60, I should at least get a Hall of Fame to record my best wins.

    And that is the entire problem I have with Civ VI. It isn't a $60 game.

    If the game offered a $35 price point I would say buy it. It is priced almost twice that amount. In its current state, it is a $35 game asking you to pay $60 to beta test it.

    Wait til it is on a steep sale. You will be glad you waited.    … Expand
  15. edgargtz
    Oct 24, 2016
    5
    La AI es estupida, no reta al jugador, confunden mas con diferentes arboles y tipos de gobierno, su modo de combate se basa mas en graficos que en retar al jugador. Desde mi punto de vista el mejor es CIV 4 en donde en verdad disfrutabas estar jugando con estrategia.
  16. Miguelon
    Oct 25, 2016
    5
    This is definitely a step back from CIV 5, I am a CIV fan since the first civ game. The worst thing for me is the policy system, in civ V every time you earn a new policy you get a bonus, in civ VI you can just replace a bonus by a different one, getting a new government doesn't give you new bonuses, it is much worse than the policy system in civ V. The AI is completely dumb, they attackThis is definitely a step back from CIV 5, I am a CIV fan since the first civ game. The worst thing for me is the policy system, in civ V every time you earn a new policy you get a bonus, in civ VI you can just replace a bonus by a different one, getting a new government doesn't give you new bonuses, it is much worse than the policy system in civ V. The AI is completely dumb, they attack you with no reason even if you have a much larger army. Also you can't choose what to do with you "great persons", they just give you a few bonuses, in civ V you have different options in how to spend your great person.
    Overall the game is a bit boring, sometimes at later stages of the game you just have to click the next turn button, it is not well balanced, hopefully it will become a great game after the expansions packs in the future, but at the moment CIV V is a much better and enjoyable game, so is civ IV    … Expand
  17. funnytrollolo
    Oct 28, 2016
    6
    I tried to love this game but at this moment I simply can’t. The game is not engaging enough and feels raw. I keep my fingers crossed that the reason to release it in this incomplete state was not to milk cash from us but rather to accelerate bug fixing based on inputs from broader audience. We’ll see in the coming few months anyways, but for now…
    1) AI is extremely stupid in single    I tried to love this game but at this moment I simply can’t. The game is not engaging enough and feels raw. I keep my fingers crossed that the reason to release it in this incomplete state was not to milk cash from us but rather to accelerate bug fixing based on inputs from broader audience. We’ll see in the coming few months anyways, but for now…
    1) AI is extremely stupid in single player game. I mean, we hear all the buzz about new technologies, artificial intelligence & machine learning algorithm that adapt to the user behavior – well, it’s not about Civ 6. I started playing at the King difficulty being experienced player of Civ 5, but the gameplay is too simple and not engaging. I announced surprise war to my neighbor who in the agenda hates this, by stealing the settler. AI had 5 times more army than I and pulled 7 units next to one of my cities where I had just 1 warrior. And guess what – nothing followed, apparently they came to have a party or something next to my city, just standing there and ignoring what was happening. In 10 turns and pulled in/build 4 archers and smashed that crowd. What the hell is that? Why do I need to care about diplomacy, city planning, trade what so ever, if I can simply skim through the game by doing bare minimum and still win?
    2) User Interface – holy cow, who designed that? The scaling of menus is extremely bad; the notifications during AI turn, so called “gossips”, simply stack at the middle of the screen covering the game window and other menus, and I always have to wait until they disappear. I don’t know if this is an issue of HD resolution but hell, my PC is not strong enough to play it on higher resolutions. The science and civic trees design is horrible and provide little to know information which can be a bottle neck for new players. Also I am missing Demographics report a lot, the new reporting options are oversimplified and does not provide comprehensive picture on where the player stand against the opponents.
    3) Some of the BASE content is missing, like Diplomatic victory mechanics. I mean it is there but it is simply disabled. I am 100% confident it will come in DLC to milk more cash… On top, I do miss the ideology mechanics which was extremely powerful tool in Civ 5 to backstab your opponents by converting several other nations to your ideology and smashing the happiness level of your opponent.
    4) The graphic design choice is questionable. Most people including myself don’t like it, too flashy colors, too childish and cartoony objects. It’s like playing Torchlight after Diablo 1. Anyways, I can live with that but I don’t really understand why the game is so demanding to hardware? Apparently the engine is simply not optimized.
    5) I don’t like the switch to city-level happiness and housing bottleneck. It forces players to go wide and tall empires are in disadvantage. First 50-100 turns now all about spamming cities.
    To wrap up, it’s not all so bad, it’s still good old Civ but as I mentioned earlier it’s far from being polished. I had a feeling that I am playing alpha version, not final release. The best improvement so far is by all means the districts mechanics. It forces you to build more specialized cities and avoid the MEGA city approach although this may be a disadvantage for people who enjoy 1 city challenge. I like the fact there are no overpowered Wonders anymore which eliminate the “rush mode” to get Pyramids or Great Library. The new government mechanics is also a good idea, although requires some improvements as well because at the moment you can overthrow your governments without any significant impact.
    Net, net, if the perfect game is 10, I would reduce it by 3 because of stupid AI and by 1 for the rest of the issues. Civilization 6 gets a 6 score from me.

