OK, so I use a Mac and I want to play Civ V and Medal or Honor (or is it Close Combat?). What sort of system do I have to buy to play both?
It’s not clear that CivV will be released on Mac. All the previous iterations have but from here:
“Well with Civ V in particular - that’s PC exclusive, and will always be. You’re not going to be seeing that on any other platforms, that’s where we designed the game. And because of that we were able to take advantage of the latest tech stuff, Steamworks, DirectX 11, Multi-core etc… We didn’t really want to compromise that and say ‘Now, how can we make this work somewhere else…’.”. And that’s why it’s a single platform release: “I think that if you’re going to make a game for PC, then that’s what you should do.”
You’re inferring something from that quote that isn’t there (not to mention cherry picking sentences). That interview really didn’t have anything to do with Macs. It was pcomparing PC games to consoles. The original question was about whether they considered using Move or Kinect for Civ and the whole conversation is about PC vs Console, and how strategy games work better on PC. Everything he says in the response is as true of Macs as it is PCs. I read it as him using “PC exclusive” as shorthand for “won’t be ported to consoles.”
But we’ll see.
Yeah, that’s why I said it’s not clear (it is clear that it’s not coming out on consoles). Under some definitions of pc a mac can be included. But it’s my understanding that macs don’t have DirectX and it’s not a simple job to port it across.
I’m going to have to buy an entirely new computer if I want to be able to play Civ 5, and since my primary online Civ opponent is a Mac user anyway, it looks like Civ 5 might not be happening for me. At least, not for quite some time. Too bad, because I do think it looks cool, but I draw the line at buying an entirely new machine just for one game. Even if it is Civ. 
Pshaw, I’ll give it two weeks before you can download him and others on CivFanatics for free. No games fanbase beats the rabid juggernaut of Civ players.
Because of the hex system and individual units per hex I can’t wait to see fan created historical battles. The first one I’m looking forward to making is the entire Waterloo campaign.
Even with eight units, having to move them around the map separately, and having to figure out each turn how to move each unit such that you can get them where they’re going without wasting moves, does not sound like fun to me. Apparently you can swap two units if they are adjacent, but if anything, that sounds even more complicated. And with two or three times as many units? Yikes.
My point was, there seems to be a long list of things that have been removed in Civ 5 (the items I mentioned were just off the top of my head), and by comparison, very little that has been added. But oh boy, those graphics that I’ll be turning off anyway, in order to speed up the game, sure are pretty!
With each previous version of Civ, I’ve felt the excitement before its release, and not been disappointed; each iteration has been better than the last. This time I’m just not seeing it. But, to each his own and all that.
Okay, your points about army management aside (because it looks like we differ in this respect so no point arguing) I think this statement is wrong too.
Yes things have been removed, but other things have been added. Off the top of my head:
[ul]
[li]City states[/li][li]Hexes not squares - more tactical[/li][li]Entirely new diplomacy system - less predictable and with more options[/li][li]Entirely new economic model[/li][li]Finite resources - this is MORE complex than the binary have/don’t have system in previous civ where if you had it you immediately had it empire wide and it was infinite[/li][li]Cultural expansion is gradual and happens organically rather than suddenly[/li][li]New civic system where you use culture to “buy” advancements[/li][/ul]
How is this removing things without adding new things?
I agree with GESanc, I’m not seeing what Civ 5 is bring to the table except what I consider to be fixes to the blatant mistakes of 4 (infinite resources and units), whereas it seems they took away a number of possibilities by basically giving you one way to play each civilization.
Hexes? WHO CARES
New Diplomacy system? When has any diplomacy system EVER been decent?
All these things are tweaks. These aren’t additions.
Oh well, have to save something for the expansions, right? Yeah, Civ V Complete might be a buy.
How so?
:rolleyes: What? Every iteration of Civilization has been ‘tweaks’ as you define them. How drastically different is Civ I to Civ IV?
Aside from the graphics, not very. Good point. Which wouldn’t be a problem if they didn’t want me to pay them real money for it.
Oh I see your main issue - the game won’t be free. I agree that’s a real reason to be critical of it.
Exactly. I don’t see why I should buy a game I’ve already owned for a decade.
Considering the bitching, what are they going to add? Squares?
Civ4 was all about religion. It had to come out.
-Joe
Goddamn. The game isn’t even out yet, but everyone’s already an expert on it.
Do I want to pay another $10 for Babylon?
I did, but I don’t think it’s a necessity. It’ll just be a matter of time before someone Mods them in anyway.
I’m just trying to highlight what I’ve seen and read about, of course I could be totally wrong and find myself playing a shell of a strategy game because it’s been so streamlined. But I just don’t anticipate that from what I know of it.
Obviously time will tell on this, but then a couple of expansion packs down the road the game will probably be very different anyway and likely much better so that doesn’t bother me.
This may be of interest to people: