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. halldors78
    Jan 3, 2017
    6
    Started the game and it looks very good and plays greatly and all that but the main thing i have against it is that i can't use the num keys for unit movement wich has been possible in any civilization up till now, that just barely makes it playable on my laptop, except when im sitting in a very good position with a real mouse instead of the touchpad. and until they will fix this wichStarted the game and it looks very good and plays greatly and all that but the main thing i have against it is that i can't use the num keys for unit movement wich has been possible in any civilization up till now, that just barely makes it playable on my laptop, except when im sitting in a very good position with a real mouse instead of the touchpad. and until they will fix this wich should be this big of a problem i will not play the game.… Expand
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. Violett
    Dec 25, 2016
    6
    Another Civilization ... Yawn
    Well, I didn't rate this game low, because actually the game is quite good for step-by-step strategy game - with one BUT. This game is great BUT only for those who play Civ for the first time.
    Graphics is good, the game has its depth, but we saw it already - in Civ 5, Civ 4, and so on. For me the best Civs was Civ 2 and 3 - Civ 5 was good also, but this is    Another Civilization ... Yawn
    Well, I didn't rate this game low, because actually the game is quite good for step-by-step strategy game - with one BUT. This game is great BUT only for those who play Civ for the first time.
    Graphics is good, the game has its depth, but we saw it already - in Civ 5, Civ 4, and so on. For me the best Civs was Civ 2 and 3 - Civ 5 was good also, but this is another Civ with updated graphics and slightly updated gameplay. AI is still stupid as a trunk. Same units, same technologies. I understand there is nothing to replace tank and spearman in Civ games, but why to make another same game then? What next? Civ 7, Civ 8, Civ 9?    … Expand
  5. tokonju
    Oct 21, 2016
    6
    I tried it, and i don't like it...
    Graphic is just bad, colors are not good at all, very low texture resolution, not very well drown if you ask me...
    I also don't like the map, mini map and fow... All in all step back from civ v... Sound is fine a guess. Gameplay is just boring, idk tbh, too much barbarians and no city bombardment, i really don't think that is realistic scenario...    I tried it, and i don't like it...
    Graphic is just bad, colors are not good at all, very low texture resolution, not very well drown if you ask me...
    I also don't like the map, mini map and fow... All in all step back from civ v...
    Sound is fine a guess.
    Gameplay is just boring, idk tbh, too much barbarians and no city bombardment, i really don't think that is realistic scenario...
    Nice features like districts, various bonuses etc...

    I hope that they will add more civs soon... and fix some stupid ideas along the way... Like someone said wait for GOTY :)...

    Also, one big "-" for all this great scores that game received, it's a joke as always... I only read user scores anyway, and even the high user scores are given from brain dead people or "bots", because there is no way that this game now worth 10... there are just too many little things that didn't mention that just looks and feels cheap...    … Expand
  6. 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
  7. HaloFever
    Oct 13, 2021
    6
    At least it is a Civilization game. When Civ 6 was released, I was skeptical of the ugly cartoonish art style and the district system. After playing on iPad and now on PC (technically Mac), I am still skeptical. Though not as bad as Civ 3, Civ 6 has some of the worst changes in the series.

    The game kind of looks like Civilization, but instead of playing as some kind of world history,    At least it is a Civilization game. When Civ 6 was released, I was skeptical of the ugly cartoonish art style and the district system. After playing on iPad and now on PC (technically Mac), I am still skeptical. Though not as bad as Civ 3, Civ 6 has some of the worst changes in the series.

    The game kind of looks like Civilization, but instead of playing as some kind of world history, global conflict simulator, the game plays like a board game that has a too few many rules. Instead of government, you have card that you play. Government is essentially meaningless. Choices are meaningless. What matters is using cards and board piece placement to maximize bonuses and then hitting end turn until you gain enough points in whatever to win.

    The district system is interesting and not in a good way. Instead of building improvements in a city, improvements are spread across the map. This means that wonders of the world like the Great Library will take up 100 square miles of land. (Maybe they need the space for parking.) It also means that if you want to build a library to increase science, you first have to build a campus and then a library. You can't just choose library and have the campus auto-built with it. (The delayed gratification if found throughout the game. Build a Missionary or a Rock Band and then waste its first turn giving it a promotion.) Need a quick boost to happiness? First you have to build an entertainment district before building an arena. How do the citizens feel about this? They have to drive 100s of miles to get from their neighborhood to the factory district. The whole district system is mocked by the game itself when builders have the options of making seaside resorts and solar farms without the need for a district.

    2K Games undercut the districts (and wonders) with the changes to how cities gain points for victory. Civ V went too far in the direction of fewer cities built big (tall gameplay). Civ VI goes to far the other way with no limit on the number of cities (wide gameplay). Every game benefits from investing in settlers to found more cities. Why build a district when you can build a whole new city? Why build an industrial zone when you can have more mines? The developers are hell bent on cost benefit so no mechanic is broken. But when every mechanic is nerfed, none of the mechanics matter.

    Civ 6 also kills many quality of life changes enjoyed in previous Civ games. A player cannot automate a city, so a world winning wide empire leads to toiling in tedious torment. Even in Civ V, which championed small empires, you could take over the entire world and set up all the captured cities as puppet governments. The a.i. would prioritize gold in every captured city and that was fine because gold is useful. Civ 6 doesn't even have an option to set the city to auto-generate projects like making more science.

    War is not great but it does include many of the strategic advancements from Civ 5. The barbarians in the early game are a nightmare. They always have the best weapons and generate 3 or 4 units at a time. It's like the early rushes from Aztecs in Civ 5, only now every game has a rush. Because builders must be rebuilt after every 3 uses, pillaging is a real pain in the ass. Units are so broken out by era that by the time you build an army to deal with a threat, it becomes obsolete. Meanwhile, the barbarians you marched toward for the last 20 turns are spawning the latest gunpowder units. Just so fun for players. And because 2K Games didn't know it wanted for strategic gameplay, armies are back.

    Did I mention the terrible selection of leaders? I like that addition of new and interesting leaders. I don't like the removal of old favorites like Caesar, Napoleon, and Lincoln. And please stop releasing games in a sad state only to sell the players more content with DLC packs. This is why I always wait so long to buy games. (Full disclosure: my son bought Civ 6 with all the DLC. I've been playing it through the Steam family sharing feature. )

    There are good additions. The district system means a player can plop down Golden Gate Bridge between two landmasses or dig a canal through a continent. Spies are more useful than Civ 5. Religious combat is its own thing (maybe too much its own thing). All-in-all, Civ 6 is the kind of Civ release that really makes you think "When is the next one?"    … Expand
  8. 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
  9. micheldbruin
    Oct 15, 2017
    6
    There is a lot to like but also a lot not to like. The game takes forever load, go make that coffee meanwhile, the gameplay is fluent sometimes, other times a bit laggy. Very often the game won't close and I'll need to log out to get back to the desktop. The soundtrack, not very entertaining for long. I like the new featured which were introduced. Other players never respect anotherThere is a lot to like but also a lot not to like. The game takes forever load, go make that coffee meanwhile, the gameplay is fluent sometimes, other times a bit laggy. Very often the game won't close and I'll need to log out to get back to the desktop. The soundtrack, not very entertaining for long. I like the new featured which were introduced. Other players never respect another player's religion, even if they promise to do so. I never start religions anymore as a consequence. The other players are a bit tame for my taste and the barbarians far too aggressive. A barbarian camp will pop up and creates a barbarian every turn for 5 to 10 turns which forces you to keep an army. If you eradicate the camp it will pop up again even before your warriors have returned home. I'm fighting barbarians far more than other players. The units are less looking than in civ5 (boring legion and samurai). What's up with the weird world wonders! Not wonders at all most of them. Truth be told, I like civ5 better.… Expand
  10. Chucklenut
    Mar 28, 2020
    6
    An otherwise solid sequel hampered by DLC dependency and poor single-player balance. Civ 5 was criticized at launch for lacking most of the features Civ 4 had with its two expansion packs, making it feel like a shallower experience with prettier graphics until its own DLC was released. Learning nothing from this (or perhaps learning people will begrudgingly accept being nickel and dimedAn otherwise solid sequel hampered by DLC dependency and poor single-player balance. Civ 5 was criticized at launch for lacking most of the features Civ 4 had with its two expansion packs, making it feel like a shallower experience with prettier graphics until its own DLC was released. Learning nothing from this (or perhaps learning people will begrudgingly accept being nickel and dimed for their niche), Civ 6 suffers from this same issue and is anemic of past features, civilizations, and wonders in the base game. While it does feel like a complete game once you buy all of it's current DLC, are you really willing to spend the full $167 when for it? If you live and breathe Civ, maybe you are, but at the very least wait for a sale so you don't embarrass yourself too harshly.… Expand
  11. 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
  12. gordonbays
    Oct 24, 2016
    6
    For all those bored of the past civ (Civilization) games, this version is perfect. Civilization 6 introduces new mechanics, new resources and much more.
    One of the greatest things that was upgraded is the screen panels. Taking the religion panel as example, now it shows how many followers you got and much more.
    The foes leaders interaction screen looks gorgeous now and more helpful. I    For all those bored of the past civ (Civilization) games, this version is perfect. Civilization 6 introduces new mechanics, new resources and much more.
    One of the greatest things that was upgraded is the screen panels. Taking the religion panel as example, now it shows how many followers you got and much more.
    The foes leaders interaction screen looks gorgeous now and more helpful.
    I felt the strategy more balanced and harder to create a snowball economy, witch is great.
    The main screen music is amazing, just like the new UI (user interface).
    Overall the game keeps its well polished concept, with decent graphics and perfomace.
    Im surprised that after several hours playing i didn't had any crashes.

    The dark side of Civ 6

    Although its very personal, i didn't like the new cartoon art concept, it makes me feel playing a cheap tablet game.
    Some new screens are confusing, poluted and the icons don't help the player figure out at a glance whats going on.
    The new leader interaction screen is very anoying, there is a long talk and the options take ages to fade on. Of course you can bypass this mess hiting ESC key but if you do this on a incorrect timing you close the whole screen.
    One change that shows the new face of civilizations its the promotion screen. Instead of a simple panel with butons like previous versions we have now a screen that obliterates all your vision and show less promotions than before. More cliks, less resources and all for sake of a better looking UI.

    Final conclusion

    The game went to a next level, thats sure, althoug i don,t like the new concept. The new mechanics are decent, and some old ones received great improvements.
    My biggest concern is about gameplay. There is way too much resources in this game made just for a better looking and tablet users instead of being quick and simple for desktop players. And a lot more clicks needed to do same tasks.
    The units, techs and strategic resources are reduced to a level that i never saw before.
    I hope that modding comunity and dlcs bring more content to the game and fix all the anoyances. Untill then im strugling to give it a score of 7 out 10.    … Expand
  13. 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
  14. TatsMcGee
    Sep 8, 2018
    6
    I have finally done it. I have finally purchased a gaming PC and I can finally start playing PC games. This is a game that I have owned for a long time but I could never play it because my PC couldn’t handle the mid game. Now that I have finally sat down and play through an entire game, I feel underwhelmed. Civilization V is one of my top 5 favorite games of all time and Civ VI just feelsI have finally done it. I have finally purchased a gaming PC and I can finally start playing PC games. This is a game that I have owned for a long time but I could never play it because my PC couldn’t handle the mid game. Now that I have finally sat down and play through an entire game, I feel underwhelmed. Civilization V is one of my top 5 favorite games of all time and Civ VI just feels lacking.

    I love the Art style and its still turn-based and part of the problem is I don’t know what I’m doing. I will continue to play it and hope eventually that the game will click with me. Civilization Revolution was the first Civ game that I played and it clicked with me instantly, Civ V was the first PC version and that was instant as well. This just feels off to me.

    I’ll keep at it and maybe expansions will help but for now, its not just not doing it for me.    … Expand
  15. cottandy
    Oct 10, 2017
    6
    I see just a raw version of Civ 5 right now. That's what the 6th is.
    Spent a great amount of time playing every previous Civ... but this time it made me sad after a few hours of game.
    Without doubt, the predecessor was just the best and it was way too difficult to outperform it! But what was the point of spending years to make the same old game with minor changes, which made it worse    I see just a raw version of Civ 5 right now. That's what the 6th is.
    Spent a great amount of time playing every previous Civ... but this time it made me sad after a few hours of game.

    Without doubt, the predecessor was just the best and it was way too difficult to outperform it! But what was the point of spending years to make the same old game with minor changes, which made it worse than it was? It's almost like the history with annual FIFA games.

    AI is poor! No, in previous versions it wasn't the best, but this time once again it's the worst ever.
    Even the graphics are better in the 5th than in 6th.
    Civ 6 is full of good ideas, but they didn't shape them up.

    Hope they will fix everything with patches and make it a better game. But right now it's not worth spending money. It's better to play Civ 5, because it's a finished fine game.    … Expand
  16. Dandy_Dust
    Oct 22, 2016
    6
    Under the restriction that this comes as a first impression: They said all the DLCs would now be implemented with the game from the start - OH REALLY??? --> No WORLD MAPS with TRUE STARTING LOCATIONS, no turning the city - states off, no handling distances between cities and so on and so forth.... I don´t like the PLAYCARD - LOOK of Politics, if I want to play tabletop - games I´d turn toUnder the restriction that this comes as a first impression: They said all the DLCs would now be implemented with the game from the start - OH REALLY??? --> No WORLD MAPS with TRUE STARTING LOCATIONS, no turning the city - states off, no handling distances between cities and so on and so forth.... I don´t like the PLAYCARD - LOOK of Politics, if I want to play tabletop - games I´d turn to Magic - cards or something. AI - REAL AI, that´s what I expect in the year 2016. I am disappointed.… Expand
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. RodrigoLolli
    Nov 4, 2016
    6
    Civilization is my prefered game. I play it since civilization 1.
    I aways like to feel like I was in the game and been the comander of that people. But I think the caricature drawnning is not good for it.
    I expected more of the AI, graphics more realistic, imagens showing in the conquest of a city like in CIV2. The Palace been contructed by people happyness, and some think new, like    Civilization is my prefered game. I play it since civilization 1.
    I aways like to feel like I was in the game and been the comander of that people. But I think the caricature drawnning is not good for it.
    I expected more of the AI, graphics more realistic, imagens showing in the conquest of a city like in CIV2.
    The Palace been contructed by people happyness, and some think new, like newspaper telling the results of the wars. The concel of ministers should be more elaborated, with faces expressions like in the pasts civilizations.
    For me, Civilization 4 is still the best. and civ5 is still better then 6.

    I liked the roads and workes sistem, because we wast less time working roads.
    I will play civ 6, but I begin to wait for civ 7    … Expand
  20. 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
  21. M3TAmeat
    Dec 5, 2018
    6
    Fact is, I just like the Civilization series and the gameplay too much, as that I could leave out a part. But unfortunately I am already thinking since the last two parts more and more to buy the game for the release.
    And sorry, normally I would give a 7 out of 10 for the initial teething problems, broken AI and mediocre balancing. But due to the growing, ridiculous DLC policy, I can not    Fact is, I just like the Civilization series and the gameplay too much, as that I could leave out a part. But unfortunately I am already thinking since the last two parts more and more to buy the game for the release.
    And sorry, normally I would give a 7 out of 10 for the initial teething problems, broken AI and mediocre balancing. But due to the growing, ridiculous DLC policy, I can not agree more than 6 in 10 for myself.    … Expand
  22. Babutto
    Oct 1, 2019
    6
    Pros:
    - graphics;
    - district system; - units, battles, promotions, research, culture, victories. Cons: - diplomacy is the same **** as usual. If you become strong, everybody hates you. They started using the system of diplomatic points, but you cannot win it even if you have more than others, guys will block your votes; grudge against others doesn't do much if you don't want to    Pros:
    - graphics;
    - district system;
    - units, battles, promotions, research, culture, victories.

    Cons:
    - diplomacy is the same **** as usual. If you become strong, everybody hates you. They started using the system of diplomatic points, but you cannot win it even if you have more than others, guys will block your votes; grudge against others doesn't do much if you don't want to start the war;
    - diplomatic relations themselves do not provide many options. TW series moves forward, here they stuck the same for YEARS. Your allies ALWAYS spy on you and even if you catch the spies keep doing it;
    - governors are useless, city states are less useful then in 5th;
    - AI, workers system should be upgraded for sure. Military engeneer to build railroads? Really?

