I don't know about anyone else, but I'd really love to see a city foundation, growth, and management video. =)

Sovereign wrote:
I couldnt agree more with you.



And it is exactly this thing the feeling to be free to realy be an actual Leader of an spezies or nation which can find his own way to bring his People to the top.

This are Qualitys which are popular nowadays, look at all the other games the more possibilitys a player has the more he feels *free* the more popoular is the game. And in every genre the Deveöpüers are trying to give the Players more libertys.



in other Genres this titles are for example : TES V Skyrim,Day Z,ME, Fallout 3, etc



And in 4X Games its the same trend CIV is a prominent game it gives you alot of Freedoms,

For CIV 3 i think it was even in the Avertisment : "You Want a Communist nation but with the Freedom of Press? NO PROBLEM buy CIV III"





Games wich are relaying to much on one way right way to play it, one*red line* are not asked anymore and normaly also getting bad criticue cause of that.



Players want to make Decision by themself and they want that they have impacts in the Game.

well for example in civ v there is barely any free choice. you can choose policies but they are the same for all factions, you can choose ideologies but your autocracy is going to be the same as another's. we do deserve some more freedom in shaping things the way we want. i personally would love to micromanage exactly how my government is going to run in the beginning. then maybe adding stuff on through prestige. All governments even running on similar bases are different. the best example that i could give is look at the two communist regimes under Lenin and under Stalin. they are very different and games should allow players to express their differences and allow them a good amount of freedom. A game that I thought really reflected this was democracy 3. wile this would probably be hard to implement into any game as it is a game by itself, it still offers an example of some freedoms that games may give players in the futur. just a thought.

The way "ideologies" work in Civ V is pretty free-form compared to Civs I - IV. If you look closely at the tenets you get to select, they are fairly interchangeable between each other, except that, at first blush "Order" is probably better for very large empires, "freedom" is probably better for smaller/medium-sized ones, and "autocracy" is almost certainly better for those who want to fight wars of aggression.



But I agree that flexibility is nice.

Civ V was awfull compared to the others.



And many people me inlcuded just bought it cause we thought it would be as good as its predecessor.

^I generally agree. I found Civ 4 to be much more enjoyable. I liked that you could at least buy tiles instead of having to wait for influence to expand. I also prefer the way that cultural victories work in Civ 5 (both before Brave New World and after). Despite all of Civ 5's additional options, Civ 4 felt like a deeper and more dynamic game.