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. Pelu
    Oct 27, 2018
    7
    It's OK, but much worse than Civ 5 or 4. It has new interesting features, which don't add much value. The AI is complete garbage and graphics ugly. Would not buy again.
  2. 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
  3. VitaminK
    Nov 13, 2016
    7
    7.5/10 This one was really tough for me. On one hand it looks glorious, I didn't run into any bugs during my fist couple playthroughs (gamespeed fast ~12 hours total), it looks AMAZING. Game/World generation is one of the best I've seen. City and district building actually makes sense the way they have it layed out. On the other hand a couple things have been completely taken out.7.5/10 This one was really tough for me. On one hand it looks glorious, I didn't run into any bugs during my fist couple playthroughs (gamespeed fast ~12 hours total), it looks AMAZING. Game/World generation is one of the best I've seen. City and district building actually makes sense the way they have it layed out. On the other hand a couple things have been completely taken out. Diplomatic system is a complete joke and the AI in its current state is HORRENDOUS. Give this game a year for patching and some good DLC and it'll be worth it all the way. AI patching will automatically bump this up to an 8-8.5… Expand
  4. sherbz
    Nov 2, 2016
    7
    I have thought long and hard about how good this version of civ is. I think in its current state, a solid 7 out of 10 would be fair. Civ is a vastly complicated and strategic game. There are a huge number of features and systems at work in it. And “balance” is almost an objectively impossible scenario to achieve. I think at release, it is in pretty good shape (certainly much betterI have thought long and hard about how good this version of civ is. I think in its current state, a solid 7 out of 10 would be fair. Civ is a vastly complicated and strategic game. There are a huge number of features and systems at work in it. And “balance” is almost an objectively impossible scenario to achieve. I think at release, it is in pretty good shape (certainly much better than V). For the most part the new systems work, and work well. Districts are an interesting strategic development; faith is included from the start and has a similar implementation to how civ 5 works; the new card system for social policies is far more flexible than the previous social policies; and the separation of trees is a good feature. There are a couple of areas though where it falls flat. The first is the AI. This is tied closely to one of the design decisions – to keep one unit per tile. The fact is that strategically it is far easier to code an AI that has to contend with stacks as opposed to moving dozens of units across a diverse terrain. A carpet of doom is no more fun than a stack of doom. And when coupled with the new restrictions on movement, the liability of vast traffic jams is an annoying and persistent feature. The AI also has a significant problem in upgrading its units. And its not uncommon to be fielding tanks against an army of AI horseman. The AI is also not aggressive enough at expansion and is handicapped by not being able to wage war effectively. I also think that removing all restrictions on number of cities was perhaps not the wisest decision. The UI could also do with some attention as largely it looks bland and not having building queues is a pretty bizarre omission. Other than that though, it retains its same addictive feel, and once a few patches are out, it will be the same old civ. If you are sitting on fence and not sure whether to buy the game, then don’t. Wait until its on sale or the price has dropped before purchasing.… Expand
  5. iseeall
    Dec 6, 2016
    7
    I've played all games in the Civ series, and all the derivatives. My fav is Alpha Centauri, and from the pure Civs, Civ 2. Civ 6 is basically Civ 5 with its 2 addons, plus even more unneeded stuff added on top. The series is moving in a direction which I don't like, piling up features that I don't want. They are tuning for dumber and dumber audience, trying to cash in on converts fromI've played all games in the Civ series, and all the derivatives. My fav is Alpha Centauri, and from the pure Civs, Civ 2. Civ 6 is basically Civ 5 with its 2 addons, plus even more unneeded stuff added on top. The series is moving in a direction which I don't like, piling up features that I don't want. They are tuning for dumber and dumber audience, trying to cash in on converts from mobile.

