(Civ 6) Why Is Civilization 5 STILL So Popular vs Civ 6? || Civilization 6 vs Civ 5

Civ 5 or civilization 5 is old vs civ 6 / civilization 6. But civilization 6 still has competition from civ 5. Why's civilization 5 popular compared to civ 6? What does civ 5 have that civilization 6 doesn't? Find out in this civilization 5 / civ 6 comparison video by thecivlifer for civ vi or civilization vi.

►Members:

00:00 Intro
00:43 Graphics
02:52 Civ 5's Depth
06:06 Movement
07:45 Performance
08:56 Mods
09:39 Why Civilization 5 Was Ahead Of Its Time

[SirSoap]

every time i hear someone mention civ v "wOuLd yOu bE inTeResTeD iN a TradE agrEeMenT witH enGlaNd" starts playing on loop in my head

[kostariusevmenid]

Among MANY things that attract me to Civ 5 the main one is being able to sign down on that paper everytime you adopt a policy. Just sounds and feels so proper.

[kellywsmar]

Great video, but there is a word that you, and the people in the comments, are using wrongly: graphics. It is VERY important not to confuse it with AESTHETICS. See, graphics are about polygons, shaders, textures, and in that department, Civ 6 obviously surpasses Civ 5. What you talked about in the video was actually the aesthetics of the games, and I agree the Civ 5's more realistic aesthetic is more enjoyable and appropriate for a game with roots in history.

Why is it important to use graphics x aesthetics corretly? Because that IS the language of the developers, and we get what we ask. If people keep demanding better graphics with no regard to aesthetics, they will keep pushing for it: ugly and/or uninspired games with amazing textures and whatnot.

I'm NOT saying Civ 6 is ugly/uninspired, just that we jumped a fire (cartoony is not the worst scenario, but definitely not an improvement, imo).

Hugs from Brazil !

[shadowmetroid]

I've mostly shifted to 6 but I like that 5 has much less to micromanage.

I really dislike limited use builders in civ 6 and I like playing a tall game as opposed to basically needing to go super wide in 6.

[damastashonuff]

I currently have 3, 642 hours in Civ 5 and the reason I play Civ 5 over Civ 6 because of the added city micromanagement they introduced. I dont get it, they realized that there was too much micromanagement with all of the units in Civ 4 and made it so only 1 military unit, /worker, /great person can be on a hex in Civ 5 to do away with the micromanagement and then turn around in Civ 6 and add more city micromanagement instead. Oh and the goofy graphics :p

[kyletitterton]

You nailed it all really. Both excellent games. My only real beef with 6 is the childish graphics also which look like my sleep paralysis demons. Civ 5 graphics are practically perfect in that regard.

[MilkmanCR]

Civ 5 is way more immersive overall in my option.

[MaciekKleczar]

I think you forgot about one important factor - Civ5 is more challenging.

I just went back to Civ5 after many years of playing Civ6. Civ6 was boring to me. Yeah, the start was always fun, but when you survive start (even on deity), I mean no Zulu wiped you from the map, It became just boring. And It was easy win after.

When I returned to civ5 I have almost bankrupted my first few games and also AI was challenging for me in mid and late game, attacking with enormous armies. So it was no longer "survive start = easy win". That made me wanna play more.

[TREKcheats]

Civ 5 just looks better. Honestly, thats the bottom line for me. I'm sure I would like civ 6, but the initial graphics just put me off so much that I stick with civ 5.

[compatriot]

I personally found Civ V to be more appealing both artistically and in terms of gameplay. It is very easy to pick up and play even if it's your first civ game.

[oliverschlesinger]

"Builders jumping 30 feet into the sky and slamming their hammer down like a budget thor cosplay" - hilarious! 😂👍

[jasonjarvis]

I've been enjoying Civ since 1991 and Civ 5 (with all the DLC) is still my favourite. I want to really like Civ 6 but just can't get into it . . . yet.

[KaboosOnX]

Civ 5 is just simpler and more fun to play. I feel like I need a spreadsheet and 10 YouTube videos open when I boot up 6.