    Ideal Civ game recipe from my POV
    Take from Civ 5:
    Visual Design
    AI (improve it to make more sophisticated)
    User Interface
    Culture Tree & Ideology
    Take from Civ 6:
    City Development
    Science
    Government
    Religion
    Military
    Barbs
    City States
    Diplomacy & Espionage
    Commerce
    Mix it altogether and release!    … Expand
  18. akbil
    Oct 24, 2016
    6
    AI is most probably the element of utmost importance in single player games. And look. Firaxis didnt get any lesson from Civ 5 by kicking out the AI team from the company. Gosh, god damn it. Who tests the AI feature of the game, is it the team that programs it or some really dumb guys. then answer is clear, "yeah yeah it is working just fine, just as it did in civ5". Examples; I have theAI is most probably the element of utmost importance in single player games. And look. Firaxis didnt get any lesson from Civ 5 by kicking out the AI team from the company. Gosh, god damn it. Who tests the AI feature of the game, is it the team that programs it or some really dumb guys. then answer is clear, "yeah yeah it is working just fine, just as it did in civ5". Examples; I have the military power x3 of one civ and he/she stills declares war on me. In real world, if you dont like superpowers you just shut the f.k up, dont declare war on them. Second, civs declare war on me but since they are dumb, i can turn around the war and they beg for peace. if I dont accept their peace offer, then I will be the warmonger. Shame on you AI testers, ALL of you.

    And shame on some sites too, including metacrticis who reviewed the game in less than 24 hours and give it 9-10. Congratulations, we can expect this much dumb AI in civ 7 now.

    And as for the religion, my holy city/religion was wiped out by foreign apostles etc, cant train any units of my original religion anymore. So I am trying to revive my religion with the help of Jerusalem :))    … Expand
  19. geekgaming
    Oct 26, 2016
    5
    Not as good as I thought it would be. Disappointed all the way makes me want to go back to civ5

    Con: The automatism that civ 5 gave made it a lot better. Removing automatic workers is a pain also the card selections of bonuses towards which government is painful and useless too much information to get submerged into gameplay. Also, the civics and influence spent to research the same as    Not as good as I thought it would be. Disappointed all the way makes me want to go back to civ5

    Con:
    The automatism that civ 5 gave made it a lot better. Removing automatic workers is a pain also the card selections of bonuses towards which government is painful and useless too much information to get submerged into gameplay. Also, the civics and influence spent to research the same as the technology research tree just clusters the gaming experience.

    It's a whole mess that didn't make this game enjoyable. Will I still play ? Yes just for the fact that I spent money on it will I buy the expansions? Maybe if they fix what they have done to it which I doubt.

    I played over 30 hours already and still don't get the best of it. It just makes me want to go back to civ 5 and enjoy the game to it's fullest.

    Pros: I like what they have done with the city states loaning the military when in need is a great addon when you reach a certain level with the state for a certain price of gold but well worth it when you are at war.

    Districts are a cool addon as well to increase military culture science , religion on your territory at the expense of the tiles. But a really cool addon.

    and that's it! not enough to give a chance to this game, unfortunately, there is too much of a mess to get recovered the civics and automatism of the workers and even those government cards that are supposed to bring this game to another level of detail just does not meet my expectations it's unfortunate and I hope it is fixable but if not I will just put it aside and compensate on my urge on Civilisation 5 instead.    … Expand
  20. Jenne
    Oct 25, 2016
    5
    Mechanically solid and complete game but I can't forgive Firaxis for what they've done to the art style and the general vibe of the IP. Realism has always been important for Civ games, feeling like a real leader of a real nation has always been something unique that other 4X games didn't have. Why then Firaxis chose to go for a this cartoony, goofy art style? They can't say it's justMechanically solid and complete game but I can't forgive Firaxis for what they've done to the art style and the general vibe of the IP. Realism has always been important for Civ games, feeling like a real leader of a real nation has always been something unique that other 4X games didn't have. Why then Firaxis chose to go for a this cartoony, goofy art style? They can't say it's just because the cartoony map is less cluttered and easier to navigate because the leaders are just goofy, cartoony caricatures of real people too. I understand that for most players the art style of a strategy game is not important but for me personally it completely ruins the experience of playing a Civilization game. The only consolation is it's not 2005 anymore, Civilization is not the only 4X game on the market.… Expand
  21. Moo-vies
    Nov 30, 2016
    6
    Civilization VI is just more of the same with bad AI, not enough variety, not enough particularities in the leaders skill and a pointless game design beyond the year 1000 AD.

    Plenty of people who can't handle change will complain about the graphics (who cares, they do the job and you will cut the animated leaders talking after a few games to stop being interrupted all the time). Like    Civilization VI is just more of the same with bad AI, not enough variety, not enough particularities in the leaders skill and a pointless game design beyond the year 1000 AD.

    Plenty of people who can't handle change will complain about the graphics (who cares, they do the job and you will cut the animated leaders talking after a few games to stop being interrupted all the time).

    Like all 4X wannabes these days, you will anyway have to wait 3-5 years to get the extensions, mods and a complete game experience. The game also lacks mod support at the moment besides a few UI fixes and customization, so we have to wait until mod tools are released which could introduce some rules variety in the gameplay).

    I had a lot of time to play Civilization VI since release and got rapidly saturated.
    More than anything else, the infuriating times between turns are absolutely awful when you go beyond a small map. This removed a whole point in the subjective grade I gave to Civ VI.

    The lack of variety between games is a huge downer. I think the game needs to go further into leader specialization and really think hard about the mid game slog that goes all the way to the end. To be honest, the only motivation to end a game is global thermonuclear war, but once you have done that once, there is not much reason to end a game.

    My biggest critic is the kind of dissociation between units and production / science. Moving your armies should go way faster so the player could actually DO something. Right now, producing units then moving them around is just a time waste considering how much else you could do with these turns in terms of development to your cities.

    I like the workers having only 3 charges by default, it introduces a bit of dynamism.
    I wish wonders could be built outside the 3 tiles limit of the city itself. Wonders should be restricted to the territory, not the cities.

    With time, Civilization VI will undoubtedly become a really good Civilization if Firaxis brings as much attention to it as they did for Civ 5, but we will all be paying a high price for the finished game again ...
    So yeah, 6, is generous.    … Expand
  22. Valsona
    Dec 11, 2016
    5
    First off, I would like to say I personally like this game and appreciate the effort that was put down into making it look good. It has really gotten a face-lift from the previous games in the series.

    Secondly, I really like that Firaxis decided to make something new with the somewhat tedious system of workers in the games and even though I am a huge CIV-fan and have played every single    First off, I would like to say I personally like this game and appreciate the effort that was put down into making it look good. It has really gotten a face-lift from the previous games in the series.

    Secondly, I really like that Firaxis decided to make something new with the somewhat tedious system of workers in the games and even though I am a huge CIV-fan and have played every single one of them and appreciated the layout in the earlier system, the concept of builders instead of workers makes the game run so much faster and smoother without taking away any of the strategic thinking.

    Now to the negative remarks..
    Even though the new way of building improvements at first may seem like a delicate yet clever upgrade from the previously somewhat tedious method there are some serious glitches in my opinion. For one, you cannot, in any way remove/move a district. While this may seem like a part of the strategic depth of the game at first I feel that it would be somewhat more advantageous to be able to move at least certain districts like for say the encampment, seeing as how this can have a great impact on the placement of your enemies cities or your expansion plan, not to mention it would seem logical to want to be able to have an "army on the move". But this is just a minor thing and I recognize that it may just be my opinion.