    The good:
    - well, it's still Civ. If you haven't played any of the Civ games, Civ 6 is a Civ game, and the tutorial is so friendly and accessible that you will even learn what a turn-based game is, in case you didn't know
    - like in Civ 5, combat is interesting, with units not dying after a single fight, there are adjacency bonuses and exp accumulation like in tactical wargames, just simpler

    The so-so:
    - the districts system (taken from Endless Legends), not that it was needed or adds much
    - the 2 separate trees for cultural and scientific advances - could have worked easier with a single tree, each tech just costing culture+sci.
    - graphics are obviously made for iPad players and kids, from which I suspect a planned port to mobile. I don't care about graphics much, but I can imagine this will upset many PC gamers
    - dragging cards to determine government and social policies - ok but i found bonuses of certain governments pretty strange. And I don't like trading cards games, so the whole aesthetic of cards being put in slots feels inappropriate here, at least to me.
    - city states - didn't like them in Civ 5 with their "quests" and attitude, though I know some people like the feature
    - workers can now only build 3 tile improvements after which they get "spent", and roads are built automatically by "trader" units - this apparently only slows down construction of tile improvements which isn't a bad thing but isn't good either
    - some techs get researched faster if a certain prereq is met (e.g. develop Archery faster if killed 1 unit with a slinger) - a good idea at first glance, but adds immensely to the rules bloat (more about that below)

    The bad:
    - in general, this plays too much like Civ 5 with its 2 addons, barely justifying the purchase ("why not just play Civ 5"?), and sadly carries over all the bad features added in those addons
    - still only 1 unit can be on a tile (annoying traffic jams)
    - tons of minor effects various things give which are hard to keep track of and which don't really change the game much. It almost feels like an RPG game where a chest piece gives +0.5% to fire resistance. The multitude of factors to consider doesn't make it a strategy game where you decide something but rather a tedious simulation with unclear, bloated rules which you mostly forget the next time you start a new game. Apparently the abundance of tiny rules makes the game simpler and takes away decision making. This game is so bloated that I wonder they could even bring it to release! It must have been a nightmare to test, debug and balance
    - religion is beneficial, even can be a victory type now, and there are tons of religions to pick from where you customize their tiny bonuses. You produce a "faith" resource which you can use (like gold) to buy things. This is ridiculous. Let temples make 2 citizens content and reduce that to 1 citizen after discovery of Scientific Method or something, that's just about how much attention religion should get in this type of game. I'm deeply saddened by the fact that they gave in to the political correctness train and started catering these complex games to religious market segments (do they even play Civ?)
    - tourism? Even a victory type for it (make more ppl in other countries come to you for a vacation rather than stay home)? This absurdity came in the 2nd Civ 5's addon, together with a minigame of putting great works of art into slots. But I get it: millions of Chinese are now cruising the world making selfies, so why not make a feature for them specifically.
    - the voiced-over texts for different countries which are shown/spoken each time you start or load the game. They aren't as idiotic as in Civ 5 but the overall feel of "glorifying" the player and praising him for something he hasn't even done (just picked up the game, haven't even won it) is stupid. Just check how little you get in Alpha Centauri for winning the game - a simple popup, and a score breakdown list. To me, that feels much more rewarding than this empty pathos.

    As I wrote in other reviews of other Civ games, Bryan Raynolds is not involved anymore (and he is the genius behind AC and Civ2 - the games I like the most). Civ 6 isn't a game made by passionate geeks who had tons of ideas. It's a franchise driven by market research. They want more players to buy the game, so they see what's popular now (e.g. Clash of Clans) and add that. It's the same thing that happened to the XCom, Fallout and many other games. My only hope lies with indies now. And it seems I won't have to uninstall Alpha Centauri any time soon.    … Expand
  6. Klewer
    Aug 3, 2023
    7
    It's a pretty good entry in to the series. It does feel a little repetitive, and I found after getting 30 odd hours of fun from it games felt a bit of a chore. It's pretty consistent with the series except a few changes, so fans of previous games will likely enjoy.
  7. Sandro13
    Oct 24, 2016
    7
    Плюсы и минусы Цивилизация VI

    -Плохой ИИ. Идиотский ИИ! -Плохо видно руины. Туман войны красивый, но не информативный. -Неудобное перемещение юнитов: при автопереключении выбранный юнит мискликом перемещается хрен знает куда, нет возможности препятствовать автопереключению удержанием кнопки мыши. -Идиотский обстрел из городов, не нужное центрирование на городе при выборе мишени.    Плюсы и минусы Цивилизация VI

    -Плохой ИИ. Идиотский ИИ!
    -Плохо видно руины. Туман войны красивый, но не информативный.
    -Неудобное перемещение юнитов: при автопереключении выбранный юнит мискликом перемещается хрен знает куда, нет возможности препятствовать автопереключению удержанием кнопки мыши.
    -Идиотский обстрел из городов, не нужное центрирование на городе при выборе мишени.
    -Много мелких деталей интерфейса. Например рост города и ходы производства.
    -Неудобное (неинформативное) уведомление о событиях. Нет уведомления про рост городов.
    -Счастье заменённое довольством и разделённое по городам неудобно и неинформативно.
    -Политики в ветке культуры. Их очень много, большая часть из них узконапрвленны.
    -Дороги нельзя строить рабочими. Только торговцами.
    -Великие люди стали менее значимыми.
    -Что-то непонятное с ядерным оружием. Дурацкие перевод.
    -Нет вытеснения культурой клеток влияния государства.

    +Интересное решение с районами.
    +Удобный выбор фиксации добычи ресурсов в городах.
    +Интересное решение с рабочими и моментальным сбором ресурса.
    +Объединение юнитов в армию.
    +Более равнозначная возможность различной победы (культурная и религиозная)
    +Прокачка юнитов.
    +Не пропадают торговцы, когда начинается война с тем, с кем торговал.
    +Формы правления. Хорошая идея и реализация.

    В целом Сидмейр хотели сделать игру, отличную от 5-й версии. И пожалуй это удалось, но многие решения вызывают сомнение. Некоторая недоработанность в плане ИИ и информативности. Думаю многие, как и я, ждали более лучшую игру, чем 5-я версия Цивилизации. Но я не могу сказать, что такой стала 6-я версия.    … Expand
  8. aidan0
    Oct 28, 2016
    7
    The game is ok I guess, I had a couple of crashes late game, but was able to continue after a reload. I spent 16 hours with my first play through, prince difficulty small map, and after winning, I can't say I like it better than civ 5. The victory was not that fulfilling. Maybe because I was going for the space victory and got the culture victory instead. I was also glad this multi dayThe game is ok I guess, I had a couple of crashes late game, but was able to continue after a reload. I spent 16 hours with my first play through, prince difficulty small map, and after winning, I can't say I like it better than civ 5. The victory was not that fulfilling. Maybe because I was going for the space victory and got the culture victory instead. I was also glad this multi day session was over. Where playing civ 5 was an addiction, civ 6 feels like a chore.

    I like.
    - I like knowing what the AI is thinking.
    - Having districts is a good idea.

    I don't like.
    - build queue's are so slow, even with an industry focused city thing progress slowly.
    - counter spying is a chore I don't like.
    - even with all the roads, travel seems so slow.
    - population assignment managements was better in civ 5.
    - no army overview (I haven't found it)
    - tech tree seems rushed in the modern/future area
    - Not enough information about districts, when assigning workers to it.

    My final impression is that it kinda feels like a chore to play.    … Expand
  9. herlius
    Oct 27, 2016
    7
    The Builder unit is an absolut waste. Why do you need a Builder unit as long as most of your buildings are built automaticaly around your city center? It sounds totaly illogical to me. Not to mention they last only 3 turns. Why? Is there any historycal reason for it?
  10. PowerGamer
    Jan 17, 2021
    7
    I've played the CIV games since they came out may decades ago.
    Got this most recent incarnation for free off of the Epic store.
    The game was pretty fun for a while on the first try, and stopped when I beat it once. Didn't feel like it was worth playing anymore. Kind of a let down. It needs some quality of life elements added to the UI. Why repeat some of the same dialog options over    I've played the CIV games since they came out may decades ago.
    Got this most recent incarnation for free off of the Epic store.

    The game was pretty fun for a while on the first try, and stopped when I beat it once. Didn't feel like it was worth playing anymore.

    Kind of a let down. It needs some quality of life elements added to the UI. Why repeat some of the same dialog options over and over again when they didn't matter for instance. Such dialogs could have a "don't show me again" checkbox.

    The worst of it is the balance and progression between the various units.
    For instance jet planes are a nearly unstoppable defence. The mobile SAM units are almost worthless. The only way to combat them is to bring your own planes.
    And the balance in the progression is off. The game is likely to be over from a cultural victory way before you get to have fun towards the space age.

    Maybe this is just a problem with computer games in general, but the AI seems pretty much the same one from CIV3.

    I really like the battles and the tech upgrades so I wish they would focus more on them. Now you are just considered a "war monger" if you fight for more than several turns.

    Instead of suggesting a future tech, why not just one? There could be futuristic laser weapons, hover tanks, antimatter bombs, etc.

    Somewhere I feel there is a great CIV game waiting to happen, but mostly the game appears to have had a graphics upgrade but the gameplay has stagnated.    … Expand
  11. dyselehrt
    Nov 6, 2016
    7
    I'm actually quite pleased with the game. There's truly only two things that I feel compromises the game. The first thing is, as others have mentioned, the AI. I'm by no means a Civ veteran, but even I can beat it on "immortal" without much difficulty (it's the second hardest difficulty setting). I also don't like the system it has adopted from previous series that the AI gets bonusesI'm actually quite pleased with the game. There's truly only two things that I feel compromises the game. The first thing is, as others have mentioned, the AI. I'm by no means a Civ veteran, but even I can beat it on "immortal" without much difficulty (it's the second hardest difficulty setting). I also don't like the system it has adopted from previous series that the AI gets bonuses depending on the difficulty setting. I would very much prefer if the AI were smarter in general and made better decisions, not that it got a bonus advantage. That's just lame. The second thing I don't like is the Sean Bean voice-over. It's not that I don't like him as an actor, but his voice sounds just wrong. His voice isn't meant for voice-overs. Simple as that. Because of this, I go for the German and Russian voice-overs despite being unable to understand them. I'm glad there are these options, otherwise this issue might have ruined it for me. Other than this it's a great game that most likely will be even better with patches and expansions. In it's current state it's a well earned 7 too me. It is thoroughly enjoyable and well worth buying.… Expand
  12. Koblihozrout
    Oct 22, 2016
    7
    It's a mess, and rather disappointing sequel. Needs a lot of patching and expansions...

    The graphics and art incomparably worse than civ 5, especially wonders. Music and atmosphere is also worse, but civ5 was too good a game in that regard. AI is.... well there is no AI actually, it doesn't even escort workers or settlers, I'm surprised that deity AI doesn't loose to barbs. Again if    It's a mess, and rather disappointing sequel. Needs a lot of patching and expansions...

    The graphics and art incomparably worse than civ 5, especially wonders. Music and atmosphere is also worse, but civ5 was too good a game in that regard.

    AI is.... well there is no AI actually, it doesn't even escort workers or settlers, I'm surprised that deity AI doesn't loose to barbs. Again if you play against deity difficulty, the bonuses are so insane, that it's no longer a symmetrical game, but more like tower defense. Sad.

    And lastly the game has some beyond earth vibe to it, there are many techs for witch you simple don't care, it doesn't have that magical progression feel that previous civs had. Government and cards system is great, but bonuses are very minor. There is no specialization and differentiation with culture polices. There are almost no vital techs or breaking points to progress to. And wonders just suck.

    Overall step in right direction, but abysmal execution.    … Expand
  13. smilzoboboz
    Feb 22, 2017
    7
    A good Civilization game, evolved from Civilization V, with great mechanics on a bad implementation.

    I liked a lot the addition of districts, cards and differentiation of social and science advancement trees. I also welcomed the new religious victory condition (even if it's kinda flawed, will write about it later). On the other hand the new graphic style and the lack of “penalties”    A good Civilization game, evolved from Civilization V, with great mechanics on a bad implementation.

    I liked a lot the addition of districts, cards and differentiation of social and science advancement trees. I also welcomed the new religious victory condition (even if it's kinda flawed, will write about it later).

    On the other hand the new graphic style and the lack of “penalties” for large empires (the game actually forces you to rush creating new cities in your empire, will write about it later) dragged things a bit down for me.

