
I spent about 45 minutes playing Civilization 5 at a press event in late June. Anyone who's played a Civilization title should immediately recognize that 45 minutes isn't enough time to conquer diddly. If Civ is anything it's time intensive, and its entries require numerous hours of experimentation before their subtle nuances become apparent.
I broke up my preview into two parts: spending about half an hour building up Caesar and company from the "Dawn of Man" scenario and the rest of the time playing as a highly advanced version of the same empire. Where to begin? Oh, right: It's Civilization. It plays like Civilization.
That's a glowing compliment for most games, but I found myself questioning whether Civ 5 was deserving of the bold new number: How's it so different from Civ 4? "There's always ideas you can bring back to that deep strategy setting on the PC, and I really don't think it's marketing speak to say, 'There's always something new that you want to try,'" Firaxis marketing associate Pete Murray offered. "There's always something you can take to that fundamental formula and change it, and say, 'Okay, what can we do that's new and exciting with combat? What can we do that's new and exciting with culture? Diplomacy?'"
While I generally agree that there's always room for improvement and innovation when iterating, my short time with Civilization 5 left me with the initial impression that this game hasn't changed that much.
Sign-in to post a reply.