…and considered finally getting it.
Untill I saw this.
So? Does the game state that all heroes must come from the same period in time? 
The upper part got in the circle by chance :rolleyes:
So it’s the mostly negative reviews putting you off?
Supposedly there’s some kind of breech of privacy stuff going on with Civ 6. Spyware business.
I would suggest to read the reviews to find out more and do your own research.
tbh just play civ 4/5
That’s why it got bad rep.
Speaking about steam sales, Valve let some steam and I got some freebie. It actually looks like a good game.
No spyware inside hopefully.
I tried II or III years ago and didn’t like it.
Salt & Sanctuary is supposed to be pretty good, have a few friends who lost a bit of time in that one.
@Medea yeah Civ isn’t for everyone… you need a LOT of time to be able to play it, can take days sometimes.
It’s the balance between building and fighting that doesn’t work for me. I prefer something like Stronghold where I mostly build, but maybe have to do a bit of fighting from time to time. Civ has too much fight and not enough build for me.
This again? I only just heard recently that Kerbal Space Program was getting a bad rep out of nowhere for RedShell spyware (until it was removed).
I haven’t played much Civ 6 but I’d also agree that you can probably just play Civ 5 with it’s DLCs and not miss out on too much.
Yes, the recent rating is due to people complaining about some kind of tracking software being included in the game (Red Shell).
But actually it’s about lifetime rating as well.
You see, between Civ5 (I’m a huge fan) and Civ6 they had released another game called CivBE. I loved it, but it had some issues. People were telling "it’s Firaxis, they’ll eventually polish the game with expansions. It didn’t happen. There was an expansion but it only brought in some features without proper balancing, so it became even a bigger mess. I think one or two people working on polishing stuff could had done wonders, but apparently management considered it a waste because they already got people’s money. I have a problem with that, because it’s a 80$ game (vanilla + xpac).
Then Civ6 got released. Super high steam rating, a lot of hype. I was salty because of CivBE treatment so I didn’t get it. There were other reasons as well - the game didn’t looked like a huge upgrade over Civ5, quite the opposite in fact. I discussed it with my friends, but they were like “lol they won’t do to Civ6 what they did to CivBE, it’s the mainstream game, not some dirty spinoff”. Fast forward two years - the rating fell down to 67% and the trend is negative.
Meanwhile, Civilization 5 is at 90% “very positive” recent and 96% “overwhelmingly positive” lifetime.
Vermintide 2 also had the Redshell debacle among other problems.
Spyware or not (although seriously, developers, think a little before you do shit) Civ 6 is just not very good. I say this having played 4 and 5 to death, both great games.
Civ 6 is crap. Civ 5 was kind of crap, BNW improved it somewhat. Older Civs are generally better Civs IMO, the series has not been headed the right direction for a while
I played a few rounds of Civ 6 and found it largely uninteresting. It was Civ 5 with more-cartoony graphics and some QoL features, and nothing more. Having already burnt myself out on Civ 5, I saw no real reason to play 6.
If you haven’t played 5, then sure, get 6 (other than the redshell shit). It is essentially a very-slightly-better 5. But if you have played 5 (to death, like I have), don’t bother.
Just a heads up, they got rid of the spyware stuff a couple days ago with the most recent patch.
With the Rise & Fall expansion, it’s actually pretty damn good.
(Not as good as Civ V: Brave New World, but perhaps after the next expansion is released)