    So, in detail, the mechanics of this new Civilization game are very good, overall positively evolved from Civilization V, but since the game forces you to rush on city building you get two bad side effects:
    Capturing cities feels like a joke, for example you may end up capturing 10 to 15 cities in just a few turns with no real side effect on your empire.
    For the same reason (too many cities) religious victory condition is a mess, you will see 3~4 priests per city battling (yeah… that is lame) for religious supremacy which is beyond annoying.
    Again for the same reason it's just easier to colonize to get certain resources rather than initiate trading with other empires or trying to acquire influence over state-cities.
    To get you the idea, totally forget about Civilization V Arrigo Dandolo play style, it's just impossible with the current state of the game.

    Something I was worried about, because so many people pointed that out, was bad AI, but I have to say that in my 2 games AI was quite good, just a bit too aggressive, in everything (e.g. Teddy building a city in a tile between two of my cities, ending up with a oblong, space crippled city or Hojo declaring war just to move through my territory).
    Finally I have to say that at the moment leaders offer you a little bit of variance only at the very start of the game, middle and ending phases of the game are more or less the same whichever leader you get to play: huge empires, fought at least two or more wars, fairly high in all compartments (science, culture, etc).

    Would I recommend this game, yes, no doubt about it, but don't get it right now, wait till a few DLC are out (or even better a GOTY edition “final” pack) because there are both “flaws” and lack of diversity at the moment.    … Expand
  14. GamingPoptartTV
    Dec 26, 2016
    7
    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 Quarries can boost your Research towards Mansory, reducing the time you need to research 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 Battlefield graphics and you can talk all you want about unique art style but there is no excuse for a 60 dollar game in 2016 to look like a Fermium 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 excellent, 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
  15. Artur_
    May 26, 2017
    7
    Plus:
    - City districts - a very good idea about city planning, management.
    - Great people having unique skills. - Corps and armies - a nice improvement. - Good reorganization of ideas. - Eurekas. - Sentiment ;-) Minus: - Infantile graphics (I know, childs play too, but an average "child" is 30 years, probably). - Removal of production queue. - Removal of statistics used to    Plus:
    - City districts - a very good idea about city planning, management.
    - Great people having unique skills.
    - Corps and armies - a nice improvement.
    - Good reorganization of ideas.
    - Eurekas.
    - Sentiment ;-)

    Minus:
    - Infantile graphics (I know, childs play too, but an average "child" is 30 years, probably).
    - Removal of production queue.
    - Removal of statistics used to compare civilisations status.
    - Quite often right-click to choose a movement target does not work.
    - Auto-jumping between units across whole map.
    - Diplomacy:
    > Pointless requests or "offers" from a weak civs.
    > They often declare war and just wait to be invaded and to lose a few cities, then make peace offer. Such a "war" may lasts centuries.
    > What is the point of constant condemnations?
    - Disappearing animations.
    - Spy task resets without information about previous task.

    There are crazy AI boosts/downturns sometimes - 1st game on lowest settler difficulty ended having modern tanks against catapults and archers and a few arquebuses, 2nd on prince : same tanks against same catapults and archers. Third game, imperator level, I didn't exit medieval age while others got to industrial one. Fourth one on imperator too - again modern tanks against catapults, but few countries had WWI infantry, at least. Can't remember something like that from Civilisation V, there were usually similar units, not several ages back.    … Expand
  16. godunow
    Nov 9, 2016
    7
    I like it a lot. It takes Civ V with all the expansions and streamlines all the pieces so they feel more like one mechanism.

    While changes may not be fundamental (unstacked cities, separate civic tree, tech boosts, support units, builders, roads) they are all to the better. Also: this is a matter of personal preference but I like graphics - nice, readable, functional. Music is also    I like it a lot. It takes Civ V with all the expansions and streamlines all the pieces so they feel more like one mechanism.

    While changes may not be fundamental (unstacked cities, separate civic tree, tech boosts, support units, builders, roads) they are all to the better.

    Also: this is a matter of personal preference but I like graphics - nice, readable, functional. Music is also very good.

