Where did it all go so wrong, /v/?
>>337658319
I honestly don't understand what they were thinking.
It's not so much how ugly it looks as how unsuitable it looks for a grid based game.
>>337658319
It went wrong when they decided that they needed to cut loses from their previously released games and make a sequel of their flagship.
>>337658319
I think it was when some faggot decided to make the graphics all cartoony like that.
>>337658319
Sid Meier said to the Civ VI team
>make it look mobile. kids love mobile games.
>giving a fuck about how a civ game looks
>>337658319
>>337658940
this
mobile is the worst thing to happen in this industry
>it's a /v/ hates colorful and distinguishable graphics because mobile games also use them thread
>>337658319
>Create a new art direction for the game map to be more readable and clean
>Your fanbase goes apeshit
>In a game where graphics don't matter at all
Must be hard to cater to autists
>>337659370
I just think it looks gay. I thought 4 and 5 did a great job of making really pretty geography. 6 just looks garish as fuck.
>>337659370
I might have gotten into mobile games if they didn't all look like this though
>/v/ keeps getting mad about Civ 6
>mfw I'm still ok just playing Civ V
CivV is shit anyway
>make promo art like this when the graphics look like that
at least keep your style coherent
>>337658319
It went wrong in the 'WHAT WE EXPECTED' part.
>>337659656
I....I play Clash of Clans...
>>337659703
It was only a matter of time before this faggot showed up. Let me guess, Skyrim sucks too because it isn't Morrowind?
>>337659593
I would say that Civ VI is looking closer to IV than V. It's got more color, smaller units, and a relatively simpler look.
>>337659808Morrowind's pretty great, dude.Don't be shittin' on my Morrowind.
>>337659370
>/v/ hates colorful and distinguishable graphics
/v/ likes IV tho
>>337659659
Civ V?
Fuck that kiddieshit, I'm still playing Civ4: Colonization and loving it.
I honestly would play the original if it wasn't so dependant on you making your own notes. Keeping track of what native villages want and what they train you in is a pain in the ass.
>>337660384
how come they don't make montezuma look mexican
>>337658319
So what you basically expected was for Civ 6 to look exactly like Civ V ?
>>337660646
I don't ever remember making notes in Civ 4, but it's been long enough I don't remember how that particular thing works.
I tried Colonization. It was okay, but didn't really do it for me.
>>337660802
I meant the original Colonization from early 90s.
>>337661087
Oh word. I was wondering if you were just way more anal about shit than I am.
>expecting/wanting Civ VI to look exactly like V
>caring about graphics in a Civ game
>>337661282
We didn't want it to look exactly like 5. We wanted it to look better than 5. Instead it looks worse.
>>337660740
civ ii ideally
>>337661282
>caring about graphics in a Civ game
If i'm going to look at something for 12 hours straight at least make it so its not hideous
>>337661390
>12 hours straight
Confirmed that you belong here.
>>337659906
*miss!* *miss!* *miss!* *miss!*
My issue isn't that it just looks cartoony, it's that the textures themselves look like distant terrain with a low LOD. I don't mind vivid colors but I dislike the specific color schemes they've shown.
The water looks entirely different from everything else, it's so much more naturalistic looking than land. The mountains look horrible and everything looks like the game forgot to load the textures.
Yes it's more readable than CiV but there weren't any real issues with that game's visuals. It looks very classy.
I like all the mechanical changes they've announced. I love the fog of war being a sea chart. I like a whole lot of what I've heard of it, I just don't like how it looks very much. I hope there's enough capacity with mod support to change textures. Hell, just higher res textures so it doesn't look like lumpy plastic would be great. Turn down the brightness, it looks like it's trying to assault my eyes with the intensity of the yellow and green.
Ultimately graphics won't matter so much if the gameplay's good. But I would ideally like well done graphics too so it doesn't become an eyesore.
>>337661857
>weren't any real issues with that game's visuals
People hated Civ Vs graphics when it just came out. They prefered the ol' CivIV style.
>>337659559
Graphics do matter though.
I care that a game that's meant to make me feel like a ruler during an actual historical event has been turned into a muh minimalist board game.
>>337659723
Why doesn't the actual game look like that?
>>337659746
Please stop then. You're dooming us all.
>>337658319
but you already have the game on top, it's called civ5. There's no point rebranding civ5 to civ6 and releasing that, is there?
>tfw I prefer the bottom
Resours tiles stand out more.
>>337662601
I never got into strategy games until around BNW's release and picked up CiV. After that I went and played 4, and at least looked over the others as well. I think 5 had the nicest visual style aside from graphical clarity or technological limitations. I grew up on PC games in the 90s, just never strategy games, so I have no issues with graphics in older games.
CiV looks the nicest to me. I don't know why people got so butthurt over it. This one legitimately doesn't look as nice to me. It's not bad, it's clean, but it just looks too clean and sterile to me.
>>337662768
This. Civ keeps bringing out new games w/o really changing much of anything to justify a new version.
Pick your favourite of either CIv IV or Civ V and just play that.
Once Civ 10 comes out you might wanna take a look at that to see if it might be worth an upgrade.
>>337659370
it actually looks bad
it looks like a phone game
this is not a good thing
Sid Meier has been really trying to break into the iOS market. He must've drunk the kool-aid about enormous growth potential there!!! So he's burning his PC playerbase behind him on the already fairly proven fact that the only things popular on iphones are essentially just gambling apps designed to hook dumbasses and keep them shoving quarters into in-app purchasing. His last two games were iOS turds that flopped on smartphones and PC. Someone needs to talk to him before he runs Firaxis into the ground like MicroProse. Although the damage was already done--Civ has become a 'buy it in 2 years' type game after Civ5 and Beyond Earth have set that paradigm.
>>337658319
Too much my lovely strategy games are being killed by its owners.
CnC series, Age Of Empires Series and now Civilization. as long as the new Civ will be released in mobile phone graphics, then Civ will be lost forever and ever (it is also enough that beyond earth sucks and really disgusting and boring unlike V) i guess it is the right time for me to commit seppuku if that shit will stay on that shitty graphics
>>337658319
The death of Leonard Nimoy.
If Civ 6 doesn't fit the bill, at least I'll have Endless Legend to soften the blow.
>>337663240
I like beyond earth with rising tide. Water cities are nice to play around with. The game is still inferior to Civ5 though.
I feel the same as you do. Its incredibly depressing to see another series going into the trash. This is going to be like Command and Conquer 4 all over again. Another series lost to the abyss all because they cunts are clearly going to design this game for tablets.
I am going to replay Civ 5, what's some good balance mods I can use?
>>337659559
I just hope that they won't ruin strategic view. It's the only thing that keeps me from vomiting violently while playing civ5
>>337663596
man a lot of pain have been seen to video games. all because of greedy fucks who want to make sure they gain more money than what it is supposed to be gained from. especially on micro transaction thing going on.
Not even for the strategy games but even other games like silent hill, Resident Evil, Call of Duty, Tekken, Tomb Rider, Devil May Cry, Final Fantasy, Digimon and more for heavens sake.
>>337663721
You must be kidding mate ? Who the fuck plays the game in strategic view ?
I mean, if they spend all the time and money they saved on the graphics on actual gameplay then I'm entirely fine with that decision
>>337663917
microtransaction really is unsavoury and is ruining a lot of good fames.
>>337664029
also dont forget the unimaginable huge amount of DLC released to some games. whomever invented the DLC stuff must be blown up in syria or iraq or somewhere. fucking hell.
OH HERRO DERE! wanna buy a game? 60 DORRAH! 60 DORRAH FOR GAME! no 60 dorrah no game! also we has these many many DRC for this games to you idiots go and buy.
t. capcom
>>337658319
They said their making it more easily moddable, so I'm holding out hope for a decent texture mod
>>337658319
>Cartoon graphic civ VI
Oh no /v/ why did you let me know of this atrocity
>>337664168
Some DLC is justifyable if it coincides with expansion packs that game developers previously used to puplish. These would typically add a lot of new content to the game and about a similar amount of gameplay time as the original title. Typically there was one to two expansions for a game.
These days DLC exists that add very little to the game, are expensive and are churned out at a constant rate.
>muh grayficks
fuck off
Surprised this didn't get posted right away
>>337664519
The AAA games with 4 planned DLCs per game is cancer. Season passes are shit. Its all shit.
My one wish for the gaming industry is that every game/IP with more than 5 titles be shut down.
>>337661726
It's called AGL, Anon.
>>337659559
>graphics don't matter
maybe you're the autist m8
>>337664526
It's about art direction, not graphics.
>>337658319
>Where did it all go so wrong, /v/?
Word of mouth went wrong, and thats the only thing so far, seeing how ITS NOT OUT YET.
At least wait for E3 footage before shitposting.
>>337664607
I just want another crash and to have all this geek culture shit go away, fucking christ
>>337664519
expansion packs are fine. example of Civ v bnw or CnC Generals Zero Hour or Age of Mythology The Titans.
But sadly we have a cancerous DLC spam like Evolve.
>>337661726
>shitting on Morrowind because it is an actual RPG
newfag
>>337664912
I don't see how it would happen though. Either of those things. And nerd shit is relegated to tumblr now, and lumped in with other cancerous shit most people hate, so I think its in a decent place right now.
It's funny to me that when you put screenshots of civ5 and civ6 next to eachother, civ5 looks like the sequel.
Is it possible in this stage in development for Firaxis to unfuck this abortion of an artstyle? Not saying it's at all likely but is it possible?
>>337665667
not with 2K owning their ass. if 2K wills to make this game a money grabbing genre then yes it will go and do it.
>>337664603
images switch too fast
>>337658319
i don't care how it looks... WILL IT NOT RUN LIKE SHIT???
>>337665840
there's something wrong with your browser, switches take a full second for me
>>337658319
Honestly it wouldn't look that bad if they didn't use neon puke colors and they actually had some fucking textures instead of this plastic lego shit
>above: a screenshot of a Civ game with objectively bad graphics
>below: a game where you can tell what the units are without giant icons floating above them, like the first 4 civ games
...k
>>337665889
I'm getting sick of this meme
Stop trying to play a huge map on a toaster, fucking retard
>It's bad because it looks different
Remember when games were about gameplay, /v/?
>>337666149
You need the units to have comically big swords in order to tell what they are?
Either you're fucking braindead or you need glasses, dipshit
>>337666376
lmao, you literally have giant floating symbols above every unit telling you what they are in civ V. that's how astronomically they fucked up the graphics in that game.
get some self-respect and stop defending the indefensible
>>337658319
Speak for yourself, pleb.
>>337658940
http://www.cnet.com/news/sid-meier-lets-fly-with-mobile-game-and-why-youll-be-happy-to-pay/
Sid Meier is unironically mobile cancer now.
R.I.P. in pieces
>>337658319
You now realize that children who had civ 5 as their first civ game are now old enough to post on /v/
>>337666486
>civ v players think civ vi is 'dumbing down civ' when they've been playing the dumbed down sequel this whole time
>>337666624
>That feel when I'm in that category
I played Civilization Revolution on the DS first but it was a shitty experience. Civ 5 was my first real game but I watched a lot of Colonization and found that game very interesting before that.
>>337666461
Even without the symbols I could tell what they are at a distance.
Not everybody has the eyesight of a fucking cave bat like you, anon.
>>337662946
This is probably how it's gonna be.
>>337666324
Civ6 continues the gameplay decisions made by Civ5, so it's already guaranteed to be shit.
Fun fact: the original designer of Civ5, Jon Shafer, wrote an article on Gamasutra a year or so after Civ5 base released disowning the decision to do 1 unit per tile and hexes. Half a decade later, he's making a 4X in the style of Civilization 4 called "At the Gates," about barbarians during Roman times.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/jonshafer/jon-shafers-at-the-gates
gg Civ5 fags.
>>337658319
Everyone's spamming mobile game but firaxis has been releasing stuff on mobile for ages, you can get xcom1 on tablets and play civ 5 with a touch screen.
>>337666687
To add to this, it felt like Civ only exploded in popularity amongst non-traditional fans because it was always $7.50 on sale.
>>337658319
> muh Dead On Arrival
How does a fucking 'downgrade' in graphics make it DOA?
It plays faster and more efficient.
If you switch it around you cucks would be saying some shit like
> "muh shitty optimization, annoying mechanics, they sacrificed all that for a better -looking graphic durr"
>>337666750
then why the fuck are the symbols even there? no other civ game needs this. it's cause at a glance, when you're actually playing the game and not looking at screenshots, it takes too long to identify units in civ V. so they skipped making the graphics functional and just slapped some bubbles on em
>>337666776
At the gates looks really fucking good. Shafer may have fucked up Civ V, but I understand what he was going for and I think he's a really smart guy. And he did this podcast interview thing with Soren Johnson (civ IV creator) and it made sense when he explained why he thought making Civ V like he did would be a good idea.
>>337659808
Skyrim is bad because it's stale.
>>337666836
This was definitely when I first played it myself but I enjoyed footage of older civs.
Civ games used to be grand strategy games, now they're 'good' mobile games, whatever that means.
Why are so many big devs attracted to mobile platform?
Mobile LITERALLY puts you in a frame where you can't do much with your game. It has sooo many disadvantages it makes it borderline insane to even make serious games for mobile.
>>337666924
>It plays faster and more efficient
You don't even know that, dumbass.
>>337666939
>And he did this podcast interview thing with Soren Johnson (civ IV creator) and it made sense when he explained why he thought making Civ V like he did would be a good idea.
He basically admitted he was a Panzer General fanboy. Not that PG is a bad game, of course, it's just that PG is a tactics game, not a strategy game. Mixing strategy and tactics on the same plane invariably fucks up the gameplay and sense of scale, which is why series like Total War (which has both tactics and strategy) end up separating them entirely into two different planes of play. The overworld has the strategy, but as soon as you start a battle, it moves into an entirely new scaled environment separate form the overworld.
Firaxis for some reason hasn't learned this...
>>337666924
Here's your fucking reply
my biggest problem is the rocky border between hills and ocean tbdesu
it looks atrocious and makes no sense geologically
>>337666687
>civ 4 players think civ v is 'dumbing down civ' when they've been playing the dumbed down sequel this whole time
2>3>5>4
>>337658319
Holy shit is this real?
Civilization titles improve just about as much as sports games.
This shit has been the same game for 10 years, what they do is simply polish up the graphics a bit and modify the roster.
Stop buying this garbage.