[miniusername]

I am one of those people that still play Civ5. I have 340 hours on it total (vs 30 hours on Civ6). But I have to say that my reasons are entirely different from what you describe in the video.

I prefer 5 over 6 because for whatever reason (I genuinely have no idea why), every one of my games in 6 is boring, not memorable and has absolutely nothing going on for hundreds of years of in-game time. I end up skipping dozens of turns in a row, just clicking on the button and all events that do happen seem to be triggered by my actions, such as deciding to expand, attack or build a new cool thing.

Whereas in 5, there is always something that requires my attention - be it rowdy powerful neighbours that are preparing for war, a contested city-state without which I'll dip into negative happiness, wrong ideology taking over the world, one civ becoming a world power on the other side of the planet and so on. There is a sense of urgency, and important decisions need to be made almost every turn. And this continues until the lategame, during which the game admittedly becomes much more of a chore.

I tried liking Civ6, but whenever I have spare time, and feel like having a game of Civ, I always inevitable choose 5 over 6, even though I would love to play something new at this point.

[hydraph]

In civ 5 I prefer the gameplay, visuals and leader AI. However, I am beginning to prefer civ 6 simply because imo the civ abilities are more interesting and have more depth. The civs are what attracted me to civilisation in the first place so yeah. Also I like that you can actually win with religion now. I know you aren't always going to go for a religious victory but it just feels a bit better in 6 nevertheless to me.
Also, I completely agree with the points made about happiness changing into loyalty, housing and amenities to restrict growth / expansion

[Commanber]

Playing tall being a real strategy and the national wonders are what I miss most in Civ 6. Especially the national wonders. Knowing there's a wonder that you can always build, even on higher difficulties, once you meet the requirements (like a Monument in every city) is huge. It also scaled with the amount of cities you had so again a reason for tall play.

[hungrymusicwolf]

I just have never gotten over the graphics and the change in leaders for civ 6. I want to play my William of Orange (Netherlands) and Isabella (Spain). I would have liked it if they kept some of the symbolic abilities as well, because they haven't I just have too much nostalgia for Civ 5 and just can't ever really want to play Civ 6.

[warrenhammer]

I first started in Civ 3, Civ V is still the pinnacle of Civ. Mainly because it has a fun late game.

In Civ V, you play tall, plus the puppet system. This means late game I still only need to manage my 4 cities that I built and cherished over the course of the game. In all other Civ's if you're conquering the world, you're forced to micromanage a boatload of cities that you don't care about. I don't want to manage 50 conquered cities, I only want to deal with the 4 I personally founded and cared for.

In Civ V, you don't even need to leave garrisons, which further lowers the bookkeeping. (Previous civs, you were supposed to leave garrisons at all of the cities you take, imagine the hassle.)

In Civ V, I just conquer enemy capitals for the wonders, and not bother managing them.

Note, in Crusader Kings, you can have a massive empire, but you only need to manage your own demesne, imagine the nightmare of managing hundreds of provinces manually. In EU4 and HOI3, there isn't much micro-managing of states due to abstraction.

The district system in Civ 6 is more annoying than fun, it feels like a bad game of Tetris, it just isn't fun. On the other hand, in Civ V, I can use citadels to expand my borders for resources, that's fun. There's some seriously satisfying when I use a general to steal 3 plots of aluminum.

Civ V is much simpler, but it's simplicity is so much fun.

Another is army management, in Civ V, I use a small amount of well-promoted units. Reinforcing is fairly limited. In older civ's, it involved mass spam of whatever I can build and I had to manually move everything to the front lines.

One thing Civ V is missing is a convoy system to make long-distance transit of armies easier.

Civ V really mastered the less is more concept.

[georgebush]

I play civ 5 almost daily. It has unbelievable replay value.

[jayward]

Definitely agree about the graphics! I have thousands of hours in Civ 5 & definitely like the graphics better. Can we talk about setting the builders to automate & sit back while they improved your empire.