    Overall: the game contains good ideas, BUT the series should boost their diplomatic side, improve workers, AI, maybe improve research that will contain alternatives that will affect you in a long term and make every discovery valuable.
    Beyond Earth by far is more interesting.    … Expand
  23. Pirocr07
    Dec 31, 2020
    6
    The game is enjoyable but the main thing with it is the AI and the difficulties in the game. There is a big change between “Prince” and “King”, not even going to mention how hard is to play in difficulties like “Inmortal”. Basically the AI is super dumb in all difficulties but it gets advantages from the beginning and in combat, which makes it very difficult to win a game in higherThe game is enjoyable but the main thing with it is the AI and the difficulties in the game. There is a big change between “Prince” and “King”, not even going to mention how hard is to play in difficulties like “Inmortal”. Basically the AI is super dumb in all difficulties but it gets advantages from the beginning and in combat, which makes it very difficult to win a game in higher difficulties, I feel like it is possible to do it with certain civilizations and it certain scenarios only. Science is super overvalued, the amenities system is a little bit complicated and the royalty system is a little bit annoying too (this last thing is optional). Apart from that is a good game, obviously if you are on pc you can make some changes and “fix” the difficulty problem taking away some of those crazy advantages but then you will probably end up playing like in prince difficulty. There are plenty of civilizations and there are multiple ways to win, some easier than others but still, it gives more options for you.… Expand
  24. tmsmith3
    Aug 3, 2020
    6
    Each component of the game seems to have no effect or of little consequence to all of the other components. Still very fun, and the dlc is worth it
  25. 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
  26. buddookan
    Feb 12, 2021
    6
    Mega nieczytelna, bzdurne zasady, AI tragiczne, nudna i mnóstwo błędów. Najgorsza od czasów jedynki.
  27. KTheSlayer
    Jun 18, 2021
    6
    Much more casual and nice-looking in the first time, but very low in replaying potential
  28. PetyaBiszeps
    Aug 25, 2022
    6
    That's first CIV i'm playing in and it's interesting and immersive enough. It has it's own problems, bad optimization, some weird menu bugs. Also i have to admit, that my experience was interesting at the start until 60-70% of game, after you get tanks, airplanes and other stuff it's getting boring, maybe it's just me, i don't really know. But overall i would rate it something between 6-7That's first CIV i'm playing in and it's interesting and immersive enough. It has it's own problems, bad optimization, some weird menu bugs. Also i have to admit, that my experience was interesting at the start until 60-70% of game, after you get tanks, airplanes and other stuff it's getting boring, maybe it's just me, i don't really know. But overall i would rate it something between 6-7 and if i could i would rate it 6.5, but if i have to pick between 6 and 7 i will go with 6. It's okay but it COULD be better.… Expand
  29. 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
  30. 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.
  31. 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
  32. 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
  33. dk3d
    Oct 21, 2016
    5
    Coming from Civ 5 and every Civ before that, I found the game familiar, perhaps too much. I've only put in 30 minutes and several dozens turns thus far, but the layout, upgrades, units, leaders, map grid, interface, is all almost too much like Civ 5. Yes, there are few new tidbits here and there I've come across but I'm sitting here thinking to myself, after 6 years, I was looking forComing from Civ 5 and every Civ before that, I found the game familiar, perhaps too much. I've only put in 30 minutes and several dozens turns thus far, but the layout, upgrades, units, leaders, map grid, interface, is all almost too much like Civ 5. Yes, there are few new tidbits here and there I've come across but I'm sitting here thinking to myself, after 6 years, I was looking for more.

    More as in a better looking and bigger feeling map, as in, use the 3D to the max and let us rotate, immerse ourself in the game world. Instead, it's the same old, 45 degree angle psuedo 3d that teases you with what could have been.

    More as in, far far better graphics. Don't get me wrong, they are nice, but they are mobile/ipad feeling.

    More as in, wow, exact same tech tree so far, granary, iron working, blah blah, all in same order. I'm a bit jaded by Stellaris's tech how it throws random pieces at you I guess. But even so, the EXACT same tech tree?

    It will replace Civ 5 for sure, but I'm not 100% convinced yet why I bought it thinking it would feel new and cool and be $60 well spent. I might get there. The first 30 minutes feel way too familar to me though. I wanted so much more from the next generation of Civ.    … Expand
  34. 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
  35. 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
  36. Silverfish1983
    Oct 23, 2016
    5
    Simply cannot understand those citing 'gorgeous graphics'. This is the art style you get from FTP's or £3 tablet games. So disappointing when Civ V was a thing of such beauty. Everything else seems 'okay', but for me I simply can't get past the lazy and cheap feeling art style.
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. 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.
  40. peterus
    Oct 24, 2016
    5
    It's barely a strategy game - it is more of a cowclicker. Different strategic elements are jumbled together and grossly unbalanced. Player can't optimize the big picture to win. Instead it's about optimizing the minute details like planning out every move (literally in everything - from unit movements, through tech, policy to buildings) to get the achievement like inspirations for yourIt's barely a strategy game - it is more of a cowclicker. Different strategic elements are jumbled together and grossly unbalanced. Player can't optimize the big picture to win. Instead it's about optimizing the minute details like planning out every move (literally in everything - from unit movements, through tech, policy to buildings) to get the achievement like inspirations for your path on the tech tree, or planning out a city 3 wonders and 5 districts in advance... and than doing the same for 2nd city, 3rd city and so on.

    Graphics are very good, cartoony but it fits the casual feel of the game and music is average. AI is terribly idiotic, diplomacy is meh. It has a minimalistic, streamlined interface which lacks a LOT of important information but it's also easy to use. All in all, if you just go with the flow and build yourself a farm... I mean a civilization that I think you'll enjoy it. But if you are for the deeper substance - you won't find any in this game.    … Expand
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. 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
  46. 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
  47. 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
  48. 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 ....
  49. RGB-Meta
    Apr 15, 2019
    5
    Not as good as previous in my opinion. Much more difficult and at higher level, like King, the AI will destroy you if you make any strategic errors. Simple things become critical. Can win easily on all levels from Prince down. Have never won a game above Prince level and am getting really frustrated at the AIs ability to target me for the simplest mistake. Attach by 3 Battleships whenNot as good as previous in my opinion. Much more difficult and at higher level, like King, the AI will destroy you if you make any strategic errors. Simple things become critical. Can win easily on all levels from Prince down. Have never won a game above Prince level and am getting really frustrated at the AIs ability to target me for the simplest mistake. Attach by 3 Battleships when I am the most advanced nation and didn't have that tech yet. But AI did and enuf to hit me hard. Can't say what the AI did but I call cheat!. Was a super fan before this. Prefer Civ 5.… Expand
  50. theredd636
    May 2, 2020
    5
    This game improves in actual game play every year. Unfortunately the AI isn't that great as they are always popping up on the users screen often saying that you military is not good and that they don't care for a leader with a bad military. Then when you do develop a military they still come up with the same prompt even though you have the best military in the match. if you are looking forThis game improves in actual game play every year. Unfortunately the AI isn't that great as they are always popping up on the users screen often saying that you military is not good and that they don't care for a leader with a bad military. Then when you do develop a military they still come up with the same prompt even though you have the best military in the match. if you are looking for a strategy game with great AI this is not for you, but if you want an Feature heavy game that is great if you wanna sit down and play for 10 hours straight by yourself or friends then this is for you.… Expand
  51. m3t4cr1t1c
    Jul 23, 2020
    5
    Few play Civ on God lvl. I am one of them. 43 years old, played Civ since "...and Earth was without form and void".
    I won't waste my time writing to many lines about this ""new"" civ game. I will just compare it with FIFA. In FIFA they spend 99 percent of their energy for graphics improvements. This Civ dev does the same. This game could be THE GAME. All humans could play it, it could    Few play Civ on God lvl. I am one of them. 43 years old, played Civ since "...and Earth was without form and void".
    I won't waste my time writing to many lines about this ""new"" civ game. I will just compare it with FIFA. In FIFA they spend 99 percent of their energy for graphics improvements. This Civ dev does the same. This game could be THE GAME. All humans could play it, it could become incredibly immersive, complex, beautiful and flexible . Instead... they upgrade graphics with every new one. Very few strategic changes comparative with hundreds that can be made. Watch reality... and watch this game. Civ is not Civ...it's just a joke. Years ago weak processors could have been an excuse. Today - NO. Bad dev.    … Expand
  52. rafabrand
    Jan 5, 2021
    5
    They tried to change a lot of things. I agree that a new game is done to keep people playing. But this one is the worst civ that I played. I haven t tryed rise and fall yet.
  53. Ratingss
    Mar 25, 2023
    5
    These games arent as complex as they pretend to be, the historic stuff is extremely shallow, but its weirdly addictive, time flies by playing this.
    Unit movement is slow, the AI turn takes forever and it mostly does nothing, in the apocalypse mode your whole territory will be destroyed by meteors while almost nothing happens to the AI territories. The secret societies adds OP vampires    These games arent as complex as they pretend to be, the historic stuff is extremely shallow, but its weirdly addictive, time flies by playing this.
    Unit movement is slow, the AI turn takes forever and it mostly does nothing, in the apocalypse mode your whole territory will be destroyed by meteors while almost nothing happens to the AI territories. The secret societies adds OP vampires that are just as broken as the legendary units, combat is not satisfying, just about which unit hasnt the highest number.    … Expand
  54. SebastiedJuan
    Sep 13, 2021
    5
    This game is the way they destruct a great series. Civ3 and Civ4 are history masterpieces, and Civ5 was a great great game, only a little more simplified/user friendly version of Civ 4 with less struttures but still be a great game where u have a great heat. In Civ 6 u don't have this. Game pace is boring, slow, and A.I. is broken, unexistent.
  55. zcat5
    Jun 26, 2023
    5
    An enjoyable turn based strategy game. This game lacks depth, and plays like a board game.
  56. Suyadon
    Oct 26, 2016
    4
    If you like features, this game surpasses all of its predecessors in just about every way. However, the AI is complete **** and completely ruins the experience. I've played one full game and will now uninstall for now with hopes of this being resolved by of a patch some day. Good game if you want "Civ 6 Tower Defense"
  57. Mascalzone
    Oct 29, 2016
    4
    Better graphic and animations. And that's all. Slow as hell to load games and go to next, even with an SSD, always the same useless diplomacy and no intel at all, as usual... A real mess.
  58. Critical_Fun
    Nov 14, 2016
    4
    They get a 4 rating now, and they're lucky to get that. Releasing games before they're finished should never happen, and when it does, it should never come from a huge gaming company. There is too much info missing to fully understand all of the new rules/benefits of your chosen path, etc. I am often declared war on by my OWN country and then suffer consequences since peace withThey get a 4 rating now, and they're lucky to get that. Releasing games before they're finished should never happen, and when it does, it should never come from a huge gaming company. There is too much info missing to fully understand all of the new rules/benefits of your chosen path, etc. I am often declared war on by my OWN country and then suffer consequences since peace with yourself is impossible. Late game is just boring. Much more so than Civ V. Many other problems that should be patched. This review comes over 3 weeks after release an no updates to speak of, despite so many obvious problems. Nice way to reward their day one fans with this unfinished pile of crap. Big fan since the early 90s. That might change going forward.… Expand
  59. Cannily
    Oct 21, 2016
    4
    I would like to say it is a step back from Civ V, but in the Civ series, a step back is strangely always a better game.
    This game is not better than Civ V, not to speak of Civ IV or III.
    Civ games are very complex and have an adult audience who like to go deep into the game mechanics to get the most out of every round. Who in the world thought this audience likes comic look? It is just    I would like to say it is a step back from Civ V, but in the Civ series, a step back is strangely always a better game.
    This game is not better than Civ V, not to speak of Civ IV or III.
    Civ games are very complex and have an adult audience who like to go deep into the game mechanics to get the most out of every round.
    Who in the world thought this audience likes comic look?
    It is just awful.
    The leaders are very annoying and the comic-joke animation makes it even worse. Every second round the NPC factions want to speak with you. And with that comes the endless animation.
    The game design itself and the city spamming is just ridiculous. My best tactic until now, just spam settlers and settle everywhere. There is no negative side to expand stupidly. No world wide unrest, nothing.
    But the worst thing about this game is the KI. It is almost not existing. This game is way to easy, and boring.
    Maybe it is fun in multiplayer, but singleplayer this game is no fun at all.    … Expand
  60. Nerm_Ski
    Dec 29, 2016
    4
    This is one BAFFLING CIV EXPERIENCE!!!! Its good and bad and ugly all at once!
    This game feels a lot like copy and paste! And it feels like it has been heavily influenced by the games available on mobile (cell) phones. I mean look at the graphics.
    The game is running in the back ground but I had to stop to write this as I cant be the only one experiencing this. Two new concepts. (first    This is one BAFFLING CIV EXPERIENCE!!!! Its good and bad and ugly all at once!
    This game feels a lot like copy and paste! And it feels like it has been heavily influenced by the games available on mobile (cell) phones. I mean look at the graphics.
    The game is running in the back ground but I had to stop to write this as I cant be the only one experiencing this.
    Two new concepts. (first is mainly for experienced players, second is universal. Also the second is quite long, so you might want to make a cup of tea now before you get there!)

    One: Districts, which are pretty good I have to say. Good way of spreading specialities and forcing us to really think about the development of our cities, and limits Wonder Production so I can no longer have a really "Wonderful" city (eh eh, see what I did there!) while the rest of the empire actually does everything else! Now a lot of wonders require adjacency to a specific district. More to it but you get the idea. Well thought out new concept, it seems.

    Two: Shocking User Interface. I mean this is bad! Let me elaborate.
    *I like edge scrolling, just a preference on these type of games. Now the buttons at the top to access Religion, Great People and all the rest of it are above the threshold for the scroll. Which means that when I am looking at an area or City and want to access the menus, the map scrolls away from my desired location, before the mouse pointer gets to the buttons. I mean seriously guys, was that tested?
    *Overlays on Overlays. No more right click to see what resources and terrain a tile has. Just hover the mouse over the tile and it displays info. Great. However problems arise when you get the notifications on the side, which you can also hover over to see what the say. What happens. The info of the tile in the background pops up over the info of the notification. This is so poor.
    *The info does not show as updated when changes are to a cities resource gathering. Ie. I select a city, currently has 16 turns to finish building. Select more production based resources. Production reduced to 8 turns, however city on world map still shows 16! I have a screenshot. Why must I wait till the next turn for updated info on world map?
    *Rigidity! No longer is information easy to access and generally all in one place. City options can only be accessed (by mouse this is, not hotkeys) by clicking the specific icon. IE, Click a city, you now see its production in a pretty picture telling you how many turns remain. However you can't access production by clicking it. Nope, you must select the SMALLER production icon to change it. Another example is (and this again is poor) you can't double click a city and be taken to its citizen screen, instead you must click the city and then again click the smaller citizen icon.
    *The most confusing fog of war I have ever encountered. Now Fog can be very disorientating at the best of times, but it shouldn't be an issue when I'm sat looking at a screen. Instead of just fading, shading or blurring; the areas you have explored but can longer see. You are treated to a nice parchment, hand drawn, tea stained colour looking map. Very pretty, it is. Why the beige? seriously why cant the colour of the terrain under the fog be visible. I mean, a unit went there, saw it is green grassland, so why the beige? I find it actually makes settler planning a little trickier.

    Sneaky third point(s)
    *No Personality. You can't change the name of your leader or empire.
    *The graphics are really poor. I want the completion of a wonder to be, well wondrous but the graphics make it look so cheap.
    *This game is far too dumbed down compared to other civ games. Bring back everything from Alpha Centuri, I mean everything. Let the players really work it out. Its a strategy game after all so cater to the market instead of trying to be more accessible in order to increase sales. (i expect alot of people to disagree with me on this one).

    I must conclude as I am out of space.
    As stated in the opening this is a very confusing experience. It is Civ! it has all the necessary elements for you to be able to enjoy the strategy game. It also comes with a lot of nonsense, as mentioned above.

    Score Breakdown
    1 For Turning Up
    1 For Effort
    1 For Sean Bean (got to love Beanie)
    1 For new districts feature and because I love Sid Meier's games (no , that should not therefore be two points. Can't be trading on old glories!!!
    Total 4 out of 10

    No points for: graphics, immersion/customisation, user friendliness (I could raise another point about it's poor explanations), user interface, the price, for trying to reinvent the wheel when all you needed was new rims!    … Expand
  61. lolrofl
    Oct 23, 2016
    4
    Besides the ugly graphics it lacks AI. And the UI is pretty much a joke. Theres no progress between Civ V and VI, it´s just like "the next game in the row" like FIFA every year. Definetely no milestone.
  62. Robobob
    Aug 8, 2022
    4
    Long time Civ fan since the days of Civ 1. Each version I've played 100s of hours. This and Civ 3 are the only versions I'd give a thumbs down.
    The good: The graphics are great. There are some new decent tweaks to aspects of the game like culture, civics and golden ages.
    The bad: movement. The change to movement where trying to move into difficult terrain ends your movement, though    Long time Civ fan since the days of Civ 1. Each version I've played 100s of hours. This and Civ 3 are the only versions I'd give a thumbs down.
    The good: The graphics are great. There are some new decent tweaks to aspects of the game like culture, civics and golden ages.
    The bad: movement. The change to movement where trying to move into difficult terrain ends your movement, though it makes sense, sloooows the game down to a snails pace. Even a scout exploring the map is reduced to a tile a turn in diffcult terrain. And roads are practically useless until modern times and/or the railroad. You know roads are useless when your units ignore them when auto-moving across your empire. So moving across your empire in classic times, with roads, can take you 100s of years, I kid you not.
    1 unit per tile. They did away with unit stacks in Civ 5 to avoid the doom stacks, and I didn't complain as much there. But here, topped with the slow movement rates, makes the movement worse. Units can't stack with friendly units so city state units are constantly in the way while aimlessly wandering the map, taking it even longer to move across your empire. You can't auto assign a military unit to protect a trade unit. You can't stack non-military units for some reason. I love how you need to remove a unit from a city just to buy or start construction of a new unit.
    AIs use of religion is just annoying and makes me want to quit everytime they ramp up sending countless missionary units to my empire. You can' t just close your borders to them like you do military units.
    The UI is disorganized and messy. It's harder to find simple city lists and yields from earlier games like Civ 5. Districts are a coll add but I had to download a mod to delete them if I change my mind and want to build somewhere else. User mods change a lot of simple issues that Firaxis has opted to ignore in favor of more expensive expansions.
    WE got a new civ every 5 years since Civ1 except we were due for a new one in 2021 but Firaxis added a yearly game-pass like expansion for Civ 6 instead of a new game. God help us if this is the last new Civ game because the core mechanics need a lot of work.    … Expand
  63. WondemanLocke
    Dec 22, 2019
    4
    Game is unplayable because in main menu, you cannot access advanced settings in menu because screen cuts wrong way. It is stupid to play an other game for hours if it is not your dream game you have done.
  64. Kamamura
    May 29, 2017
    4
    Seeing all the rave reviews the game got on release, I wonder how long is it before an average gamer starts questioning journalistic integrity of this "independent" reviewers. The game is fatally flawed, featuring brain-dead AI that does not function even when propped by the crutches in the form of heavy cheating bonuses. The diplomacy system is atrocious, the interface badly designed, andSeeing all the rave reviews the game got on release, I wonder how long is it before an average gamer starts questioning journalistic integrity of this "independent" reviewers. The game is fatally flawed, featuring brain-dead AI that does not function even when propped by the crutches in the form of heavy cheating bonuses. The diplomacy system is atrocious, the interface badly designed, and the graphics are pain to look at. Civ 5 had also a rough start, but was polished to a reasonable state in time. However, I think this mess of a release is beyond redemption, and after the mediocre Civ:Beyond Earth, it's a sad evidence of a decline of what used to be a stellar game developer company.… Expand
  65. Rmiles801
    Oct 28, 2021
    4
    I could go on and on about how horrible the AI is, but I'd pretty much just be going over what's already been mentioned here plenty, the AI is SO awful that it absolutely ruins this game in every way possible, not going to even go into detail on all the AI related issues there are, but if you combine the bad AI with the lack of a well-done online multiplayer because there's no rankingI could go on and on about how horrible the AI is, but I'd pretty much just be going over what's already been mentioned here plenty, the AI is SO awful that it absolutely ruins this game in every way possible, not going to even go into detail on all the AI related issues there are, but if you combine the bad AI with the lack of a well-done online multiplayer because there's no ranking system, no punishment for leaving, no stat tracking, no nothing, it's crazy you can't even explore ANY details of your gameplay history, how can you see if you improve? There's just so much lacking from the core of this game that it's slightly mind boggling how they allocate their development efforts to putting more civs and more features in the game. That's all cool and all, don't get me wrong, I like all the stuff that came out clear into early 2021. but the reality of it is the game is STILL a buggy mess. I've played it with several $2000+ dollar gaming pc's that I've built and my primary playing friend also has a top of the line PC, we've spent MANY HOURS trying all sorts of different things to get this thing to run smoothly, never once did we EVER reach turn 100 with just 2players without one of our games crashing, stalling, freezing, or some sort of issue that caused us to have to reboot the entire client, reload the game lobby, and start from an autosave. Very frustrating, there's so much potential here, just need someone to lead the efforts that can think bigger picture, they needed to tackle all the games ancillary stuff years ago instead of adding new little quirky things to the game. It makes me mad because I do enjoy the game, but it really needs someone running the show that knows what they're doing.… Expand
  66. Silverzapper
    Jul 14, 2017
    4
    This review is coming from someone who has enjoyed Civilization in the past. I would rate Civ5 an 8 or 9. So it isn't that I don't like Civilization. I just have a problem with this one. I want to like this game, I really do. Every so often I try to play, hoping for a fun and enjoyable experience, and every time I come out disappointed. There are many things that the game does really well,This review is coming from someone who has enjoyed Civilization in the past. I would rate Civ5 an 8 or 9. So it isn't that I don't like Civilization. I just have a problem with this one. I want to like this game, I really do. Every so often I try to play, hoping for a fun and enjoyable experience, and every time I come out disappointed. There are many things that the game does really well, but the AI utterly ruins it. If you are familiar with the Civilization series, you should be familiar with the AI and how it is well, lacking to say the least. Well it's still horrid here. What makes this AI ruin the entire game for me is that it knows everything you do. Try to build a wonder? The AI knows you started building that and will not only begin building it as well, but it will specifically wait until the last possible turn to start. Just so it can beat you to it by one turn, losing you both the wonder and the 20+ turns of production you used to build it. You can't see what the AI does so you have no idea if they just started building Stonehenge. They can. Based on this, I bet the AI probably sees inside your territory without even so much as meeting you first. Maybe even the entire map. Even if they don't, should I even have to be asking these questions? Like I said in the beginning, there are good things about it and if you can get past an AI that blatantly cheats you might like this game. I can't rate it anything above red because I simply get little enjoyment out of playing it.… Expand
  67. Kommerzbanshee
    Oct 23, 2016
    4
    This game has some of the most amazing game mechanics i have ever seen.

    This game also has one of the most poorly designed AI in gaming history. Not does the AI literaly cheat on higher defficults, but the Agenda system the AI is supposed to follow is broken. It is impossable to satisfy it's agenda on higher diffifult resulting in a game plan where you ether can warmonger your way to    This game has some of the most amazing game mechanics i have ever seen.

    This game also has one of the most poorly designed AI in gaming history.
    Not does the AI literaly cheat on higher defficults, but the Agenda system the AI is supposed to follow is broken.
    It is impossable to satisfy it's agenda on higher diffifult resulting in a game plan where you ether can warmonger your way to victory or get crushed by the AI ganging up on you.
    This is nothing new, but it's just devaluates the amazing job the game designer team has done here

    In short: a game can have a the most impressiv mechanic you'll ever seen. But a single player game with poor AI is stil garbage.    … Expand
  68. Oldsport78
    Oct 22, 2016
    4
    The Good:

    - City upgrades are now placed on tiles which makes it more important how you use them. - City states is a lot more active than before in CIV 5. - Fog of war, you can still see where you discovered resources The bad - The AI is mess - The new social policy tree is very similar to your research tree instead of using the much superior model from V. - Two    The Good:

    - City upgrades are now placed on tiles which makes it more important how you use them.

    - City states is a lot more active than before in CIV 5.

    - Fog of war, you can still see where you discovered resources

    The bad

    - The AI is mess

    - The new social policy tree is very similar to your research tree instead of using the much superior model from V.

    - Two advanced options when creating a game, gone are one-city challenge, raging barbarians, random seed, start bias and all the other advanced options you used to create a custom game with, this is the core of any civilization game and its absent is game breaking.

    I honestly don't see how anyone who likes to create their own game could possibly prefer CIV VI, but some people will always be drawn to what's new and shiny rather than older games with more or higher quality content.

    Stick to Civilization V and don't pay for content you already own in V.    … Expand
  69. Realist_gamer
    Nov 20, 2016
    4
    Please don't get amazed and distracted by the many fresh-off-the-boat sick new features presented to you by this game.I'm 100% sure that if you just play the game for at least two or three days in a row,you can easily notice it's weaknesses and understand that in many aspects not only this game doesn't excel previous versions but also completely remove or change some strategic elementsPlease don't get amazed and distracted by the many fresh-off-the-boat sick new features presented to you by this game.I'm 100% sure that if you just play the game for at least two or three days in a row,you can easily notice it's weaknesses and understand that in many aspects not only this game doesn't excel previous versions but also completely remove or change some strategic elements from the game that we had fun with.for instance,they deleted the world congress,cargo ships,satellite war(what was seen in "beyond earth"),various on-water-tiles improvements(beyond earth) and so on...those were just some of the most painful removals sadly happened in this version;not changes or some newly-added features that are fun at some points but got it's serious problems and you get noticed of them after many hours of gaming."districts" is one of the good and main added features to the series and is fun but for a limited time.The number of buildings that can be constructed in the city center and other districts is decreased incredibly(also Developers seem to have forgotten an important lesson from "fallout" series:in atomic era get the bomb shelters up&running asap!c'mon team!what if I get nuked?!there no bomb shelter anymore!).builder's gameplay elements,however in my idea,got worse,not much variety and creativity and fun in civics(culture affairs).and about settlers,I think developers just copy-pasted from the previous version into new.diplomacy AI got worse and not many great features introduced.battle AI is not perfect.info graphics(from the civ v)is not returned yet.espionage system is a nuisance;and many more bad and horribly disappointing things just waiting to discover.what is pleasing about the game is having the clear look of the buildings;unstacking them and spread them throughout the map;some battle animations,and having the graphics updated(however that is not counted as a bonus point for this game).soundtracks aren't bad but developers seem to have worked less on that(it's obvious);as we don't see the unique soundtracks,like folklore musics be various and limited to a nation.put away main famous fun-to-play-as leaders and brought up new characters that are fun-to-look-at.in addition,characters' appearances doesn't get changed during the ages.all in all,I think experiences gained from 4 previous versions(from civ v to stellar)weren't put into good use and not only we don't see a limit-pushing game but a weak not-even-equal-to-previous-limits is seen.
    Firaxis team,I respect all of you and your work,but this is not what was expected.please be up to release some super meaty dlcs and fixes to make the series perfect once again.thanks...    … Expand
  70. mj1973
    Oct 23, 2016
    4
    I hate the cartoonish style. The game is ugly.
    But the game it self seems god, many new funny things and better diplomacy.
    I will not play this game because of the ugly interface/graphics
  71. anonymousclay
    Oct 24, 2016
    4
    It will probably be great in a year when the game goes on sale and there are mods to fix it. It's basically Civ5 + Beyond Earth, with Endless Legend districts and a shiny new skin. That may seem great on the surface, and it is, but there are many flaws and oversight, some of which should be common sense at this point. If you hated Civ5, you'll probably hate this one too. If you were fineIt will probably be great in a year when the game goes on sale and there are mods to fix it. It's basically Civ5 + Beyond Earth, with Endless Legend districts and a shiny new skin. That may seem great on the surface, and it is, but there are many flaws and oversight, some of which should be common sense at this point. If you hated Civ5, you'll probably hate this one too. If you were fine with 5 and BE, then it's a slightly-better-than mediocre addition to the franchise. Everything is "finished" per-se, but nothing really feels complete

    Details:

    Right now the AI is useless, production queues are missing, the overall style is more cartoony than Warcraft, and diplomacy is all but non-existent. The new research/civic boosters seem cool at first but inevitably push you down the same path every time. You still can't make your own leaders or save world settings. Basically it feels like a game that doesn't want you to experiment.

    (Personal aside) - I thought I would love Sean Bean as the narrator but nearly every quote is juvenile and silly instead of the witty and sarcastic dialogue that Nimoy was given in previous installments.    … Expand
  72. ColinKelly
    Oct 24, 2016
    4
    There are so many problems with the game it is difficult to know where to start. First, the graphics; it appears that the designers made a performance trade off, giving us what you might called less than the original DOS version of Monkey Island graphics - cartoon like graphics; to increase overall performance I presume. My machine can take it; give me state of the art graphics. Second,There are so many problems with the game it is difficult to know where to start. First, the graphics; it appears that the designers made a performance trade off, giving us what you might called less than the original DOS version of Monkey Island graphics - cartoon like graphics; to increase overall performance I presume. My machine can take it; give me state of the art graphics. Second, the map generation options are too limited; a step back from prior versions. Also, the type selections available all seem to generate roughly the same outcome. No matter what you choose, you seem to get what has been called in the past a "fractal' map. Hopefully user mods will improve on the poor map generation options over time. It is unfortunate that they stuck with the naval/intercontinental movement model of Civ 5. Use and control of the sea is a significant real world problem that Civs prior to 5 dealt with in a more realistic fashion. The AI is a major problem. AI cheats at higher levels frustrating. AI seems to drive the game, you are reactive to the AI, with rare opportunities to be proactive. Game options also disappointing. Seems each new version of Civ, since 4 gives the user less options. Same with information reports. Less than Civ 5, much less than Civ 4. With the increased complexity level, more information reports should be available. The entire civics scheme seems like a waste of time. The choices are so incremental as to have little impact. Could do away with it and perhaps improve playability. Game is just cumbersome; does not flow. It gets boring. Unit control also cumbersome; can't use keypad for unit movement; keyboard can be much more efficient in a complex game than a mouse alone. This game takes the keyboard out of the unit control equation except for five or six basic functions. City state importance has been escalated and you can't turn them off. It's nice to be able to play a game without the City States when you want to; like Civ 5. Can't do that in 6. This game made me what to try Civ 4 again after a lay off of several years. Civ 4 much more playable and enjoyable.… Expand
  73. SsiNy
    Oct 25, 2016
    4
    I do not speak English well
    Understand me
    Disadvantages 1. terrible ai 2. Diplomatic system degeneration 3. ai doesn't forget penalty 4. productivity and gold tile balance 5. Intuitive UI readability both falling 6. Deleting user-friendliness 7. ai's religion play 8. World Conference deleted 9. No penalty according to the Expansion 10. Science tech tree simplified 11. too    I do not speak English well
    Understand me

    Disadvantages

    1. terrible ai
    2. Diplomatic system degeneration
    3. ai doesn't forget penalty
    4. productivity and gold tile balance
    5. Intuitive UI readability both falling
    6. Deleting user-friendliness
    7. ai's religion play
    8. World Conference deleted
    9. No penalty according to the Expansion
    10. Science tech tree simplified
    11. too many bug

    stop dlc-ing Plz    … Expand
  74. Johny179
    Oct 28, 2016
    4
    + graphics
    + atmosphere

    - AI
    - Terrible AI
    - 1 unit per tile - boring, annoying, in late phase it is not fun but misery
    - builders

    Instead of graphics should Firaxis invest to AI and gameplay, change 1 UPT
  75. Keatz
    Nov 2, 2016
    4
    AI is completely broken and so much worse than CIV 5. AI interactions are completely random. They get pissed off or happy for no reason, complement me on my fleet when I've not a build a ship the entire game, denounce me after I just liberated their city and so on...

    Also go denounced by myself when playing Cleopatra. UI is bad. Weird, slow auto-unit cycling will make you do many    AI is completely broken and so much worse than CIV 5. AI interactions are completely random. They get pissed off or happy for no reason, complement me on my fleet when I've not a build a ship the entire game, denounce me after I just liberated their city and so on...

    Also go denounced by myself when playing Cleopatra.

    UI is bad. Weird, slow auto-unit cycling will make you do many accidental moves. In general, it feels like you have to micro manage units more than CIV 5. The amount of clicking required is just off the charts compared to CIV 5. Especially, spying and trading. You would've thought that devs would make those little quality of life improvement in this iteration, but no.

    General art style of the game is childish/cartoonish. Leaders heads are ridiculously over-sized, their reactions are immature and overstated, as if the game is trying to appeal to 7-year olds.

    Rest of the game is pretty solid, but immersion is broken by the reasons stated above.

    CIV fans: still must have. Others: wait till AI is fixed.    … Expand
  76. snowskisunsea
    Nov 14, 2016
    4
    Civ 5 is almost impossible to beat IMO. Unfortunately, that is proven here. Disappointed after a long wait...

    Cons - Maps are huge. Graphics cartoonish, and I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate the map. Play either too slow or too fast.

    Pros - builders, districts.

    Thanks,
  77. FreddyRama
    Nov 20, 2016
    4
    I am a huge Civ fan, but this iteration really missed the mark in my opinion. Graphically, it was a nice upgrade, but the whole game-play experience changed and not for the better. More city management and expansion at the cost of the feeling of scope that was in previous Civs. I will stick with Civ V until Civ 7 hits.
  78. MCG2017
    Dec 14, 2016
    4
    DOWNER.
    Dunno where to start this.
    This game is terrible. Most dissapppointless game 2016. Devs where supposed to merge all the features from civ 5 and brave new world ( like tourism and religion ) and improve them with new style and new ideas ( sadly the ONLY NEW feature is districts ). The result is really awfull from a to z. Graphics are a shame. Cartoonish style is totally awkward    DOWNER.
    Dunno where to start this.
    This game is terrible. Most dissapppointless game 2016.
    Devs where supposed to merge all the features from civ 5 and brave new world ( like tourism and religion ) and improve them with new style and new ideas ( sadly the ONLY NEW feature is districts ).
    The result is really awfull from a to z.
    Graphics are a shame. Cartoonish style is totally awkward and destroys the xperience of playing a game based in a real world. Theres no sense of realism whatsoever. U feel like staring at a treasure map from some comic not to a rich realistic world ( civ 5 did very well on world graphics and they simply downgrade them ). Graphs from cities are dull. Textures are clunky and boring, also for unities.
    THE AI… they created a new concept.. AS ( Artificial Stupidity ). No further comments. Is a shame.
    Im only talking bout fatal errors otherwise this will be bigger than the bible:
    1) Resources: WHERES gold?.... They ripped the most important resource of human history for social and economy development… and ITS GONE. Whaaaat the hell were they thinking ?
    2) Railway. Same. Whaaaaat?.. I mean WHAAAT
    3) Workers can only make 3 actions. Forces us to lose tons of turns spamming them. Whaat?. Doesn’t make any sense.
    4) Tourism.. whaaat. Tourism have a huge impact on world economy and civ vi totally ignores that. For DEV´s visionary minds tourism is a number that increases with some bonuses from buildings and archeology… dull.
    5) Religion. The most WTFing and shamefull feature. Seriously? Religion is a nonsensicall set of random bonuses chosen by god knows what criteria. Cities and civilizations changes religion once for turn with the RIDICULOUS AND MASSIVE SPAMMING of religion units… whaaat? Catolics turning to muslims and to budism and then to nomatterwhat custom religion with no consecuences . Religion is historically the first cause for war. Is disrespectfull with real history. Doenst make any sense!!. Where is religion pressure and expansion??? They already did well in civ 5 why the **** they screwd this up?

    6) Culture. Same as religion. Culture expansion and culture pressure was pretty ok in civ 5 and they did waaaaaay worse in this game. Wtf

    7) Policies…. Cards?? Random bonuses with ridiculous impact on game. No penalties AT ALL from changing to OPOSITE governments? Terrible.

    8) Tech tree. A joke. Ripped most of the historically relevant techs. LINEAR? Whaaat? Arcade tech tree most suitable for a childish mobile game. This an insult to all civ community.

    9) Combat. Random and nonsensical. Units in a tile prevent any other unit from moving through that tile… even friendly units. So when u are at war u got to lose tons of turns walking around, and u cant deploy your own units properly. Is ridiculous. Archers and swordsman still destroying tanks? facepalm

    I stop xDD that crap. I played about 15-20 hours. im sick even talking about it.
    The only thing with some potential are districts but…. U can really get lost between thounds of requirements. U need lots of games and frustration to start to comprehend how to improve the district placement… in the end the overall production is lesser than previus games so… this needs to be workd on.
    Sorry for the novel. Don’t waste your money. U better wait for further dlcs… or some miracle.    … Expand
  79. Dictat0R
    Jan 6, 2017
    4
    It wasn't very fun for me. I couldn't make much sense in many things, I tried for 4 hours. I don't play it any more it's boring. And the AI didn't make any sense after one encounter I had....
  80. zbironson
    Jan 8, 2017
    4
    The game has lack of feedback to player. I felt the quantaty has replaced the quality. Hundreds of small choices which seems to effect nothing. I gave up after 4 hours of playing, because it felt as endless clicking "Next turn".
    Maybe because it's my first game in the series...
  81. apostaganha
    Feb 17, 2017
    4
    What a disappointment, the graphics seems to be for a 10 year old kid. Its frustrating starting a game and always come back to V... It seems unreal but CIV 5 are 100 times better.
  82. Notapotato
    May 11, 2017
    4
    I was looking forward to this, I always liked the Civ games. This one just seems like a cache grab though. i find it frustrating to play, the UI lags, the AI sucks. It looks pretty but it's such a bad playing experience. I tried it when it first came out and gave up because of the bad AI. I tried it again and the game lags after about 20 turns.

    Awful.
  83. huggoman
    Jul 22, 2018
    4
    - Cartoon animation, big guns dont look like a kid toy
    - Diplomati need more posibillitiess and a new look on algorithm's
    - AI is often the same or lame
    - religions is a fail, need to be rewritten.
  84. JakeHyle
    Feb 25, 2019
    4
    This game has an awful user interface. I had to look up a youtube video to find things that should be obvious like, the Civilopedea button, and the unit promotion button. Never in any other Civ games have these things been difficult to find. Figuring out how to manage a city is a mess of side bars. The game is terrible at conveying information to the player, like when setting a city IThis game has an awful user interface. I had to look up a youtube video to find things that should be obvious like, the Civilopedea button, and the unit promotion button. Never in any other Civ games have these things been difficult to find. Figuring out how to manage a city is a mess of side bars. The game is terrible at conveying information to the player, like when setting a city I was expecting to see the resource icons around the settler indicating how much research and money a tile would be worth if I settled there.

    This game, even now years later, still lacks the sort of obvious things that should have been there to start with like a production queue in cities as the most prominent example.

    This may be a good game, but it's not a good CIV game. Shame of Firaxis for forgetting what a Civ game is.    … Expand
  85. kimchiwarrior
    Aug 19, 2022
    4
    Contrary to the reputation I heard, it was a really boring game for me. The game has been running for a while, so it's dizzying to see a lot of information on the screen when you don't use it.
  86. RackNRoll
    Feb 5, 2020
    4
    в 6 циве много нового, но это ее не спасает. во первых она очень дорогая и за последнее обновление фираксис просят аж полтора куска. то бишь я купил делюкс едишн за 2600.. отдал косарь за райз анд фалл.. и с меня требуют еще полтора за конечный продукт... итого игра обходится в 5100 деревянных.. вы скупердяи! это раз.. два - ваша игра плохо генерирует местность/ресурсы/расстановку игроковв 6 циве много нового, но это ее не спасает. во первых она очень дорогая и за последнее обновление фираксис просят аж полтора куска. то бишь я купил делюкс едишн за 2600.. отдал косарь за райз анд фалл.. и с меня требуют еще полтора за конечный продукт... итого игра обходится в 5100 деревянных.. вы скупердяи! это раз.. два - ваша игра плохо генерирует местность/ресурсы/расстановку игроков (часто бывают случаи когда у тебя либо нет места, либо место есть, но оно плохое, а отсюда нехватка довольствия/промки/еды и т.д.). хотите поиграть за Россию? буюшки - ибо ее кидает напостой в тундру, а игра генерирует голую тундру, без лесов, без ресурсов и в итоге у тебя половина клеток дают 1 еды, 1 промку и 1 веры. с этим игру не выиграть даже против бота, не то что сетевой режим. если уводить поселка в другое место, то пропадает перк на старте игры, смысл тогда от этой нации в вашей игре? вот если бы перк давай еще +1 еду в тундре, то уже было бы честнее и нация стала бы играбельнее. и такое отношение далеко не к одной нации. очень часто игра генерирует то голандию в пустыне, то египет в тундре и все перки той или иной нации пропадают на старте игры. в добавок в игре есть очень читерные нации, типа скифии, шумеров, римлян и т.п., которые на старте тремя юнитами сносят два города, притом что у тебя в запасе есть 3-4 лука. в третьих - полно долбанутых механик аля великому художнику нужен художественный музей для того чтобы он написал картину.. вы прикалываетесь? то есть если я захочу нарисовать картину, то мне нужен музей? мне нужна кисть и холст! более ничего! при всем притом великого художника получаешь раньше, чеи открываешь художественный музей и он у тебя ходит в зад в перед ходов 10 по твоей территории.. такая же песни и с писателями - они у тебя порой вылупляются как на дрожжах, а у тебя нет ячеек для них.. тупая механика.. такая же песня и с великим музыкантом - нет ячейки куда его загнать.. пара бара бам.. короче говоря даже фанатам цивы не советую брать эту сырую игру. в ней опять же куча багов (пример пропадает промка), нет никакого баланса и есть эти долбанные районы, которые занимают всю площадь. все что они сделали за пять косарей так это красивую обвертку.… Expand
  87. Kolst15
    Sep 7, 2020
    4
    While the never-ending climb to be the game that's played on multiple platforms is seldom a very good goal to shoot for, it seems like that was the main priority with Sid Meier's Civilization VI. While I rarely will consign a game of such magnitude with a mixed to negative review, this specific title has me hovering over the 4 score. The AI is frequently nonsensical with commonlyWhile the never-ending climb to be the game that's played on multiple platforms is seldom a very good goal to shoot for, it seems like that was the main priority with Sid Meier's Civilization VI. While I rarely will consign a game of such magnitude with a mixed to negative review, this specific title has me hovering over the 4 score. The AI is frequently nonsensical with commonly ridiculous decisions that throw your game for loops often, which can similarly be enjoyable when juxtaposed with an option to not have a random attack placed on you. The animations are disappointingly ugly. The predecessor went for a look far more realistic to real world images, while these seem like random jpg shots assembled to vaguely recreate a Disney animated character's emotions. While I am nevertheless aware that this is far more of a personal grievance, its still something that should be addressed. I realize I haven't given this game much credit, but I will give it this, its entirely easy to sink 3 hours into this game, it has a classic Civ feel for the most part, and withholds re-playablilty for future games. I'm really of the mindset at the moment that in order to not stray away from the mobile and console releases of the game, they just dumbed down features for the PC edition, which, as such, does not present me with a very enjoyable game. It leaves features, interactions, and situations often half-baked and uninteresting. Which, in my opinion, is half of the game.… Expand
  88. GRUShalashaska
    Sep 2, 2021
    4
    Liebloses, abgespecktes und unprofessionelles "Casual-Civilization" in Kiddy-Optik ala` Free to Play-Games.
    Gerade zum Jubiläum hätte man hier etwas großes erschaffen können. Entstanden ist aber eine Baustelle mit einer Menge verschenktem Potenzial.
  89. Crimson9
    Jul 28, 2023
    4
    Really fun to play with friends.

    Don't bother playing it alone, the AI is absolutely worthless.

    Also the graphics are somehow much worse than 5.

    Districts are a cool idea, but overall its inferior to 5 + Vox Populi.
  90. yrcrazy
    Oct 23, 2016
    3
    Utterly laughable that the developers saw fit to leave Persia, one of the greatest, widest spanning and most important civilizations in the history of mankind out of the basic game. Whats more is that for obvious reasons of political correctness they then include the Kongolese.
  91. Odin-
    May 26, 2017
    3
    Short version: DON'T BUY IT. CIV 5 is much much better.

