What Games Have the Best Replay Value for You?

[PatsFan2003]

The major rebuild for Civ V (??) ruined the franchise for me. I understand you gotta keep the game fresh or the new versions don’t mean anything, but when the game becomes so alien to its predecessors, why keep the name on it?

I actually agree with you. Civ V was not a good version at all. Cities would switch because of culture in a fairly unpredictable way. You could lose if someone built the United Nations and got the major powers to side with them and then, bang, it was all over! Stupid.

Yeah Civ1 was great because it was the first of these type of games that fit together. You could replay it forever since there were so many surprises in how the game worked. I actually thought Civ2 had too many bell's and whistles...

Yeah it's easy to feel disconnected if you haven't played the game in a while but the basic principles are still the same. Build and develop cities. Explore the world, Learn new technologies and civics, pummel your neighbor into dust or not...

Civ VI is actually pretty good and I think they set the game back on track. In addition to learning technologies, you would develop "civics" for different areas.. Military, industrial, scientific, economic, diplomatic etc and you have to the balance the use of these developments depending on what your civ needs at the time. Which btw is directly related to what government you establish in terms of what type and number of civic developments you can pick.

Oligarchies and Republics early on. Theocracy, Democracy, Fascism, Communism later. Fascism is great for a military type government but less economic and scientific. Democracy great for economic, scientific but less formidable in the military area.

If it sounds more complicated it is but it fits together well. And each game is completely different.

Another game with infinite repeatability are the Total War series.

Rome Total War, Medieval Total War, Shogun. Different historical period but you get the idea, Depending on the game you can start as Rome, Greece, Gaul, Egypt and 10 other nations or as Spain, Britain, Ottoman Empire, Venice etc

Half the game is building your empire like Civ but the other half are the real-battles which are really well-done and fun. There you move around your phalanxes, knights, bowman, legions, pikeman whatever.

The map isn't random but most games are totally different.

 

[Payton]

Yeah, Civilization really jumped the shark from its original conception. The first had a nice combination of strategic complexity that combined with a certain simplicity of game play (if that makes sense).

Sure, there were some minor tweaks needed... Like a phalanx being able to stop a tank or battleship, for instance... Roads meaning infinite travel...

 

[PatsFan2003]

Yeah, Civilization really jumped the shark from its original conception. The first had a nice combination of strategic complexity that combined with a certain simplicity of game play (if that makes sense).

Sure, there were some minor tweaks needed... Like a phalanx being able to stop a tank or battleship, for instance... Roads meaning infinite travel...

I agree. The rules weren't overly complicated even while the depth of the game was very deep..

 

[chf]

It jumped the shark from 1991 to 2016?

That shark has some serious hops!

 

[Payton]

It jumped the shark from 1991 to 2016?

That shark has some serious hops!

No, Civ jumped the shark pretty quickly for me... By Civ 3 it had gone too far IMO...

 

[chf]

Well you're in the minority on that one.

 

[chf]

They took a wrong turn in 5, but then course corrected in 6. The games have ALWAYS been about the community anyway. What the game started out as didn't last long as modders and map-makers and other FANatics got involved. Sid and the gang have never been afraid of letting the game evolve, not by them, but by the players.

I highly doubt there's a game out there that's listened more to the critiques and wants of its players.

 

[Payton]

Well you're in the minority on that one.

Sure.

 

[Clayton]

A game has to decide at some point whether it wants to cater to the masses or to it hardcore audience. Civ is clearly a game for the hardcore.

When you try to balance games for both, it seems like you get divisive games like Destiny 2 or Street Fighter V.

 

[chf]

The first time I won the game on the highest difficulty I felt like I'd truly accomplished something. Even then I still felt like I was cheating a bit, because you learn tricks like narrowing the victory conditions, and making sure the physical game world favors the player you choose (deserts for Arabia or seas for England etc)

If I were to truly randomize the game, I doubt I'd ever beat it on the hardest level.

 

[navamind]

Counter Strike, Halo 1 (awesome multiplayer and the campaign also has replay value (campaign, speedrunning, tricking), Fallout New Vegas

 

[night]

If I'm honest, none really. The good ones tend to take a very long time to finish and you don't want to grind that out again.