FadedC

Hmm....I must admit that is a little concerning. I read the article that Annatar posted as well that talks about a tactical camera view, but it's not really that reassuring. I can't imagine the PC and console versions are going to be all that different and if they are then that's not necessarily a good thing either.....as trying to create 2 types of games at once usually results in them ending up kind of half assed. Hopefully this won't end up like Deus Ex 2 where the series got destr

Well the arcade elements could be interesting if they are done right. I mean when you get down to it, if your going have any chance of competing in the MMO market you need to have something about your game that makes it very different from the others. Because if you just make a WoW clone then people are going to play WoW instead. With that being said it's a big risk and it will be very tricky to do right. Most likely it will fail, but that's true of every new MMORPG. I actuall

[quote who="Tridus" reply="286" id="2787590"] Quoting Tasunke, reply 285 So ... I heard the AI was REALLY bad. Is this true?? I mean, it seems like the combat AI would be more easy to "improve" due to the 1 unit per tile. I mean right? Computer AIs can handle chess pretty well, and as for the combat AI, its largely like a game of chess. You'd think so, but it has to know how to arrange its units in the right tiles, with ranged guarded by

[quote who="Tridus" reply="102" id="2787489"] Civ 4 had a pretty strong MP community. I doubt anybody but Firaxis knows the size of it relative to the SP one, but for a "niche" it was doing pretty well for itself. Civ 5 didn't manage to reach the same level of support. It's not like people in this market are very demanding in MP: they want SP with some of the AIs replaced by humans. Somehow Firaxis messed that up, with the AI behaving differently in MP and being re

I think it's just gotten to the point where the number of people who are willing to play a very long drawn out turn based multiplayer strategy game (particularly one that does not have simultaenous turns) is a very small niche. When most people want a game that they can play with their friends they usually want one where they don't spend much more time waiting around for their turn then playing. I must admit that while I used to quite happily play some games like that (with strict turn time l

[quote who="Ahroo" reply="293" id="2786343"] The sad thing about it all is both games had a pretty bad start. But everyone is going to praise Civ V for being amazing while continuing to trash this game. When they both suffer from the same exact problems. [/quote] Well I think saying it suffers from the same problems as elemental is a huge exageration. That's like saying someone with the flu suffers from the same problems as someone with the bubonic plague. Both h

[quote who="Mtn_Man" reply="288" id="2784963"] Quoting FadedC, reply 286 I read his review before making the post you responded to. He does not complain about the game being dumbed down. He also discusses the "streamlined" social policy feature which is basically a tech tree with unlockable permanent bonuses as well as the "streamlined" diplomacy feature which he compared to Civilization Revolution. Then there's the complete excision of the r

[quote who="GaelicVigil" reply="279" id="2784451"]Well I've heard that the AI and diplomacy is actually far worse in Civ 5 than Elemental. I've also heard that the late game is a mess. [/quote] Civ 5 does appear to have a bad combat AI. But it's not anywhere close to being bad at the level of elemental AI. The diplomacy system on the other hand is not innately bad, it's more of an information/interface issue. Again it's definitely better then elemental but there is room for

[quote who="Mtn_Man" reply="282" id="2784532"] Quoting FadedC, reply 278 I don't understand the complaints of steamlining or dumbing down for Civ 5. I've seen a number of claims of that, but no actual examples. See Tom Chick's review. [/quote] I read his review before making the post you responded to. He does not complain about the game being dumbed down. In fact some of his complaints relate to the game being too confusing (

[quote who="Mtn_Man" reply="275" id="2784294"] My prediction is that Civilization IV will be the go-to Civilization game for many years to come. From what I've read, Firaxis a bit too much "streamlining" when they designed Civ V. [/quote] I don't understand the complaints of steamlining or dumbing down for Civ 5. I've seen a number of claims of that, but no actual examples. I've played the game and I've found it to be deeper and more complex

Having played considerably more I do still feel that the gameplay mechanics are deeper and better then the original. However I've also come to suspect that 1up may have had a point about the AI. I haven't played quite enough to get a great feel for it, but I've seen it do a disturbing number of completely boneheaded things in it's wars with me. It seems to handle economics fairly well (including when I automate my workers and things like that) but it may not be able to handle the new military

[quote who="blix2006" reply="41" id="2783570"]people are confusing less microing with dumbing down...all they did was remove tedious tasks that just weren't fun.the stacks were very annoying and this system is just alot better.people think that if a sequels UI is cleaned up and more readable its automatically dumbed down console crap......its always comical to see stuff like that. [/quote] I honestly haven't even noticed that much of a reduction of micromanagement, at least compa

[quote who="klaxton499" reply="39" id="2783527"]It's true Civ 5 is less complex than Civ 4. You can almost feel the console influence. I enjoy the new combat system the most. I used to spend hours playing Panzer General and this combat is similar. Maybe that is why I'm glad the rest of the game gets out of the way. You still prioritize your efforts but you are not forced to micro-manage. The new city-states are a nice improvement. Ironically this is w