>>337667029
Civ was never a 'grand strategy' game. Civ is almost its own genre. I like to call it a 'tile game', because it's about extracting yields from the land with cities and converting that into advantages, rather than a province-based game.
>>337658319
Although Civ 6 looks like garbage aesthetically, it might still turn out to be a great game.
Some of my favorite games of all times - Dwarf Fortress and Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup - Barely has any graphics at all, and they're still amazing.
I will pirate Civ VI on release, see if it's any good, then I'll give it my hate if it turns out it's just as bad as it looks. Otherwise, I will buy the game and support the company, and you faggots cannot stop me.
>>337660740
Considering the company I think it's perfectly reasonable to have expected a carbon copy of Civ 5.
>>337658319
Reminds me of SimCity Societies.
>>337666776
>muh unit stacking
the argument that 1UPT made the AI more shit is stupid, it couldnt handle stacks either, the game was trivially easy and encouraged armies that are at least 50% catapults due to the way collateral damage worked
and dont get me started on generals military academies stacking which meant that by the Renaissance your units start with lvl4-5, which means your trebuches have +collateral abilities, which not only makes the game even easier it also further encourages you to stack siege engines
the fact that two units fighting HAD to end with 1 unit dead was dumb too
its fucking ridiculous trash
>>337667189
Endless Legends fixed that. Seeing by how much they're taking from that maybe they'll take the combat split up as well.
>>337667316
how can you possibly rank 3 above 4 when 4 basically fixed the brokenness of 3.
In 4 the corruption/waste issue is solved and ICS is dead.
That's like saying civ 1 is better than civ 2, makes no sense.
>>337667509
>the fact that two units fighting HAD to end with 1 unit dead was dumb too
Uh, except the entire line of horsemen had a skill that allowed them to hit & run?
That's how you use that entire unit branch
am I weird for thinking the second image looks better aesthetically?
>>337667368
but they already announced two changes that are pretty damn big - the limited unit stacking and multi-tile cities
civ5 was sufficiently different from 4 too, with them moving to hexes and 1UPT and a different religion and social policies system
>we've gone full circle and now cartoony graphics are the cool thing to hate and everyone wants muh realism
i was wrong, there will never be a crash and video games will never be saved. anytime we make progress the contrarian hipsters will just change their minds based on whats now popular and clamor for something else
>>337667727
what the fuck are you talking about
>>337667638
>1 type of units
wew lad, also are you going to ignore every other point?
>Trailer is fucking awesome
>Game looks like trash
T-They'll change it, right?
What are the chances they're still changing the graphics to release?
>>337667316
Civ 2 is the best Civ to this date.
The game only had one real flaw which was that the Leonardo's Workshop wonder was a little bit gamebreakingly powerful, and therefore rushing for that was the best strategic option every time, which is rather dull.
>>337667727
>going back is progress
Also do you honesly think this shit fits the Civilization vibe? Let alone it's fucking trailer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvBf6WBatk0
>>337667836
if we shitpost enough, meme magic might just work
>>337667509
>the argument that 1UPT made the AI more shit is stupid
you say that as if it's the only argument against 1upt, or even the primary one
>and dont get me started on generals military academies stacking which meant that by the Renaissance your units start with lvl4-5,
how is this bad lol. why do you hate strong, powerful options in games? i bet you actually like building wonders that give +6 faith/turn in civ V, because powerful options would be 'broken'
btw no one promotes +collateral you retard, everyone takes city raider. and yes, city raider III trebs/cannons are awesome. doesn't encourage you to further stack them at all. once you get city raider III out the gate your siege survival rate is ridiculously high so you don't have to build so many
>the fact that two units fighting HAD to end with 1 unit dead was dumb too
No, it isn't, at all. this was necessary in V because 1upt in less units. Civ IV is on a much bigger scale. A civ IV fight involves many times more units than a civ V fight, so it's perfectly reasonable to lose multiple units per turn.
How do you become such a big sperg that you complain about the graphics of a Civ game?
>>337667791
Why would I address a misinformed argument?
You don't seem to realize that you defeated your own argument
>stacks are bad because stacking siege engines
>good siege weapons lead to stacks of siege weapons
yet you don't realize
>the solution to stacks are siege engines, so a single siege engine does proportionally more damage to a stack of them
>horse-type units deal bonus damage to siege weapons with very little risk of being hurt back
saddle up the horses lad, stop complaining about game mechanics you don't understand
but what if the game is actually good
I mean I'm sure it will be trash but a man can dream right
>>337664603
>>337665840
Updated.
>>337667934
civ vi's graphics fit the civilization vibe better than civ v's graphics, I'll tell you that right now.
the trailer is god awful though, yeah
It will definitely also be released on mobile.
>>337668131
Civ5 was also on tablets, dumbass.
>>337667986
>graphics
You mean art direction? Shit's fairly important in any game.
>>337667970
>why do you hate strong, powerful options in games?
it makes you snowball even more than usually
>no one promotes +collateral you retard, everyone takes city raider
well you should have some siege engines with collateral, then you can destroy any stack by feeding a catapult or two into it
>i bet you actually like building wonders that give +6 faith/turn in civ V, because powerful options would be 'br
> you retard
making assumptions and adhoms good job
>>337668080
those mountains and trees maaaan
that's retarded even for mobile game
>>337667986
Geez, I don't know why people care about the art direction on a VIDEO game
>>337668043
>stop complaining about game mechanics you don't understand
I was talking about the AI learn to read, I know how to counter stacks but the AI does not
I played the fucking game for over 1000 hours, I understand the mechanics, the AI doesnt
>>337668308
>>337668216
You didn't answer my question. You did you become such a sperg?
>>337668239
Superior threes.
It reminds me of civ revolution. They had the make 3 units of the same type into an army in revolution too
>>337668434
>>337668434
cartoonish graphics often imply cartoonish gameplay
>>337668495
>cartoonish gameplay
what does that even mean?
>>337668238
>snowball
the entirety of this genre is built around snowballing you big dingus. the amount of relevant world powers is always down to 2-4 in the late game for this reason. and that goes for all civ games and all 4x games. so if your reasoning for taking away fun, powerful options is to 'fix' snowballing (something that doesn't need fixing), then it's not a very good one, because as you can see in V, nerfing shit in a 4x game doesn't remove snowballing from a 4x game.
btw that's not an adhom you retard
if i had said 'you are a retard, therefore you are wrong', that would be an adhom. I merely called you a retard in addition to arguing with you.
>>337668489
>>337668495
haha just messing with ya bro
These hourly threads are making me realise how muddy and bland civ graphics have been.
>>337659559
But Civ V is perfectly readable to me.
Do you have some problem with your eyes?
>>337664790
>>337659559
if the game could effectively be played with no consequence with ascii art, the graphics don't matter, they are only a plus.
>>337661361
I think civ 3 and civ 5 were the best for keeping everything very readable while making the graphics look good.
civ 6, while i can handle the more cartoony look (o prefer it, when you want to talk about modding, its easier to make something fit in and be cartoony then it is to have something realistic) the map looks harder to read at a glance.
>>337663063
personally, some games i'm ok with just a cosmetic/skin shift, god knows i have 3 or 4 versions of monopoly, all different settings but still exactly the same game.
plus, small changes in game balance can also justify a new release, granted i don't play civ enough to really talk about this aspect.
>>337663240
>>337663596
Command and conquer died because ea bought westwood and fired 90% of the staff.
>>337663917
Re isn't dead exactly,
CoD isn't dead either, granted i hate the 120$ price point they sell the games at, its largely the same multiplayer wise its always been, weather you like it or not.
tekken, first i heard of this being dead, what happened?
tomb raider i have no nostalgia for, and the recent entries suck (up to the reboot) and old entries controll like fucking garbage. if anything, rise of and reboot were good enough to justify a 50% off sale buying point
final fantacy... well... when the company who made the games basically died due to mergers, was it a shock? the last good one was 6 and the only 3d one to hold my interest was 9.
were any of the digimon games good?
>>337664480
not to mention cartoony graphics are able to run games better because they rely on style than brute forcing realism.
>>337665889
>>337666260
there is legitimately no reason a game should run bad if you have a quad core cpu, ANY quad core cpu. its not like ai has gotten better, what the fuck takes up so much cpu?
>>337659808
Skyrim is bad but not because it isn't Morrowind, it's bad because of million other reasons.
>>337666717
civ revolution was my first civ, through not because it was a childhood game, i played it on the 360 because my computer broke (psu blew up) and i had beaten all my 360 games at the time and needing something to calm my nerves over possibly losing every single component in my computer.
it wasnt bad, or at least as bad as everyone makes it out to play, i have civ 5 and every other civ now but rarely play them, they are a kind of game i only play when i am in the mood for a civ like experience.
>>337667172
you have to be a massive fuck up to make a cartoony game play like shit, and i don't believe the devs are that shitty.
>>337658940
This. It is literally designed for mobile
So, I'd like to start playing the Civ series, what's the better for me ?
>>337658319
below looks better
>>337663606
COMMUNITY PATCH PROJECT
Makes Civ 5 into an actually good game
>>337669316
4 or 2
>>337668624
>aking away fun, powerful options
whats so fun about pressing the make academy button?
>(something that doesn't need fixing)
well I disagree, I'd like that phase to be as late in the game as possible, there is a reason I almost always drop my civ campaigns around the renaissance era. Hell these days I never actually save a game when playing civ, whenever I get bored or have to do something else I alt-f4 out of it and then just restart again
played civ games starting with 3 and never enjoyed the late game, the moment I begin to snowball out of control all the fun is instantly lost
>>337669342
This is all you need and its a great game, but without it the game is garbage.
Regarding Civ6 I don't mind the artstyle, and after reading the promo material and a few articles about it I like the direction that they claim to be pursuing, specifically the city planning aspects and the stated ambition to make it less predictable and gamey. I'm looking forward to it.
>>337669706
What does being white have to do with anything?
>>337658319
>all the features that were in V and its expansions will be in VI
>spreading cities
>better combat
>interesting science progression
I don't know about you but so far the artstyle seems to be the literally only bad thing about this game. If enough people complain about the shitty aesthetics then it's entirely possible they'll tweak it a bit, but otherwise this seems much more promising than Beyond Earth was.
i dont mind the art style, but i throw up in my mouth every time i see those colours
>>337669743
>whats so fun about pressing the make academy button?
I think you realize that this is a fucking absurd thing to say. There's no mechanical skill whatsoever in a turn-based game like this. It's all decision making, which is done by pressing buttons. Btw, military academies don't add experience to units, and you can't build them until miltary science which is a renaissance tech. You're thinking of settling great generals as super specialists. Btw, unless you've been warring non stop the whole game with an imperialistic leader, you wouldn't have enough great generals to get city raider III trebs/cannons. that almost never happens. THe way it works is this:
barracks + theocracy + sometimes vassalage + a great general or two if you want to get enough experience for level 4 units out of the gate. In doing that, your'e sacrificing stronger economic options like organized religion, pacifism, and bureaucracy to get those stronger military units. it's a perfectly reasonable trade off
>well I disagree, I'd like that phase to be as late in the game as possible, there is a reason I almost always drop my civ campaigns around the renaissance era. Hell these days I never actually save a game when playing civ, whenever I get bored or have to do something else I alt-f4 out of it and then just restart again
played civ games starting with 3 and never enjoyed the late game, the moment I begin to snowball out of control all the fun is instantly lost
You're not playing on a difficulty level high enough for your skill level if this is a consistent issue. Push yourself. Even the best civ 4 players can't win every time on deity, there's always a challenge available.
I like the simplistic artstyle but I have the (probably unfounded) hope that the simplistic graphics will allow the game to have much, much larger world maps.
>>337660646
Civ4 Colonization was great, I just wish it had a larger map, and that the native AI was a little better about reacting to hostile Europeans.
>>337667316
Except for combat (which 3 was the best of the series), 4 improved on every aspect of 3. Better culture and border development, better resource management, and more dynamic civilization customizations with Civics.
Did anyone else notice the music in the announcement trailer is recycled from a film soundtrack? It actually makes me hopeful that they won't waste money on a big symphonic soundtrack like they did in 5. It was great music, but I typically play without music. That symphonic score had to have been a significant budgetary factor, and they probably could have diverted some of that money to making the game suck so bad on release day.
>>337670074
>i dont mind the artstyle, but i hate the artstyle
fucking neck yourself
>>337658319
These fucking trees.
>>337667316
There is no need to play any Civ before IV, except for nostalgia's sake.
>>337658319
>Allegedly going to have all the features that were in CiV expansions i.e. religion, espionage, trade routes, archaeology and all that junk
>Endless Legend style cities and wonders
>AI leaders are allegedly going to have way more personality
>Not purely 1 UPT anymore
>Overhauled tech tree and victory conditions for far more varied and interesting gameplay
>Full modding support
You tell me, because so far it sounds pretty promising and at the very least worth a pirate.
>>337663940
It's superior in every way, you insipid nerd.
>>337658319
civ is for casuals anyway, might as well enjoy it
I'm just glad that Civ VI will have a system where you can change the time of day throughout the game
Whole playthroughs during nighttime for maximum comfy
>>337659370
Dude it looks like a downgrade from V. Do you really think it looks good?
>>337669706
This dude has obviously been spending too much time in interracial porn threads.
>>337667316
shit taste, senpai
>>337664897
Those graphics look pretty advanced to just be placeholders. I really doubt the final version will be significantly different.
If they needed temporary assets they could just have reused those of V and then reveal the release version later.
>>337671735
Right side looks like an unfinished version of left side.
If they add the details to the dirt and horses, like shadows of a few black lines here and there, it will be better.
They aren't "advanced" at all, they are very basic, not sophisticated, lacking detail.
In interviews a developer said thats what they want, a basic, easier to differentiate visual style without much richness so players don't get lost or something, whatever bullshit.
But anyway, just wanted to tell you that your argument is bad, even if you are incidentally right at the end.
>>337671906
a cartoon style will inevitably have less detailed texture, otherwise it wouldn't be a cartoon style anymore.
>>337671906
Adding onto this, they said they designed this after players who spent a large amount of the time zoomed out as far as possible. All the screenshots so far have been very close up, I wonder how it will look when seen from a distance.
>>337660740
Civ V with higher fidelity would be fine.
>50 LESS TECHNOLOGIES THAN CIV 5
>>337668480
>Trees are just literally shitty doodles on the ground
Seriously? I prefer civ 6 over this garbage.
>>337658319
Why did you expect Civ V from Civ 6?
This reminds me of the SimCity 4 to 5 transition. Graphics went from semi-realistic to extremely cartoony, amd gameplay predictably got destroyed
>>337672594
That's just in battle, the forests are removed for clarity. Outside of battle they're fully rendered, you can see them in the upper part of that image.
>>337669342
Requirements:
Civilization V (.279 version)
Gods and Kings Expansion
Brave New World Expansion
All Leader DLC
Ancient Wonders DLC
Windows 7-10
>all leader DLC
>ancien wonders DLC
DROPPED
R
O
P
P
E
D
GAME RUINED
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>337658319
Call to Power is still the king
I miss 2005-2010 when REALISTIC graphics and real colours were used instead of WOW clone shit
>>337668080
do we have to wait till e3 for more info/pics?
>>337673289
Playing with pieces like that must be confusing as fuck.
>>337673772
That's why only the plebist of plebs do it.
I'd rather have the old V graphics exactly like they are than this shit. What's the point of making new assets over reusing the old ones if they're not an upgrade?
I actually look forward to these graphics.
It's a refreshing change.
It's very 2016.
I'm genuinely confused about why anyone would ever play Civ in the first place when the entire Grand Strategy genre exists.
Even at their most basic, GSGs have a thousand times more depth and freedom than Civ at its best. The only difference is that grand strategy games have a coloured map of the world, while Civ has actual buildings, units and shit.
>>337673159
>he didn't buy the complete edition
Jesus Christ
>>337674760
Civ is not grand strategy, maybe you'll ask next why someone plays total war when grand strategy exists
I did not expect this from Firaxis. All their games had a nice balanced style and polished graphics, XCOM2 was supper pretty. And now they jump the shark like this, I don't get it, it's not like they're on a tight budget.
>>337674759
>It's very 2016.
Possibly the best way to put this.
>>337674878
Total War is more of a combat sim, while Civ has the same general concept as grand strategy games
>>337659139
It's a pretty strong indicator of target audience.
Civ has been dumbed down shit since V anyway.
>>337660646
I don't know how you can go back to unit stacks. As much as I love 4 and acknowledge as the superior game in content and polish, 5's combat is just worlds better. To the point I just can't play the older games anymore because of all the cheesy bullshit. I'd rather deal with 5's shitty AI and lackluster content.
>>337674760
Good point, I guess I've been foolishly holding on to Civilization in the hope that it will eventually evolve into a grand strategy game. It has such great potential.
The developers just basically rehash the same bullshit game over and over without adding any complexity to the game.
The fanboys keep gobbling it up making a big fuss with every new iteration that this or that little detail isn't exactly the same as it was in it's predecessor.
>>337674760
People play them for completely different reasons.
Civ is turn-based 4x for people who want something comfortable to play that kills time and lets you nurture a society from a small village to a thriving empire in more ways than just seeing bigger numbers on a spreadsheet and borders expanding.
Like Sim City/Cities:Skyline, you get to build it from the ground up however you want. How do you still not get this? It's like a Civ player asking why people play RTS instead of TBS 4x.
First, a lot of people play both and second they play them for completely different reasons. Are you literally retarded?
>>337675120
>I guess I've been foolishly holding on to Civilization in the hope that it will eventually evolve into a grand strategy game
Why would you want 4x to "evolve" into a gsg?
Are you also hoping FPS games will turn into MOBAs?
>>337658319
Civilization has never been fun. It's just ahistorical kiddy shit.
Fuck off.
>>337666624
I'm 25 and Civ5 was my first Civ game.
>>337675228
'why not ?' I say.
>>337674934
>>337674760
literal retard
>>337659370
So you're too retarded to recognize the mobile visual style and you just think it's about colorful graphics?
>>337666687
They are right though.
Dumbing down an already dumbed down game is just worse.
>>337675548
I know a lot of people who went back to 4 because they said they couldn't beat 5.
>>337658319
i dont like the art style but you have a photo from a decent angle then you have this zoomed in shit that makes the shit game look even shittier. i cant tell where one tiles ends and the other begins on this angle
>>337675120
>I've been foolishly holding on to Civilization in the hope that it will eventually evolve into a grand strategy game.
Kek what?
"I've been foolish to stick with Burger King in the hope they will eventually start making spaghetti"
>>337675789
it's not that farfetched. Civ has everything in place. All it would take is to add more complexity to the game.
>>337666924
>graphics
>artstyle
Apply yourself
>>337663240
Believe in Amplitude. And assorted indie studios.But fuck Stardock and Paradox.
>>337676050
Then just play Stellaris or any of the EUs or CKs or Vicky you fucking moron.
Jesus christ cry more faggots
>>337666687
SMAC was the peak of the 4X genre. Two decades later NOTHING has surpassed it.
Not in lore.
Not in gameplay.
Not in TECHNOLOGY.
