![]() It was quite bad in 5, and quite good in 6. That's only one part of the game, sure, but it's a big part, and it was the part that changed. Even some of the really big ones like great-person improvements. There isn't a single time in 5 where I thought "man, I really wish I hadn't made XYZ choice on building or tile improving". You really can't fuck up farming in civ 5. Because you have to actually stop and think about it - and can fail. In 6? Just laying down farm arrangements is fun - actually fun - because it's a challenge. In 5, nothing mattered about tile improvements. 6 is the first one where you actually have to sit there and sweat because the things you're going to do have major tradeoffs. It was bad enough that some clones of the same model were able to satisfactorily let you actually script the build order for your cities.Ĭiv 6 isn't overdesigned - rather, 5 is underdesigned. The macro part of the game - the big movements of armies and wars, was interesting (though no moreso than 6), but the micro part of the game, by comparison, was a snoozefest. The problem in civ 5 is everything just had obvious "right decisions." You could work out a build order, and just run it on every city. What do y'all think?Īs much the narrator was fucking amazing in civ 5, the game was way more boring. This post is getting way too long, but I'm curious to hear if anyone else shares these thoughts. But overall, I think 6 is weaker in its feedback to decisions, and suffers from having too many layers of gameplay systems. To reiterate, I'm not saying 6 is bad, just a different game. And I would be like, oh, I guess I just won/lost. Many times I would just be chugging along happily in Civ6, and then suddenly, victory just happens. But again, compare this to the UI of Civ5, where it presents your tourism output, the respective modifiers, and the opponent's culture, all sorts of critical information that lets you know how and what you could/should be doing (or have done) to maximize your tourism output. I think the biggest offender is the tourism screen, which. Is it the best decision? No idea, unless you want to go number hunting in a variety of UIs.Ĭiv6 also has a really cluttered UI and world map which doesn't help either, IMHO. Compare this to slotting most policy cards in Civ6, which often has very little feedback for your decision, leaving you with a vague sense that you have made a good decision. ![]() You instantly see a jump in your global happiness and income and can begin planning your next moves accordingly. Take for instance, adopting the Monarchy policy in 5. Not that they aren't there, but they're just not shown. Civ6 feels like it has a lot more layers of gameplay systems, each one demanding your understanding to fully benefit from - eg: espionage, trade, religion, appeal, etc.įurthermore, the game isn't great at showing you the benefits of your decisions. 5 made it easy to understand the benefits/consequences of your actions somehow. overdesigned somehow? I can't quite put my finger on it, but Civ5 had a certain straightforward simplicity to it that made it very easy to learn, understand, and proceed to act upon. Still, I can't help but feel like Civ6 is just. Having gotten back into Civ6 recently, I can say it grew on me and is definitely a pretty fun game that can stand on its own apart from it's predecessors. Years later however, Civ6 has throughly matured and has much more to offer, and they now can be compared on a much fairer basis.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |