I would say this: Civ V leaders had agendas (called personalities) but these were hidden from the player - it is therefore a common misconception that Civ VI introduced agendas; it merely made them visible to the player
Civ IV was built on the Gamebryo engine, a licensed engine and not a a proprietary one. It was most famously used by Bethesda in their Elder Scrolls and Fallout games. However, given the modular nature of the engine, much of it was heavily modified for use in Civ IV.
CIV5 was my introduction to the 4X genre and i'm glad I got into it. CiV games are now too casual for me and I can't get over the "stupid IA with massive bonus" difficulty meter anymore. But i'm still pleased it's here and popular and getting new people into the genre.
If you play Civ VI on the Prince level you play against an AI with NO massive bonuses. Lower difficulties actually favor the player and only the higher difficulty levels favor the AI. I'm NOT certain that there still isn't some cheating in the background but overall I find it the deepest, most engaging strategy game of it's type.
@@havan56civ 5 is amazing..I always play on on immortal..Anything lower and ai bonuses are hardly noticable. Emperor is the absolute lowest setting o play on
Great video. One game not mentioned here I loved at the time was Civ: Call to Power made by Activision in the middle of that time when there were disputes around the rights to the game. What I loved is it went to the year 3000 if I remember right. Into some far future tech and let you build cities underwater and things in space. Something I've been disappointed the main series has never tried to expand to.
This is exactly what I wanted as a kid playing civilization since SNES civilization beyond was pretty cool although it was basically a mod rather than a stand alone game I thought the game should start in the Neolithic Era before fire to an intergalactic age much like Stellaris but you know with less exploration grind and pointless systems. I kind of like the region mechanic in humankind, where only one city can occupy a region and are claimed by scouts building outposts
I've been subscribed for the last 2 years, I knew I shouldnt unsub and just wait, hope there are other loyal fans out there like me who awaited your return!
you did such a great job on this video-respect! overall this video did a better research on the history of a game, then any IGN"pro" coverage of any game. realy like the effort you had put in this video.
We got a secondhand pc from my uncle and all his 5 1/4" floppies. Played civ forever till we finally got a new pc when civ 3 came out. STILL play at least a campaign a year
A lot of people see Beyond Earth as a black sheep and honestly I have to admit that it’s my favorite game of the series over Civ V. I just love the idea of controlling the future instead of rewriting existing history.
Love the history deep dive, but on an unrelated note i think the song in this video is used by my dentist office when they put me on hold lol, ik it might seem like a weird connection but i just had an appointment the other day and i swear i recognized the melody
A little disappointed you didn’t dig into Civilization Revolution, that’s where I personally got introduced to the series. Now 4X and RTS games in general are a favorite of mine.. a slippery addiction, but a favorite nonetheless
I bought a new computer in 93 to play this game. Almost flunked out of college due to being addicted to civ I. Have played many other versions since but disliked 5 and hate 6, i hope they can reign it back in, but that is unlikely. Still play older versions.
With what's going on with video game climate and industry since the narrator mentioned Take-Two owns Firaxis, anyone worried how Sid Meier's Civilization VII be like? Will it make or break the game?
I don't see anything wrong with it. I own all of the games (excluding the first two since they're not sold on any current stores) and I really love Beyond Earth, it's easily on par with 3 in my book.
I still don't like how they did districts in Civ VI. It may make gameplay slightly more interesting in some situations. But I really think they should have come up with a better way of implementing the idea. Maybe sub tiles of a tile. So you don't have cities that take up entire regions map wise. But still have some strategy.
CIV6 is the first in the series that I don't like. I have gone back to playing CIV5 and I'm still enjoying it. At some point if 7 doesn't come out for awhile, I will give 6 another shot.
Civilization V was the high point in the series. Civ6 a nonsense. I didnt play I,II. 3rd I did, but ancient times, 4th ok, 5th best. If they dont make Civ VII good, I l never again hope for it to further.
What I would like for Civ 7: Unit sizes: return them to civ 5 sizes. I hated the 4 infantry, two cab per unit. Also, remove that “Victory spin” after an attack with the tanks and other late game units. It’s stupid. Unique unit overhaul: what’s the point of playing different civs? They’re all virtually the same with the exception of 1-2 units, one district, and an ability. Overhaul the unique unit system to be full on unique militaries and a tech tree that is slightly different depending on which Civ you play as. Remove all generic units. For instance, the only thing that currently differentiates japan from say America is a single unit (samurai and rough riders) and a district and their abilities. Otherwise, they are identical. Why not have America have the same units as England until the colonial era where America has the minutemen or continental army while England gets redcoats. Up until that point, America and England would have the same military. English longbowmen, long swords men, broad swords men, and the like while France would have their own military units with their own strengths and abilities each, different from what England and America would have in earlier eras. Japan would be different too. From the early eras, every unit of theirs would be samurai or their predecessors and would double as archers. As the eras progress, Japan stays with samurai but they get better armor and new abilities even. For instance, when the renaissance era comes, your samurai now do a matchlock volley before charging into mele combat. But they still double as archers. Then there’s your Japanese spearmen. In early eras, they would be yari samurai, then in the medieval era, they upgrade to naginata samurai, then in the renaissance, they become ashigairus. Japan stays with samurai well after most other civs have moved completely off of sword units. Japan doesn’t go off of swords until almost the end of the industrial era, when the Boshin War happened. You might be wondering what would happen with Rome after a certain time because we know from history that the empire split and then the western half fell in the 4th century while the eastern half fell in the mid 15th century. Here’s what could happen if Civ 7 does this unique unit overhaul: during the medieval era, the Roman Empire takes on an Eastern Roman military with Greek fire throwers and Varangian guard as your pikemen type units and everything else to match the eastern Romans. Then in the renaissance, you get a screen that says you can choose one of two paths. You can choose Italy, or the Ottoman Empire. If you choose Italy, your military automatically changes to historically correct Italian units from the 1400’s like Swiss guard for your spear men. Should you choose the Ottoman Empire option, your military becomes an ottoman military with janissaries and sephi cavalry and all that stuff. Speaking of which, France and other European nations were ruled by Rome in the classical era, so during that unit, as France, you would have Gaulic auxilas as your sword units, reflecting the time in history. In the late game, Germany would get mechanized infantry (half tracks) and fighter jets (me-262) before everyone else because that’s how military history happened. New eras: yes, there needs to be more eras with more military development. They need to add the Bronze Age and separate the medieval era into the early, high, and late Middle Ages. There also needs to be the colonial era. Districts: that needs to be tempered. I understand the docks, entertainment, neighborhood, water park, Industrial, and airport districts, but WHY in this good game do we need the commercial, culture, government, religious, or campus districts??? Couldn’t the buildings of those districts just be part of the city center? Is that not how it is in real life? Heck, even some great wonders could go into the city center. Fewer districts means more space for farming. nukes: what an improvement over Civ 5, just one complaint, nukes need to eliminate cities. Artillery and city defenses: the purpose of artillery is that you are able to destroy enemy walls while outranging city defenses. Catapults should have a range of 3 with a promotion while that range comes with cannons. Late game artillery gets a range of 4 (except for German rail artillery gets a range of 10 but only gets limited uses and has a two turn set up but will completely annihilate a city’s defenses in one shot) and MLRS units get a range of 5. Anyway, sorry for that long spiel, but hopefully Firaxis and 2K see this
Civ V for me was a lame simpleton, for the console crowds. I have not touched any Civ title after that. Even with sucky stack of doom, IV will always be the best Civ.
Yeah, CIV IV was the best one, the previous ones were fine too. V & VI are ok'ish but it's not the same, the AI is plain stupid and there is simply a point where you know you're going to win and it becomes boring, sometimes it happens very soon, it lost the replayability
Civ IV is simply the best. Been playing it non stop since 2005. The amount of mods and custom scenarios is insane and the modding scene is still very active. It is the most balanced, most mechanically perfect game in the series. I didn't like Civ V, and Civ VI even less so, however, I think some of the systems introduced in V and VI were great but poorly executed in the context of the games.
I want to say the HUMANKIND this game is a goddamn bad game, expensive and you played once then you didn't want to open it again, it is ridiculous. I just bought a copy of Civilization VI maybe I will try it later.
I just wish they get back to they way CIV IV was and evolve from there .... the new civilizations really suck, they lack a lot of fun and replayability from the previous games, mostly due to the completely stupid AI and the consequence of static situation where none of the civs is smart enough to conquer others .... Basically most of the game you just snowball to victory and noone can stop you, because few units are enough to defend from the stupid AIs so most of the game is super boring and not challenging at all. Also adding volcanoes and floods (both useless) instead of fixing the basics like combat, diplomacy, AI - I really don't know who makes the decisions there but it's really getting worse and worse, not to mention the CIV VI graphics which is just childish... I'm waiting for CIV VII hoping they will listen to the fans and figure out they're going the wrong way.
Игры
Civilization is one of the best games ever. Point.
The first computer game I fell in love with. I spent hours and hours with my childhood best friend playing this. A true classic
The 33% rule explains why - 1% of the time it bugs out.
I would say this: Civ V leaders had agendas (called personalities) but these were hidden from the player - it is therefore a common misconception that Civ VI introduced agendas; it merely made them visible to the player
Civ IV was built on the Gamebryo engine, a licensed engine and not a a proprietary one. It was most famously used by Bethesda in their Elder Scrolls and Fallout games. However, given the modular nature of the engine, much of it was heavily modified for use in Civ IV.
Aren't most games built on third party engines?
CIV5 was my introduction to the 4X genre and i'm glad I got into it.
CiV games are now too casual for me and I can't get over the "stupid IA with massive bonus" difficulty meter anymore.
But i'm still pleased it's here and popular and getting new people into the genre.
If you play Civ VI on the Prince level you play against an AI with NO massive bonuses. Lower difficulties actually favor the player and only the higher difficulty levels favor the AI. I'm NOT certain that there still isn't some cheating in the background but overall I find it the deepest, most engaging strategy game of it's type.
Civ 4 actually has good AI for the most part, but it is a common problem in this series
Play online dude , why you still playing the AI 😂 if you play online even if you have bonuses ill eun you into the ground
It's only on immortal and above where ai get massive bonuses..CIV 5 is a masterpiece
@@havan56civ 5 is amazing..I always play on on immortal..Anything lower and ai bonuses are hardly noticable. Emperor is the absolute lowest setting o play on
Great video. One game not mentioned here I loved at the time was Civ: Call to Power made by Activision in the middle of that time when there were disputes around the rights to the game. What I loved is it went to the year 3000 if I remember right. Into some far future tech and let you build cities underwater and things in space. Something I've been disappointed the main series has never tried to expand to.
Call to Power was nothing but a shamelessly inferior attempt to cash in on Meier's success.
I liked the idea of slave and abolishinist.
This is exactly what I wanted as a kid playing civilization since SNES civilization beyond was pretty cool although it was basically a mod rather than a stand alone game I thought the game should start in the Neolithic Era before fire to an intergalactic age much like Stellaris but you know with less exploration grind and pointless systems. I kind of like the region mechanic in humankind, where only one city can occupy a region and are claimed by scouts building outposts
I remember playing the Nintendo DS version. Each game would take 3-5 hours xD Had a lot of fun with it!
I've been subscribed for the last 2 years, I knew I shouldnt unsub and just wait, hope there are other loyal fans out there like me who awaited your return!
civ 4 is my fav of the series
Much better than your previous video, audio quality is a lot better and you're speaking more clearly.
Good job.
Excellent video explaining the series. I stopped playing at Civ III and sure missed out a lot.
I gotta say that Age of Empires is a good runner up.
loyal fan here boii
you did such a great job on this video-respect! overall this video did a better research on the history of a game, then any IGN"pro" coverage of any game. realy like the effort you had put in this video.
Thank you so much for showing us this!
Nice video, mate! Keep 'em coming.
Very good overview. I can't believe this video has not received more views.
We got a secondhand pc from my uncle and all his 5 1/4" floppies. Played civ forever till we finally got a new pc when civ 3 came out. STILL play at least a campaign a year
A lot of people see Beyond Earth as a black sheep and honestly I have to admit that it’s my favorite game of the series over Civ V. I just love the idea of controlling the future instead of rewriting existing history.
Civ 2 Nostalgia
I love Civ 6 and regularly play and beat it. It's always enjoyable and every civilization feels a little different
Civ 6 is awful..I play cive 5
Great content mate, keep the good work 🎉🎉🎉
I've got 1 to 5 and still go back to old versions. Must be time to buy number6
Love the history deep dive, but on an unrelated note i think the song in this video is used by my dentist office when they put me on hold lol, ik it might seem like a weird connection but i just had an appointment the other day and i swear i recognized the melody
Thank you for the video.
Kudos for polish version of technology tree (from Civilization board game, I presume)! 2:20
We are back baby. You shall not be forgotten. Thus it shall be.
The best AI by a mile is in civ 4 which is why I like it the most.
A little disappointed you didn’t dig into Civilization Revolution, that’s where I personally got introduced to the series. Now 4X and RTS games in general are a favorite of mine.. a slippery addiction, but a favorite nonetheless
like itttttt) watching now, intersting
My first civilization was revolution and I loved it
Master of Orion and Civ 1 are the games that I have played the most
The civilization licence passes hands a lot... Weird...
Civ 3 and 4 were the best.
I bought a new computer in 93 to play this game. Almost flunked out of college due to being addicted to civ I. Have played many other versions since but disliked 5 and hate 6, i hope they can reign it back in, but that is unlikely. Still play older versions.
When is Civilization 7 coming?
With what's going on with video game climate and industry since the narrator mentioned Take-Two owns Firaxis, anyone worried how Sid Meier's Civilization VII be like? Will it make or break the game?
Will you ever make dota 2 videoes again?
1:11: That's not a floppy disk. It's an SD card in the shell of a floppy disk.
1:12, why is there an SD card in that floppy disk? wtf?
No idea but good eye
@11:30 is metacritic reliable??
CIV2 is my favorite.
Civ 6 is fun
Good video. You sound like G-Man.
Civ 5 is by far the best
we dont talk about Beyond earth
I don't see anything wrong with it. I own all of the games (excluding the first two since they're not sold on any current stores) and I really love Beyond Earth, it's easily on par with 3 in my book.
I have almost 700 hours on civ4 and still playing
Good video but you sound really Monotonous. I had to speed up the video to 1.25 to make it sound normal.
I'm dying to know what are this games names that appear on the start?!?!?!? :oooooooo
On mobile : World of empire 2
One of the beginning ones in space was Master of Orion
5:59 Korean video rental shop
anyone else notice the "Hammurabisucks" city at 3:13
Yeah lol and Anti China
You didn't mention Activision Civ3
Beyond Earth not included here or in the Steam franchise sale. I didn’t love the game, but harsh, lol
Ahh Bryan Reynolds, obviously continuing the family tradition of chaos and amazement.
I still don't like how they did districts in Civ VI. It may make gameplay slightly more interesting in some situations. But I really think they should have come up with a better way of implementing the idea. Maybe sub tiles of a tile. So you don't have cities that take up entire regions map wise. But still have some strategy.
Yeah, but IRL as cities expand they start to interconnect with each other massively.
Civ 7 announced.
your VCR needs its head cleaned lol.
"The first floppy disc..."
Shows floppy with SD card in it
Has this video been made with AI?
CIV6 is the first in the series that I don't like. I have gone back to playing CIV5 and I'm still enjoying it. At some point if 7 doesn't come out for awhile, I will give 6 another shot.
Civ IV is much better, i can't play to CIV V
@@ivanagoston9543 No mention of the game this video is about, Civ 6? How odd.
Civ V the best game in the series for me. By far. Fuck civ 6. Civ 7 will be released 2025
Civ 3 is the best
?
Civ 5 was the start of the decline. Civ 6 is the first version I find boring.
Civilization V was the high point in the series. Civ6 a nonsense. I didnt play I,II. 3rd I did, but ancient times, 4th ok, 5th best. If they dont make Civ VII good, I l never again hope for it to further.
civ 5 still the best.. civ 6 is too cartoon-ish for my taste..
What I would like for Civ 7:
Unit sizes: return them to civ 5 sizes. I hated the 4 infantry, two cab per unit. Also, remove that “Victory spin” after an attack with the tanks and other late game units. It’s stupid.
Unique unit overhaul: what’s the point of playing different civs? They’re all virtually the same with the exception of 1-2 units, one district, and an ability. Overhaul the unique unit system to be full on unique militaries and a tech tree that is slightly different depending on which Civ you play as. Remove all generic units. For instance, the only thing that currently differentiates japan from say America is a single unit (samurai and rough riders) and a district and their abilities. Otherwise, they are identical. Why not have America have the same units as England until the colonial era where America has the minutemen or continental army while England gets redcoats. Up until that point, America and England would have the same military. English longbowmen, long swords men, broad swords men, and the like while France would have their own military units with their own strengths and abilities each, different from what England and America would have in earlier eras. Japan would be different too. From the early eras, every unit of theirs would be samurai or their predecessors and would double as archers. As the eras progress, Japan stays with samurai but they get better armor and new abilities even. For instance, when the renaissance era comes, your samurai now do a matchlock volley before charging into mele combat. But they still double as archers. Then there’s your Japanese spearmen. In early eras, they would be yari samurai, then in the medieval era, they upgrade to naginata samurai, then in the renaissance, they become ashigairus. Japan stays with samurai well after most other civs have moved completely off of sword units. Japan doesn’t go off of swords until almost the end of the industrial era, when the Boshin War happened. You might be wondering what would happen with Rome after a certain time because we know from history that the empire split and then the western half fell in the 4th century while the eastern half fell in the mid 15th century. Here’s what could happen if Civ 7 does this unique unit overhaul: during the medieval era, the Roman Empire takes on an Eastern Roman military with Greek fire throwers and Varangian guard as your pikemen type units and everything else to match the eastern Romans. Then in the renaissance, you get a screen that says you can choose one of two paths. You can choose Italy, or the Ottoman Empire. If you choose Italy, your military automatically changes to historically correct Italian units from the 1400’s like Swiss guard for your spear men. Should you choose the Ottoman Empire option, your military becomes an ottoman military with janissaries and sephi cavalry and all that stuff. Speaking of which, France and other European nations were ruled by Rome in the classical era, so during that unit, as France, you would have Gaulic auxilas as your sword units, reflecting the time in history. In the late game, Germany would get mechanized infantry (half tracks) and fighter jets (me-262) before everyone else because that’s how military history happened.
New eras: yes, there needs to be more eras with more military development. They need to add the Bronze Age and separate the medieval era into the early, high, and late Middle Ages. There also needs to be the colonial era.
Districts: that needs to be tempered. I understand the docks, entertainment, neighborhood, water park, Industrial, and airport districts, but WHY in this good game do we need the commercial, culture, government, religious, or campus districts??? Couldn’t the buildings of those districts just be part of the city center? Is that not how it is in real life? Heck, even some great wonders could go into the city center. Fewer districts means more space for farming.
nukes: what an improvement over Civ 5, just one complaint, nukes need to eliminate cities.
Artillery and city defenses: the purpose of artillery is that you are able to destroy enemy walls while outranging city defenses. Catapults should have a range of 3 with a promotion while that range comes with cannons. Late game artillery gets a range of 4 (except for German rail artillery gets a range of 10 but only gets limited uses and has a two turn set up but will completely annihilate a city’s defenses in one shot) and MLRS units get a range of 5. Anyway, sorry for that long spiel, but hopefully Firaxis and 2K see this
Holy existence of meme man....
I don't think I ever wrote this much in any serious exam I ever had...
God damn
Holy hell mate you itching to write a novel?? Start with learning about paragraphs…
Underrated
Civ V for me was a lame simpleton, for the console crowds. I have not touched any Civ title after that.
Even with sucky stack of doom, IV will always be the best Civ.
Yeah, CIV IV was the best one, the previous ones were fine too. V & VI are ok'ish but it's not the same, the AI is plain stupid and there is simply a point where you know you're going to win and it becomes boring, sometimes it happens very soon, it lost the replayability
Civ IV is simply the best. Been playing it non stop since 2005. The amount of mods and custom scenarios is insane and the modding scene is still very active. It is the most balanced, most mechanically perfect game in the series. I didn't like Civ V, and Civ VI even less so, however, I think some of the systems introduced in V and VI were great but poorly executed in the context of the games.
I need spanish subs... 😭
I do not rember regils victory
I want to say the HUMANKIND this game is a goddamn bad game, expensive and you played once then you didn't want to open it again, it is ridiculous. I just bought a copy of Civilization VI maybe I will try it later.
I just wish they get back to they way CIV IV was and evolve from there .... the new civilizations really suck, they lack a lot of fun and replayability from the previous games, mostly due to the completely stupid AI and the consequence of static situation where none of the civs is smart enough to conquer others .... Basically most of the game you just snowball to victory and noone can stop you, because few units are enough to defend from the stupid AIs so most of the game is super boring and not challenging at all.
Also adding volcanoes and floods (both useless) instead of fixing the basics like combat, diplomacy, AI - I really don't know who makes the decisions there but it's really getting worse and worse, not to mention the CIV VI graphics which is just childish... I'm waiting for CIV VII hoping they will listen to the fans and figure out they're going the wrong way.
The multiplayer is solid at least.
Civ 4 BtS was the best Civ ever. After that, the series declined.
Civ III is my favorite