    What I hate is how tech discovery quotes have been chosen - they were supposed to be funny, but they break immersion in epic act of buiding your civilization (example: Military Training - "Those who in quarrels interpose, must often wipe a bloody nose.")    … Expand
  17. Rodney5
    Oct 24, 2016
    7
    Far too much effort is spent on the cartoon-ish good looking pictures, possibly they are aiming for a younger group of players, or just that George Lucas got involved somehow.

    The game is very similar to CIV 5 with a few tweaks, but I am not sure if they are actual improvements or there to make the game look different. I really hate the tactical view option, it looks very nice, but    Far too much effort is spent on the cartoon-ish good looking pictures, possibly they are aiming for a younger group of players, or just that George Lucas got involved somehow.

    The game is very similar to CIV 5 with a few tweaks, but I am not sure if they are actual improvements or there to make the game look different.

    I really hate the tactical view option, it looks very nice, but the limited line of sight makes it almost unusable. Fortunately you can use the strategic view, but then it doesn't look that nice anymore,
    in fact CiV 5 looks better.

    So if you want a game for young kids that looks nice by all means this is for you.
    I will give it a few more shots and then probably go back to playing CIV 5.    … Expand
  18. Melgacius
    Feb 8, 2018
    7
    I love grand strategy games and the prospect of playing any Civilization game always fills me with excitement. Civilization VI was acclaimed upon its release as being a glaring improvement over its predecessor. Now that the dust had settled and the game has been around for some time, I do not think they have told us the whole story.

    I've really enjoyed playing this turn-based strategy    I love grand strategy games and the prospect of playing any Civilization game always fills me with excitement. Civilization VI was acclaimed upon its release as being a glaring improvement over its predecessor. Now that the dust had settled and the game has been around for some time, I do not think they have told us the whole story.

    I've really enjoyed playing this turn-based strategy game, yet I admit I became a fan of the game's scenarios or expansions, and I was not totally convinced by the traditional sandbox mode that was always been my favourite previously. This entry of the series presents a considerable dose of new mechanics, but that after squeezed it is clear that they are only derivations of what already happened in the last expansion of the previous game. Two of those are mandatory to be mentioned given the fact that they change the planning of cities in a remarkable way. The introduction of specialized districts that add bonuses and allow for evolutions throughout the game has now ended with the random upgrades of each of the hexagons that we could make in previous games. The decision of where to put them messes with many things in the present and future. Each one obeys certain rules, giving more or less bonuses depending on their location. This seems simple seen individually, just choose the hexagon that assigns the biggest bonus and put the district there, nothing special... however this placement will interfere with the placement of new districts in the future, or with the improvement of the hexagons if some new bonus is discovered in that tile, or even with the placement of World Wonders. This has turned my usual farm-filled cities into sparsely upgraded cities, since any improvement I could make could stir up future bonuses. Speaking of improvements now the workers are consumables. In the old days we would leave them there to make automatic improvements and there you go. We never thought about them ever again, but they were continually in their toil to micromanage hexagons. Now they only make three improvements each and then we have to produce or buy a new unit. It is no longer workers who build the roads, but the merchants, who when starting a commercial route create the road to the city to which they are going. Briefly, these are the biggest changes that the game presents us.

    There are other changes but with less impact on gameplay. In my opinion all these changes made the game more interesting. The four forms of victory are now domination, religious and science that already existed, and the diplomatic changed to the cultural one. Now everything that does not involve war has become much more interesting. We can spread religion all over the world, with our missionaries and apostles being able to engage in religious battles with their opponents, something that involves lightnings and arms thrown in the air, until one of them gets tired and ends up dying of apparent religious boredom. The spies work in a funny way, and they give a good help to our development by stealing technology that saves us a good amount of shifts in our productions, something very important in a scientific victory. Planning our cities to offer maximum tourism is an exasperating challenge because it is a bit of trial and error since we do not know the practical results of our decisions. But in a game of strategy it is blood that we seek, and it is with war that we obtain it. Artificial intelligence has many flaws and it is in this aspect that it is more noticeable. If we choose a low level of difficulty, it does nothing, if we choose a high level it cheats and produces much more units than possible, overwhelming us by the magnitude of the numbers. Even though they are not able to have a decent strategy during a war, and whether it is against us or against another bot player, wars are never beautiful to see and always end up close to a draw. I have been declared war multiple times, so many that I do not always understand why. The speed with which they declare war does not mean that they end up attacking us, often they do not, and sometimes they can not even reasonably interpret the terms of the peace treaties, mostly to their disadvantage. If they consider that they are losing the war even if they are winning it, they have no problem offering us cities to end the war with.

    Probably they do not mind that becaus one of the game biggest issues. Spam of cities. There is no downside to have multiple ones because now the degree of satisfaction of the inhabitants is done one by one and not in a general way. It is also easy to solve their needs, which means that if we distract ourselves we are surrounded by a sea of adversary cities and with no space to expand. In the long run more cities represent more points to everything.

    Well, to few characters that I can use, so much more to say...    … Expand
  19. StefanakosGR
    Oct 22, 2016
    7
    This is the Civ experience everyone expected. While there are a lot of new features, old civ players should feel right at home. But ...

    The engine, while mature and generally bug free, is clunky and demanding. Looks like it is an advanced version of the civ 5 engine. The result is a game so slow when you play with anything more than a couple of civs, that it ruins the experience. And Im    This is the Civ experience everyone expected. While there are a lot of new features, old civ players should feel right at home. But ...

    The engine, while mature and generally bug free, is clunky and demanding. Looks like it is an advanced version of the civ 5 engine. The result is a game so slow when you play with anything more than a couple of civs, that it ruins the experience. And Im on an i7 with 32 gigs of ram and an R9 390. Also, like beyond earth, trader (caravan) management seems to take a huge chunk of your time. When you are playing on a big map, after 10 cities it is maddening.

    Graphics are cartoon-ish and childish, which is a bit of a turn off for me. But the leader animations and voice overs are awesome.

    Overall I just wish I didn't have to wait 5 minutes for a turn on big maps. I literally watch episodes on netflix on my 2nd screen and pause and un-pause to play in between.    … Expand
  20. jaimemar
    Oct 25, 2016
    7
    Did you like CIV V? Then I give you a few comparisons.

    The game brings great improvements but also looses some good aspects. Good aspects - Graphics is obvious (and not important to me in strategy franchises). - Unit promotions are not so broken. You can't start with autohealing planes (some improvements make you gain experience more quickly). In CIV 5 with 4 L3 bombers and a    Did you like CIV V? Then I give you a few comparisons.

    The game brings great improvements but also looses some good aspects.

    Good aspects
    - Graphics is obvious (and not important to me in strategy franchises).
    - Unit promotions are not so broken. You can't start with autohealing planes (some improvements make you gain experience more quickly). In CIV 5 with 4 L3 bombers and a couple of land units you could defeat massive enemy offensives. Now there is not such imbalance.
    - The cities are not so broken. In the past building rush led you to very powerful cities with all possible advantages. Now districts make you spend tiles, as well as wonders, so you can't have everything. Additional districts need higher population, so you won't be able to build a lot of stuff on a city with little tiles or insufficient food flow.
    - Combat is somewhat better. There are not senseless unit upgrades: ranged units won't have useless promotions if they evolve into melee units and vice versa. Combat mechanics are also better.
    - Religious victory is not looking 100% perfect, but it's rather fun, as it is not a passive victory, you have to use well your religious units.
    - More balance between early, mid and late game. in general.

    Bad things:
    - New eras have a lot less flavour, as the new tech tree hasn't got those fixed era limits.
    - The interface is messier than before, sometimes you lack important information that you used to have in BNW.
    - The card system for the civics is almost nonsense. You have 50 cards unlocked, but you can use 6... and often you will find problems to find the interesting ones. That should be revised in future mods or expansions, because social policies are often meaningless and you research whatever comes next.
    - World wonders are a bit too weak. In civ5 some were too powerful and gave devastating advantages. in Civ 6 they generally give very poor advantages. Considering that you can waste 4 or 5 tiles in an important city to build them... it's annoying.
    - AI still stupid on combat and other aspects. The biggest need to improve gameplay was more or less ignored.

    To sum up, I think CIV6 will make me stop playing CIV5 and CIV BE. I find the game ABSOLUTELY BETTER than the previous ones. However I find some aspects that prevent me from giving it a bigger score.    … Expand
  21. ExpertPL
    Nov 11, 2016
    7
    I was never a fan of Civilization series, that may be a reason why I give such low score, but I think that Civilization VI introduced not enough new things into this series compared to it's predecessors. In my opinion the audio and more animated graphics in Civ VI are the way to go for the whole series, thanks to it, I feel like Civ VI shows that it is a game inspired by history, notI was never a fan of Civilization series, that may be a reason why I give such low score, but I think that Civilization VI introduced not enough new things into this series compared to it's predecessors. In my opinion the audio and more animated graphics in Civ VI are the way to go for the whole series, thanks to it, I feel like Civ VI shows that it is a game inspired by history, not actual historical strategy and I think it's better that way.… Expand
  22. Jack5switch
    Nov 10, 2020
    7
    Sid Meier's Civilization VI is an alternative to the traditional gameplay of the fifth instalment. It expands the original strategy with new skill trees, units, resources and diplomacy. It is also the prettier game between it and Civilization V, with fully integrated multiplayer and modding support.
  23. 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
  24. andreadavided
    Sep 26, 2021
    7
    The game is good. It's fun to play and engaging. You still want to do one more turn and go to bed too late. That being said it's not evolved one iota from the previous versions.

    Combat is still lame and technology only goes to nukes and computers. We have better tech even today but it's lumped into "Future tech" and you can't see it or research it. That's a let down hence my grade of 7.    The game is good. It's fun to play and engaging. You still want to do one more turn and go to bed too late. That being said it's not evolved one iota from the previous versions.

    Combat is still lame and technology only goes to nukes and computers. We have better tech even today but it's lumped into "Future tech" and you can't see it or research it. That's a let down hence my grade of 7.

    One very big problem: launching the game is harder than starting an old car engine. It takes 5 minutes. Buttons are unresponsive and there's no dialogue or visible timer. The DRM soft must be heavy and ****    … Expand
  25. 4ya5h1
    Aug 24, 2022
    7
    at first sight this game is good, great and interesting but when you spend some time, and get used to it civilization become a little one-sided. i played through few days long time lot of hours in a row, finished few full games and it became boring. then after few days break i played lot of time again and it was good again then again boring
  26. NezharMC
    May 3, 2019
    7
    Similar to Civ V with all the expansions minus the number of leaders and world congress, this game is a double down on the best features of the older version but with a different art style (cartoonier), which I like due to better clarity of tiles.
    It also makes more important the control of the tiles because of the district system and world wonders need their own tiles. Workers are now    Similar to Civ V with all the expansions minus the number of leaders and world congress, this game is a double down on the best features of the older version but with a different art style (cartoonier), which I like due to better clarity of tiles.
    It also makes more important the control of the tiles because of the district system and world wonders need their own tiles. Workers are now builders that improve tiles in a single turn but have 3 uses, which makes the game faster.
    It's an interesting game for noobies of strategy games like me, although to more seasoned players, the really stupid AI may concern them. The AI is probably what costs 2 points for this game, it is really that bad. But a fun game overall.    … Expand
  27. alanwaketan
    May 2, 2020
    7
    本作初始版本相较于前作而言可谓是全面倒退。唯一乐趣的可能就是建立工业六角星。但讲真，文明作为一个以写实著称的系列，卡通化会不会有些过激。实在是喜欢不上本作。
  28. GioGiorno
    Jun 28, 2020
    7
    Divertido com bastante conteúdo e várias maneiras de finalizar. Só achei um pouco monótono e demorado pra finalizar, talvez por causa dos turnos serem "lentos".
  29. 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
  30. murtazasamiwala
    Aug 6, 2020
    7
    I enjoyed the game a lot for a while, but the battles/games tend to be too long, and after a few weeks I felt kind of done with it. The civilazations and units seem very well designed, but I did not feel like replaying too many times.
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 »