>CIV VI will be dumbed down with clash of clans graphics
>Ars technica "improved" their site into a web 2.0 shithole
http://arstechnica.com/
I thought that this horrible fashion was already passing. So post "improvements" in technology.
>>54518094
Fantastic don't you think? Our screens keep increasing in resolution and definition, at the same time information density only decreases.
Firefox with that shitty Australis UI.
Also the direction they've headed in general, with all that extra bloat and social media shit built-in.
I had to switch to cyberfox.
Flat/Minimal/Material design is here to stay and realistic graphics have always been shit. Never hold up well and don't have any charm whatsoever.
>>54518094
Civ VI sounds pretty good: cities on multiple tiles, combining units (civilization revolution had that already, I don't know why Civ V didn't), etc. Civ VI sounds like what Civ V should have been but whatever.
The graphics though. It's terrible. This cartoony shit isn't cool for a game like that.
>>54518094
>Encryption is “essential tradecraft” of terrorists, FBI director says
Not even. The france terror attack terrorists used literally zero encryption. God I hate authoritarians.
>>54518634
Go away pedo
>>54518648
>check arstechnica
Why would they do that?
ITT: People who never played Civ III and Civ IV
Civ was a cartoon game before you were born.
Ars looks fucking horrid now, but it has nothing to due with your web 2.0 memes.
Civ VI looks fine though. CIV has always been a series that targets people with "average" hardware. You were never going to get stunning visuals.
But I already have civ 5 grumle grumble grumble
Why would I buy another version of a game I already own that is essentially the same game but with less content.
oh jesus no Ars, can we not set it to the normal latest at top list?
>I play strategy games for the art style
>>54518634
>some terrorists don't use encryption, therefore encryption isn't useful to terrorists
>>54518856
The point is that taking away freedom doesn't thwart terrorists.
>>54518764
And the graphics of the old civ had nothing to do with the hardware limitation we had.
Nowadays any computer is powerful enough to display enough details with a decent quality. Just look at civ 5, it was pretty good.
>>54518764
Civ2 improved on Civ graphics, and Civ3 improved greatly on Civ2 graphics.
Thank god, the last few civ games were dogshit.
The first civilization was way simpler.
>>54518582
That..... is pretty accurate.
Civ has always sucked, turn based strategy "games" are basically the fatlus of RTS in which it's what you go to when you can't manage a proper RTS. Not to worry as RTS is dead anyway due to MOBA faggots and their one man nothing games but you had two great decades of passing up actual challenging games but had to dumb it down because you had a heart attack after managing 15 units.
>Muh two month long psuedo chess game
>Pony express offered quicker moves in the 1800s with distance chess
>other guy leaves the turn he starts losing
>wasted month and a half
>reddit has a circlejerk board based solely off one total fucking loser who kept a civ game going for a decade and doing nothing in it for 99% of its time
lol civ has always sucked
>>54519753
>>54518094
>http://arstechnica.com/
Wtf is wrong with this site?
>>54518856
>essential
>>54520456
It's different from the old one. Not worse, not better, just DIFFERENT.
/g/ doesn't want to admit it but they are exactly the same as all the grandmas who can't get over typewriters that they claim they hate so much, difference is instead of 70s shit they hold onto 00s shit
>>54518593
Yea dude, I cant fucking wait. I love Civ 5, and I don't game, but Civ is just awesome.
>2016
>playing civ anything other than 2
>not playing paradox games
>>54520558
I'd play paradox games if their shit didn't either crash on startup or crash when I try to start a game
Civ IV was the last one for me
Civ V just looked like a graphics boost plus some minor tweaks
On my book a radical change in mechanics is the only justification for a new game
>>54521042
They're way better than they used to be. Starting with CK2, they've really modernized their lineup, but it really does feel like they've lost alot of the depth that made them interesting in the first place.
>>54520482
Did you even look at the picture? Look at all the fucking wasted space.
>>54519669
>I'm too stupid to play Civ.
Civ I was good
Civ II was great
Civ III was great
Civ IV was good
Civ V was shit
Guys, OP is trolling you!
Here's a real screenshot!
>>54521191
Nice Endless Legend screenie
>>54521308
CVILIZATION
>>54521316
see what I did there?
>nostalgia for the wrong and shit game
What's the matter, broodwar was too hard for you?
still got old version opened up
>>54518094
>he's a grown man who plays video games
>>54522015
Then why are they rated 17+ for the vast majority as adults to play them?
>>54521333
Blizzard get your head out you ass and patch BW to support higher resolutions.
>>54521047
Civ V was probably the biggest change from its predecessor in the entire series
>>54518786
Because it's new.
>>54521191
Endless Legend > Civ 5.
I really hope they steal some mechanics for civ6.
Go back to /v/
>>54521047
I like V simply because I fucking loathed stacks of doom.
>>54521047
t. never played civ
Are we not men?
>>54523957
where's the day 1 dlc list? and the pay-to-win shop?
>>54518634
That stupid motherfucker also just said that the rise in murder is caused by cops being afraid to do their jobs because of being on camera. He also presented no evidence that the murder rate is rising.
>today
>get on /g/ - techloligy
>windows 10 locked by botnet support thread
>what does he say thread
>videogame bitching thread
Are we being raided?