I just realized it had been telling me what building I just completed the whole time at the bottom of the production menu. Apparently I'm blind.... Now my only real criticism is that I wish i could still see what the other civilizations opinions of me are. I understand that they got rid of the little table full of little modifiers (although I really miss it) but it would be nice to have some better idea if a certain civilization loves me or hates me. Granted I have noticed that civili

[quote who="shadowtongue" reply="27" id="2783238"] Quoting FadedC, reply 25 Quoting wilebill, reply 21Kael is rumored to be porting Fall From Heaven to Civ 5. Oodles and gobs of magic then! Kael has also made two cool mods for Civ 5 already. Added the Celts and the Legions mod. Unfortunately, neither mod will download and install for me. They are working on it. FFH for Civ 5 would be amazing. His legions mod baffles me though as it

[quote who="wilebill" reply="21" id="2783162"]Kael is rumored to be porting Fall From Heaven to Civ 5. Oodles and gobs of magic then! Kael has also made two cool mods for Civ 5 already. Added the Celts and the Legions mod. Unfortunately, neither mod will download and install for me. They are working on it. [/quote] FFH for Civ 5 would be amazing. His legions mod baffles me though as it removes the one unit per hex rule which is one of the best things about Civ 5 a

I've noticed that when I automated my workers they replaced a lot of farms with trading posts too. On the other hand I've decided I may be happy with that. Empire happiness often limits my growth way more then food. Sadly I haven't found an option to show hexes, maybe there is one somewhere I missed somehow. Currently though what drives me the most nuts is that when I complete a new building it doesn't tell me what it was. Next time I play I'll have to see if there is any option for t

[quote who="Melamine" reply="722" id="2782731"] Quoting FadedC, reply 713 So I stand by my statement that you may have a strong opinion beyond what is justified. That would be fine, if that was an objective statement. What exactly qualifies as justifiable criticism? Agreeing with you? [/quote] So you still think it's justified to claim that it's horrible that steam assumes that people sometimes cheat in multiplayer games? That's the ty

[quote who="falconne2" reply="717" id="2782635"] Quoting scratchthepitch, reply 714 Thanks to the annoying behavior of the likes of Firbolg, FadedC, falconne2, and Rebell44 I will never be using your service or buy any of your products. I did what now? [/quote] You expressed an opinion that is different from his. That's not allowed. The logical response is to boycott a service you have nothing to do with.

[quote who="Melamine" reply="705" id="2782284"] As for your claims that he was not engaging in ad hominem, you should consider rereading his statements. To claim that someone is on a "crusade" is to not argue a point but to discredit an opponent. A valid, logically-sound response to my argument could resemble, "I disagree with your points for the following reasons." An ad hominem attack, however, reads like, "I disagree with you because you're crazy." [/quote] Fo

[quote who="Melamine" reply="697" id="2781985"] Quoting FadedC, reply 696 I realize that you are on a crusade against Steam and you may have some good points. But I feel like you just going by a knee jerk reaction to criticize every single thing about them whether it's logical or not. Ah, the eventual descent into ad hominem. Because I, by pointing out obvious and troubling flaws, must be on an illogical crusade (in your terms). Pa

[quote who="Melamine" reply="693" id="2781445"]Apply the parent/grandparent situation: If non-tech-savvy users are likely to get hijacked, then the system needs to accommodate them. Most credit cards have fraud protection (if your card is stolen or cardmember account hacked, you are not liable for any charges incurred, if you report the issue within 60 days or so). Valve's customer policies are inferior to those of the major banks? Ouch. Or consider this situation:

[quote who="Melamine" reply="689" id="2781417"] Valve could easily verify this by checking connection logs and such. It's a terrible policy because it puts convenience (for Valve) ahead of the customer. I'm inclined to condemn a system that assumes that its users are potential cheaters. [/quote] You don't think it's users are potential cheaters? Have you ever played an online first person shooter like modern warfare? The number of people who blatantly

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="231" id="2781403"]Well, I hope some form of Religion/ Ideology functionality is modded back into Civ V ... and if/when it happens, It'd be cool if it were "better" than the Civ IV version ... IE a city could have X% of a religion, instead of simply true/false having the religion ... in other words, a city could be 33% Church of Water and 67% Church of Fire ... as a rough example. [/quote] I'm not going to miss religion very much f

[quote who="Melamine" reply="687" id="2781381"] Another troubling policy: If your account is VAC-banned while hijacked, Valve will not remove the ban. Many stolen accounts are used for cheating and many get banned via VAC. Enjoy. [/quote] Well that only means that you can't play on their multiplayer servers not that you lose access to your games. I'm inclined to agree with that policy, otherwise everyone who cheats would just claim that their account was stolen.<