    The problem with the AI's ability to make half-witted to wholeheartedly insane decisions however is a problem in a different dimension entirely. Not only the fact that they seem to be about as trigger-happy as a pawnshop-owner that has been raided by thugs just one time too many but they declare war as(it seems) a statement rather than anything else. I have played the game for about 50 hours or so by now, so, I admit, its not very much, but every 15-30 turns or peace I find myself in a war against an AI opponent on the basis that my haircut offends them.. Or so I assume..
    The AI is constantly declaring war, not only without a good reason, but when I line up my defensive units I too often see them coming at me with clearly inferior units, either in number or in way of science. And, if that is not bad enough, at times they actually manage to amount a decent army that should go wrecking ball in my territory, however they just seem to mope around taking multiple hits from my city defenses and garrisoned units until they decide to retreat, barely having scratched the walls and raided AT MOST two improvements. Yet other times, I face no army at all and when I send out a forward party against their cities they have basically no units at all!
    Its like the AI declares war upon you based on the basis that there has been peace for too long and thinks the player is bored, but merely does it for show.

    That said, I have some issues that I find falls in between in severity, probably because I'm as experienced when it comes to playing CIV as I am but:

    1. The tooltips for this release is.. lacking just doesn't cut it. It is non-existent! While this isn't a big bother for me who has several thousands of hours of gameplay combined on the previous games its really annoying when I find a new feature only to realise that there is no explanation anywhere as to what it does. Yes, google is my friend but really?

    2. While I like the fact that you brought back religious victory in this game, you have to tweak it.. really. It is far to easy to win a religious victory versus the AI because the religious units are simply too powerful. I get the point with inquisitors, really, I do, but then again? They cost way less than an apostle and have basically a VETO against you spreading any religion but mine among my cities. One action(out of three) and everyone believes in my god again. The AI never uses them that I have seen, but if they did, it would just make religous victory pointless again because it would be completely impossible so..
    By now, with inquisitors, religion has no other effect than a few bonus policies.

    3. The tech tree and policy trees need some work and tweaking. I like the linear system with both "policies" and tech but the trees in my opinion isn't really balanced. Also, there are so many policies/techs that could be situational, that you wanna use sometimes on some playthroughs, maybe. But they never end up being good enough in any situation, especially not since you get to change policies every time you discover a new one, completely for free! An easy way to give this a bit more strategic depth would be to bring back the "revolts" from some of the earlier games with the tweak that during the lower tier governments you have longer unrest if you wanna change during a specified number of turns.
    Example. Tier-1 2 turns of unrest if changing withing 20 turns at standard speed. Tier-2 1 turn of unrest if changing withing 20 turns.

    Overall, its a decent game. It could be great with the tweaking and a vast AI improvement. Unfortunately I'm a bit disappointed in my overall experience at this time.    … Expand
  23. Ganoba
    Apr 21, 2018
    5
    Civilization is my favorite franchising, but this game have so mane bugs and it seems that the developers don't care to fix ....
  24. kiptenbingo
    Oct 24, 2016
    6
    Initially I was excited and impressed with my first playthrough. A few of the features seem to work sporadically, music and animations have a tendancy to drop out. Graphics are okay but nothing special. Music is nice when it works. Game play is pretty slow and even after 300 turns you might be limited to making one click per turn. I do like the game but think we need to see a lot ofInitially I was excited and impressed with my first playthrough. A few of the features seem to work sporadically, music and animations have a tendancy to drop out. Graphics are okay but nothing special. Music is nice when it works. Game play is pretty slow and even after 300 turns you might be limited to making one click per turn. I do like the game but think we need to see a lot of improvements in the next few months. AI is terrible, lost count of how many times I have been invaded and outnumbered 10-1 but end up victorious in just a few turns and claiming multiple cities in the peace treaty. I know it is still early in the games life but I have to say that currently the potential outweighs the delivered content.… Expand
  25. Skipnipper
    Oct 28, 2016
    5
    Its a decent game I suppose. As has already been said, the AI is ridiculous and nonsensical, at best. This really kills the game as there is no challenge anywhere to be had. Graphics and sound are ok I guess but nothing special.