>>337676204
It seems indie studios emerge to save gaming in these dark ages. The old game dev giants seem to be incapable of coming up with anything novel these days unless it's some new gimmick that can make them easy money
What if they're skimping on the graphics to make the AI super good as well as the other aspects of the game?
>>337676204
How bad is Beyond Earth, really? I've been turned off by all the people saying CiV is way better but I've played Alpha Centauri and loved the fuck out of that and just want a similar feeling game.
>>337676204
>Stardock
What's wrong with it? I don't follow GalCiv much.
>>337672594
He's rusing. I'd post proper screenshots but I play on toaster with min settings.
>>337676286
but what i really want is a game where you can guide a civilization on earth from its beginning through it's development.
>>337660735
Montezuma wasn't Mexican. Modern day mexicans are a mix of aboriginal, spanish coloonial, and black africans. (not to mention there are like 12 mexican aboriginal ethnicities.) Montezuma belonged to just 1 of those ethnicities, so he doesn't look like the totally mongrel mexicans of today look
>>337676204
Stardock published Offworld Trading Company, the most innovative RTS of the past 2-3 years, you big old goob
>>337672106
>I wonder how it will look when seen from a distance.
>>337671238
not even him, I think you're retarded. The strategic view is more cluttered than normal gameplay and it doesn't even make the game run much better.
>>337676650
>i'll just splice 3 screenshots together and act as if thats zoomed out
>>337676650
looks pretty comfy tbqh sen-pai
>>337676526
BE is just hugely disappointing. It's an underachiever considering its aspirations and its mismanagement really speaks to the inexperience of the team working behind it.
They took the Civ 5 engine and just threw in a bunch of half-baked systems that didn't really work with the existing mechanics, and often failed pretty hard. They kept talking about needing to go "further" but never actually did.
It's not a broken slog like Pandora but it doesn't come together to be more than the sum of its parts like Civ 5 either.
>>337676526
>and just want a similar feeling game.
You will not get it from BE. Try Pandora, more true to the spirit of SMAC but still lacking its TECHNOLOGY.
>>337660384
What the fuck was his problem? He always acts like a dick to everyone in my game and is always the first guy to get rekt
>>337676629
>4X thread
>he talks about RTS
Stardock also published GalCiv3. And we all know how that turned out.
did someone say endless legend screenshots?
>>337660384
>/v/ likes IV tho
only after it got 2-3 expansions
>>337676963
>>337676769
Looks zoomed out to me senpai.
>>337658319
Why are they going back to the shitty cartoony design?
>>337676850
>BE
fuck. I didn't even want to get that game off humble bundle for $2 more bucks.
No amount of expansions is going to fix that piece of shit with the art direction and the lame civs. Those civs just feel like they were shit out compared to how AC's were defined and unique.
>>337677053
>>337658319
I honestly wasn't and still isn't a fan of how Civ V did things visually.
For crying out loud you can barely tell what anything actually looks like without first zooming in. And at that point you've already messed up your design.
I don't care if it's more "realistic" or whatever. Civilization shouldn't look like a Google Maps screen-shot with satellite view on, it's a horrible thing to aim towards.
Everything is cluttered in Civ V. And fuck that. And no this isn't just me apologizing for Civ VI but rather all Civ games other than Civ V. Civ V is the outlier here.
When the fuck did Civ V gain this many fans who aren't even familiar withother Civ or Civ like games?
Civ V was alright but this is really starting to make me dislike it. Civ V was a mistake. There I said it. It was an outlier and I am glad they're leaving it behind because it wasn't the train to go on.
>>337676963
>>337677053The DoF makes it look even better
>BAWWWWWWW NOT GRIMDARK ENOUGH
>>337677152
>>337677006
this is common with every new iteration of civ
people are used to playing with all the expansions.
then when vanilla next iteration comes out, everyone is like where is my religion and my espionage etc etc. Worst Civ ever - DROPPED
then once all the dlc are out everyone is like yeah nah this is actually the best civ ever.
Why does /v/ hate civ V all of a sudden? Is this just a meme gabblygoopers invented because it was mentioned on that SVU episode making fun of them?
>>337677079
I'm more concerned of the art direction itself making the game feel smaller (less clustered buildings, less people per unit). The 1UPT staying was bad enough.
>>337677234
>>337677264
>Why does /v/ hate civ V all of a sudden?
Either hipsters or shills
>Master of Magic never.
Why did the best game of the genre die first?
>>337677339
>>337677108
Art direction and factions were the least of that game's problems.
>>337677152
>Wild Clans city in the frozen tundra
Absolute madman.
>>337677339
you know it's a great game when you see people on /v/ constantly shitposting about it rather than actually playing it.
>>337677516
every time
>>337677074
I guess you are just retarded then. Stitching 20 closeup shots of your nose together doesn't make a zoomed out shot of your nose.
>>337674760
probably because nobody can play a grand strategy game without falling asleep
>>337677606
Wherever there is profit to be made, we are there.