    Longer version: They’ve made all the wrong decisions in Civ 6. Rather than making Civ less admin focused which historically plagues the series particularly in late games (endless requests of ‘what do you want to build in this or that city?’) – They’ve made it more admin focused with: • The introduction of separate research trees    Short version: DON'T BUY IT. CIV 5 is much much better.

    Longer version: They’ve made all the wrong decisions in Civ 6. Rather than making Civ less admin focused which historically plagues the series particularly in late games (endless requests of ‘what do you want to build in this or that city?’) – They’ve made it more admin focused with:
    • The introduction of separate research trees (nice in theory but becomes a pain the arse in practice)
    • Removing workers and replacing them with builders who are limited to 3 or 4 actions before disappearing, requiring you to build more – No automated improvements to tiles – Seriously!? I’m surprised I have to mention this
    • Expanding cities to tiles requiring the user to individually place minor buildings on tiles (again, nice in theory, but just a pain in the arse when you have halve a dozen cities and want to focus on wars, economic growth, geopolitics and espionage)
    • Government policies are too convoluted – far too many to choose from
    Other problems with it include:
    • A repetitive soundtrack where you want to gauge your ears out. Don’t get me wrong, the quality of the music is fantastic, it’s just that your limited to your nation’s them and those who you have met. This means it’s on continuous repeat. Over and over again. They really needed to stick with the Civ 4 model of music, changing as you switch between eras.
    • Some of the models for units are just terrible. For instance the cruise missile ship looks like a **** fishing boat. Particularly after you’re used to the size of the battleship that it replaces – it’s about the size of a fishing boat. Also destroyers look ****
    • Sound effects for bombing is ****
    • AI is retarded.
    The series is crying out for AI governors to manage cities. Its back to CIV 5 for me.    … Expand
  92. barth_desade
    Dec 5, 2016
    3
    Civ I was a very good game (I'm still playing it on dosbox on my tablet while on my way to work). Civ II was even better though. Civ III again, was a solid game, nice graphic, not as great playability, but it was used as a platform for something really great: Civ IV, which I'm still playing on PC an consider along with CoH as a best game ever. Civ V, with some new features wasn't bad. ItCiv I was a very good game (I'm still playing it on dosbox on my tablet while on my way to work). Civ II was even better though. Civ III again, was a solid game, nice graphic, not as great playability, but it was used as a platform for something really great: Civ IV, which I'm still playing on PC an consider along with CoH as a best game ever. Civ V, with some new features wasn't bad. It wasn't great too, but I thought - oh this again will be a platform to something exceptional. I'll wait for it. I was partially right. Civ V gave birth something exceptional - first ever bad Civilization game for PC. Waste of time, waste of money and disregard for most mature player base in the casual gaming world. If I want something childish, overly simple and unfinished, I can always download the Clash Royale - the playability and sense of achievement is far higher in that one than in new Civ VI.… Expand
  93. woohoomaster
    Oct 21, 2016
    3
    I thought I could play another Civilization game, but found out it's incorrect. I have sweet memories of playing Civ1 on 286, but essentially the game has not changed (for good) ever since. Year after year, same crap. Only change is that it went from somewhat ok board game to confusing and stupid overwhelming card game. While in older Civs you could play as you wanted, it all went to +1 -1I thought I could play another Civilization game, but found out it's incorrect. I have sweet memories of playing Civ1 on 286, but essentially the game has not changed (for good) ever since. Year after year, same crap. Only change is that it went from somewhat ok board game to confusing and stupid overwhelming card game. While in older Civs you could play as you wanted, it all went to +1 -1 mess now. The music and announcer just make me sleep. All the old problems are still there, from endless loading between turns to stupid restrictions (putting up a granary in new city takes same time 500BC and 2000AD), auto-exploring is absolutely random, etc.

    If you're new to the genre, I suggest to go with Civilization 4. If not, I think it's time we put this franchise aside.    … Expand
  94. Qgal5kap
    Apr 27, 2020
    3
    I was very hopeful for this game. What I could see from pre-release gameplay, it looked promising. I've now played 4 full games. I won 3 lost 1. The AI is pretty terrible to be honest. Lots of information is left out. There are issues with diplomacy as well. So far I have no way to tell my opponents to stop sending missionaries through my lands, but they can demand that of me. I also haveI was very hopeful for this game. What I could see from pre-release gameplay, it looked promising. I've now played 4 full games. I won 3 lost 1. The AI is pretty terrible to be honest. Lots of information is left out. There are issues with diplomacy as well. So far I have no way to tell my opponents to stop sending missionaries through my lands, but they can demand that of me. I also have a sound bug I cannot fix yet. I will update my score if this gets fixed with coming patches.

    ** UPDATE **
    This was the game that killed Civilization for me. I haven't played it in years, nor have I ever felt that I wanted to play it again.    … Expand
  95. phentix
    Oct 21, 2016
    3
    Absolutely atrocious user interface as compared to civ V. New gameplay features are pretty cool, but the U.I. seems like it was given to a summer student. Makes playing a really annoying, wait for future patches.
  96. pierrem
    Jan 8, 2017
    3
    Very few novelties, AI dumber than ever, religion handled the worst possible way... A CIV V , only slightly different, but not for the better. Interface has been made really unfriendly compared to CIV V.
    The achievements needed to increase research speed are basically a "double punishment" when you don't have the right ressources from the strart. Really unbalanced.
    The musics are... like    Very few novelties, AI dumber than ever, religion handled the worst possible way... A CIV V , only slightly different, but not for the better. Interface has been made really unfriendly compared to CIV V.
    The achievements needed to increase research speed are basically a "double punishment" when you don't have the right ressources from the strart. Really unbalanced.
    The musics are... like the game. Well chosen, but in a version that feels like the musicians were about to commit suicide.    … Expand
  97. ChikatiloZ
    Nov 1, 2016
    3
    The good : Everything besides the AI
    The AI : 1st encounter : "So happy to meet you, I will send a delegation to send you cookies/pancakes/caviar"
    3 rounds later :" I declare war on you for no reason whatsoever" (even if they have 2 archers and you have 10 fleets of nuclear submarines) Every single round after that they say "Im sorry, I offer you all my stuff if we can make peace" You    The good : Everything besides the AI
    The AI : 1st encounter : "So happy to meet you, I will send a delegation to send you cookies/pancakes/caviar"
    3 rounds later :" I declare war on you for no reason whatsoever" (even if they have 2 archers and you have 10 fleets of nuclear submarines)
    Every single round after that they say "Im sorry, I offer you all my stuff if we can make peace"
    You can either accept, in which case they will send you cookies and declare war on you again within 3 rounds.
    You can destroy them, in which case every round they will offer everything they have over -& over again.
    Being at war with everyone is more enjoyable, because if you're in peace with someone (which almost never happens) they spam you "offers" every round, the offer is usually "you give me a bunch of stuff, i give you nothing, what do you say?" I click NO without reading it.
    Great game with the most retarded AI I've ever seen in a video game.    … Expand
  98. Trainor
    Oct 21, 2016
    3
    Prepare to start scum at least 3x as often as in Civ 5. The importance of your start location to make the most of districts is completely unbalanced at the moment. So to is the dependency on barbarians being turned on for several leaders to make the most of their early game abilities. This is a problem because now barbarians are even more numerous than before and combined with the game'sPrepare to start scum at least 3x as often as in Civ 5. The importance of your start location to make the most of districts is completely unbalanced at the moment. So to is the dependency on barbarians being turned on for several leaders to make the most of their early game abilities. This is a problem because now barbarians are even more numerous than before and combined with the game's already finicky capacity to give you a playable start with the more complex city mechanics it is effectively unplayable for anyone who cares about balance or multiplayer. The number of people who drop out of multiplayer matches by turn 30 is horrendous, far worse than Civ 5 ever was.… Expand
  99. Wiebe
    Feb 27, 2020
    3
    Too much like the old games, but then without the previous DLCs, bad AI, easy to game, showing its age
  100. Generalgameman
    May 21, 2020
    3
    Nice game, and fun to play BUT.... Civ 5 was better (imo ofc), Civ 6 still has awful AI, no map editor, and worst of all, it has became a SeasonPass/DLC nightmare!!! They are copying Paradox and milking the fans for every penny!
    I gave it a 3 because it can be fun. It would have had more if they fixed the dumb AI and stopped exploiting the fans in the name of greed. If they need cash,    Nice game, and fun to play BUT.... Civ 5 was better (imo ofc), Civ 6 still has awful AI, no map editor, and worst of all, it has became a SeasonPass/DLC nightmare!!! They are copying Paradox and milking the fans for every penny!
    I gave it a 3 because it can be fun. It would have had more if they fixed the dumb AI and stopped exploiting the fans in the name of greed. If they need cash, release a Civ 7 or add features, NOT silly nations no one will play (unless your from the Hellhole!).    … Expand
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 »