    Save your money.
  26. Braggi
    Oct 25, 2016
    6
    Flickering UI was in the end resolved by a simple driver update.
    First impression: a chatty tutorial that can not be saved (ORLY, Firaxis??).
    Very old issue: Lack of special resources still completely prevents combat unit production. Stupid. STUPID. My Civi immersion once died long time ago when being forced to build horse carriages instead of tanks ... Overall enough fresh ideas for    Flickering UI was in the end resolved by a simple driver update.
    First impression: a chatty tutorial that can not be saved (ORLY, Firaxis??).
    Very old issue: Lack of special resources still completely prevents combat unit production. Stupid. STUPID. My Civi immersion once died long time ago when being forced to build horse carriages instead of tanks ...

    Overall enough fresh ideas for someone who quit after III. Cities now grow organically over the map, no dedicated screen. Craftsmen with limited actions are ok with me, a consequence of playing on the main map only.
    I may tinker my own religion. There are now two trees to explore - science and culture, the second for social progress. Fine tuning your own government with policies is nice, the execution as text cards in boardgame style in not. Leaders are generated, providing small boosts but often needing very specific requirements to be triggered.
    Overall interesting dimensions, but too much micromanagement for the gain.

    There seems to be no limit to a civi's expansion, which IMO is a balance issue. Spamming settlers seems a valid strategy. Minor Civs to interact with, good. Initial survival pressure comes from barbarians roaming the lands, manageable.

    New techs pop up very fast from the start, especially as two trees trigger in parallel. Pacing feels strange.
    Treasury became an issue for me, with lots of tradeoff, felt ok. Compared to the old CIV also keept troop count lower, good. Units gain experience and may level with a small tree of improvements.

    AI seems stupid; sorry. Not impressed by diplomacy or war strategy yet.

    Overall: Tons of details, but hard to get the big picture.
    Will be a nice detraction to explore casually, but I don't see me spending lots of time with it.    … Expand
  27. bumarco
    Nov 4, 2016
    5
    Single player is pretty good. Really enjoying it.

    Tried to set up a multiplayer game with my wife - terrible. Should be ashamed of yourselves as game makers. I think, the reason it won't work is mac/PC, but FFS make an error message that says that. Don't let me invite her. Don't have her "visit profile" to accept. And sure as sh@t don't respond with some ambiguous version mismatch with    Single player is pretty good. Really enjoying it.

    Tried to set up a multiplayer game with my wife - terrible. Should be ashamed of yourselves as game makers. I think, the reason it won't work is mac/PC, but FFS make an error message that says that. Don't let me invite her. Don't have her "visit profile" to accept. And sure as sh@t don't respond with some ambiguous version mismatch with host message when she does.

    Fix it. It's 2016.    … Expand
  28. gamerINchief
    Oct 22, 2016
    6
    In almost every way, this is a step back from Civilization V. It actually plays and feels like it should have come before Civilization V and not after.

    It really is hard to not compare VI to V. Civilization V (Vanilla) is such an exceptional game in its fundamentals, mechanics, combat, accessibility, replayability, learning curve, engagement, user interface, etc. The only aspects in    In almost every way, this is a step back from Civilization V. It actually plays and feels like it should have come before Civilization V and not after.

    It really is hard to not compare VI to V. Civilization V (Vanilla) is such an exceptional game in its fundamentals, mechanics, combat, accessibility, replayability, learning curve, engagement, user interface, etc. The only aspects in which VI outshines V is in a much deeper diplomacy. Almost everything else falls flat.

    The atmosphere in this game is non-existent. Wonders don't feel rare or great, or give you that sense of accomplishment after completing them. User Interface is absolutely terrible. I should not have to battle the UI when trying to play through the game. If anyone has spent at least 100 turns playing the game you know exactly what I mean. The game feels so dull and dare I say just boring. Who cares if the civic system is more "complex" than Civ V's social policy system if I can't even feign interest in continuing to play one more turn? The graphics is just inexcusable for a 2016 AAA series backed by a AAA publisher. I don't have a problem with the style but the quality is so poor. Its like the graphics were developed by a low budget indie developer. I'm a devout fan of Civ but any review for this game above a 7 is simply not accurate.

    You have to be able to draw and capture the interest of a gamer. This game is not at all accessible for new comers or even many old fans. It has a slow, complex learning curve, and for those with not the interest to keep playing the game they will never learn it because the atmosphere of the game is too uninteresting/unaccesible to get to the intricacies of the new features.

    I would go back to playing Civ V if I hadn't already spent the past six years playing it. I wasn't expecting VI to be exactly like V or to even be better than V. I was however expecting it to uphold the exceptional quality the series has made for itself. All of these perfect scores and near perfect scores from both user reviews and critic reviews I have to shake my head at. I can guarantee these are from die-hard Civ fans with just a slight bias. I'm as big a fan of Civ as the next guy on here but I will reiterate this again: any review for this game above a 7 is simply not accurate.    … Expand
  29. SecondRateOp
    Oct 25, 2016
    5
    You cannot queue production in cities (wtf???).

    Workers can only do a limited number of improvements, then disappear (wtf???). I overall don't like the feel of it. The pace is weird. The flow is terrible. It's slow and messed up. Maybe it's the inability to be able to queue production. Maybe it's the fact that you have to constantly interrupt your production to make workers for your    You cannot queue production in cities (wtf???).

    Workers can only do a limited number of improvements, then disappear (wtf???).

    I overall don't like the feel of it. The pace is weird. The flow is terrible. It's slow and messed up. Maybe it's the inability to be able to queue production. Maybe it's the fact that you have to constantly interrupt your production to make workers for your neighboring low production cities because they only last a limited number of improvements. Maybe it's the fact that you have to build districts before you start reaping benefits and feel some sense of progress. Maybe it's the terrible housing system.

    I hate the housing system that stunts your population growth. You don't get 1 citizen per tile anymore, no. You start with between 1 to 3 housing capacity depending on conditions and get 0.5 housing per SOME tile improvements (not mines), then SOME buildings will give you few additional housing. Housing is SCARCE in early game. When your number of citizens reaches your housing limit minus 1, the growth rate is reduced. Good luck if you have land with little production, because it then becomes a vicious circle of production deficiency : You need population for more production and you need more production to build housing units to get more population. If you start in a tundra or a desert, you might as well start over.

    Districts aren't a well executed idea. The concept causes great balance problems. All the buildings you could build in previous games that would allow you to make up for low food and low production environments are gated behind... *drumroll*... population (which is gated by food and housing) and production! Building districts at an acceptable rate requires production, which requires population, which requires food and housing, which requires production. And then, as if that wasn't enough, districts are gated behind population minimums. Tundra and desert tiles are very hard to play for that reason. Other than the ONE trade route you can get in early game to get more food and production from another of your cities (which is a very bad thing to depend on for food), I really don't know what to do about that. Nothing in the policies helps with that either. Oh... and you can't build farms on tundra and hills next to freshwater anymore.

    Great people are given out like candy.

    Civics are weird, annoying and a little too much to think of for very little reward ; The bonuses are plenty in numbers, but they don't really feel significant or relevant. Everyone is going to have access to the same ones and progress roughly the same way. There is no specialization. There is little punishment if you don't plan ahead, don't think things through or make mistakes. You are forced to research civics that you do not want or need, as prerequisites to others that you might want. Being prompted to look at them and switch them every time you are done researching one (often) is annoying. I liked Civ V's way of doing it better. The buffs were fewer and more significant within the game balance and the choice you made really mattered.

    Eventually, you realize that civilizations have been at war and you were not notified. Well you were, among the 3 messages that last 5 seconds that pop on your screen at the beginning of a turn then disappear. AND THERE ARE NO LOGS for these things. If you miss it, it's gone. Forever.

    There is no diplomacy overview that I could find. You have to check each civ for its relations with others. THERE IS NO OVERVIEW TO SEE EACH CIV'S RESOURCES & WONDERS.

    The UI is a mess and all over the place.

    There is no indication of how long until border expansion, nor which tile the city is going for.

    The fog of war and unlit terrain are way too much alike. It is way too difficult to see resources on unlit terrain.

