Review: Civilization V (PC)

For me, the Civilization series really epitomizes some of the traits I appreciate the most in a computer game: strategy, emergent story, great replayability. My first encounter with Civ 1 at a friend's house changed the way I view games with my collection of arcade-like titles turning into a pale shadow of true gaming. Each title in the series has gone on to become one of my most played games. If you want an unbiased review, go hunting elsewhere, but for all the civ addicts and those who share my tastes and want to know whether Firaxis's latest offering is indeed the "most well-designed Civ ever developed", read on...

The Civilization games are empire building sims that play from the founding of your civilization's first settlement to, potentially, futuristic wars and space colonization in the year 2050. While the epic scope of the series has been retained, much of the appeal of these games (particularly Civ 3 and Civ 4) has been in all the different facets of your civilization that you have to manage, yet in Civ 5 things have been greatly simplified. The original Civilization was originally based on the Civilization boardgame, and now with this fifth incarnation, it feels more like a boardgame than ever. This is mainly because of the 1 military unit and 1 non-military unity per tile rule.

Civ 1

There are plenty of other simplifications with staple elements simplified or removed: a simpler tech tree, no tax slider (to control research or luxury spending) and no tech trading. New additions in Civ 4 and its expansions have been cut: religion, espionage and corporations. To compensate for all the subtractions, there are some new complications such as city states, added as minor civs that don't compete to win the game but whose alliances provide various useful bonuses.

The end result though is that Civ 5 plays less like an empire sim and more like a strategy board game. Fortunately I like boardgames, so this isn't necessarily bad. In particular, combat is more fun with greater tactics involved than simply building up a "stack of doom". And although it might feel simpler, there are probably just as many viable strategic options as before.

This brings us to the one clear weakness of the game: the AI. On the fair playing field level (prince), they're just not very competitive, particularly in combat. Smart use of terrain, ranged bombardment and tactical withdrawals will win against an AI opponent's superior forces. It's nice that good play can make such a difference, but disappointing that in only my 3rd game I was able to win the major war of the game with only a handful of casualties.

Civ 5 - my Aztecs conquering the Russians

I've also experienced a number of annoying glitches. For example, I can't scroll left with the mouse on my dual screen set-up and the graphics become weirdly corrupted after about 2 hours of play. Fortunately the game is sufficiently captivating and still possessing of the "one more turn" quality so that I'll play despite the bugs and press on to harder difficulties until I find a level that's suitably challenging.

Final Score: 8 / 10 - an excellent turn-based strategy that has yet to prove it belongs aside its illustrious forefathers

Notes on my personal rating scale: They are entirely based on my personal feelings about the game - I don't rate a game on its own merits but rather how much I've enjoyed and how much time it's sucking out of my life. Strategy games will do well and shooters poorly because those are my gaming preferences.

0-4 = Poor game that I won't be bothering to play any more
5-7 = Decent game - fun enough that I'll try play it some more if I have the time
8-10 = Good game that I'll be playing a lot more or have already finished and greatly enjoyed

With this review complete, I look forward to bringing you some of my Civ 5 experiences as I tackle the higher difficulty levels.