    Friendly civs can have units in each other's territory without open border which makes moving your units around even more tedious and can block your workers from making improvements. This is BS.

    There seems to be no way to tell a civ to piss off with their religion so be prepared to protect your cities with units. There is a new system with religious units that can attack each other... like normal wars weren't enough and we needed even more warring BS in this game.

    BORING. 3rd game trying to have fun. Can't get past renaissance without being bored out of my mind.    … Expand
  30. andrewbrown
    Oct 28, 2016
    5
    PROS:
    * no more micromanging workers, improving a tile in one turn is wonderful.
    * no more building roads, roads are laid with trade routes * can levy city state armies CONS: * No end screen with stats, making losing or winning worthless on reflection * When you lose, they don't tell you why, and its the same video regardless of ending * AI doesn't get smarter, just get bonuses on    PROS:
    * no more micromanging workers, improving a tile in one turn is wonderful.
    * no more building roads, roads are laid with trade routes
    * can levy city state armies

    CONS:
    * No end screen with stats, making losing or winning worthless on reflection
    * When you lose, they don't tell you why, and its the same video regardless of ending
    * AI doesn't get smarter, just get bonuses on harder difficulties
    * Religion is another layer tedious to manging addtional units
    * You have to buiild Wide, Tall is not an option
    * Civics have no impact to create unique style of play

    What I want out of CIV is being able to win with different play styles depending
    on Sceince, Religon, Culture, Domination, Economics (Money), or Dipolmacy. So I really want
    6 games in 1. The depth of most these subgame is simplistic, and you'd think by now with 5 previous
    games under their belt they would have fleshed out these subgames.

    Not everything has to play out as units on the board. Religion is so unfun because you are just
    slowly moving units across the board to convert other cities. Religon could be played out totally
    in UI Panels. Last thing I want is more units to move around the board.

    What they did to SimCity is what they are doing to Civ6. Instead of having large cities,
    they want you to have small meaniful cities. When what we wanted was what City Skylines
    produced. We just have to wait till someone makes the City Skylines for Civ.PROS:
    * no more micromanging workers, improving a tile in one turn is wonderful.
    * no more building roads, roads are laid with trade routes
    * can levy city state armies

    CONS:
    * No end screen with stats, making losing or winning worthless on reflection
    * When you lose, they don't tell you why, and its the same video regardless of ending
    * AI doesn't get smarter, just get bonuses on harder difficulties
    * Religion is another layer tedious to manging addtional units
    * You have to buiild Wide, Tall is not an option
    * Civics have no impact to create unique style of play

    What I want out of CIV is being able to win with different play styles depending
    on Sceince, Religon, Culture, Domination, Economics (Money), or Dipolmacy. So I really want
    6 games in 1. The depth of most these subgame is simplistic, and you'd think by now with 5 previous
    games under their belt they would have fleshed out these subgames.

    Not everything has to play out as units on the board. Religion is so unfun because you are just
    slowly moving units across the board to convert other cities. Religon could be played out totally
    in UI Panels. Last thing I want is more units to move around the board.

    What they did to SimCity is what they are doing to Civ6. Instead of having large cities,
    they want you to have small meaniful cities. When what we wanted was what City Skylines
    produced. We just have to wait till someone makes the City Skylines for Civ.    … Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

10
#10 Best PC Game of 2016
9
#9 Most Discussed PC Game of 2016
20
#20 Most Shared PC Game of 2016

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
88

Generally favorable reviews - based on 84 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 79 out of 84
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 84
  3. Negative: 1 out of 84
  1. CD-Action
    Jan 12, 2017
    90
    You don’t want to spend your night in front of the computer? You have a wife and kids? You cherish your friendships and enjoy parties? Beware of this game. It’s that good. [13/2016, p.44]
  2. The Overpowered Noobs
    Jan 11, 2017
    90
    It's a more playful, fun feel to the franchise, perhaps, but all that's wrapped around a deeply nuanced game. If you've ever enjoyed playing a multi-layered, immersive and strategic board game with a bunch of funny characters, get in here.
    Read full review
  3. Games Master UK
    Jan 1, 2017
    74
    Firaxis has made some significant, exciting changes, but has also obscured vital information. [Christmas 2016, p.70]
See all critic reviews »