Explorminate's Top Ten 4X Games of All Time List

[Martok]

Read the article here. 



Of if you prefer watching the video version: 

For those who really just want a TL;DR summary: 

1.) Distant Worlds: Universe
2.) Master of Orion 1/Remnants of the Precursors
3.) Sid Meier's Civilization IV
4.) Master of Magic
5.) Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri
6.) Endless Legend
7.) Sword of the Stars
8.) Galactic Civilizations 2
9.) Fallen Enchantress: Legendary Heroes
10.) Master of Orion 2: Battle at Antares

[Martok]

Personally, I'd say it's a good list overall.  And whatever one might say about the game, I do believe DW:U has earned its spot at the top.  At the very least, I can easily understand why they ranked it #1. 


My main beef is that Stellaris is not on the list; in fact, I find its exclusion baffling.  I would probably swap it out with either SotS or FE:LH, as I do question whether those two games deserve to be on there (much as I personally adore the latter). 

I don't say that because I enjoy Stellaris, either.  (If I were to judge the list based on how much I personally like these games -- or not -- then Endless Legend, Sword of the Stars, and MOO2 wouldn't be on the list at all.)  But ever since release, the game has had such an immediate and outsized impact on the genre -- partially (and precisely) *because* it doesn't entirely follow your standard 4x formula -- that its inclusion in any "all time greatest" list seems pretty much obligatory. 

[bayonetbrant]

Anytime you start with an all-time top 10 list, it's going to be inherently flawed regardless of how you try to couch it.

If you simply say "here are 10 great games" and you're not trying to rank them, then it's a much less contentious article while still talking about games you really like.

Either way though, their space roots are absolutely showing here as there seems to be an unbalanced against the historical games and their fantasy spin-offs

[ojsdad]

I would be curious why they didn't include one of the EU titles in this list.

I'm not sure I would have put DWU in the #1 slot.  Not sure who I would have though.  I've been playing it again.  While I enjoy it, there are some very frustrating and glaring issues with it. 

[bbmike]

Anytime you start with an all-time top 10 list, it's going to be inherently flawed regardless of how you try to couch it.

If you simply say "here are 10 great games" and you're not trying to rank them, then it's a much less contentious article while still talking about games you really like.

Either way though, their space roots are absolutely showing here as there seems to be an unbalanced against the historical games and their fantasy spin-offs

This. And then throw in the fact that it's an Explorminate article...

[bob48]

No Warlock I or II?

Tut.

[judgedredd]

I keep hearing people say Civ IV was the better of than Civ games...why? What changed that left that one king?

[bbmike]

No idea. I'm one of the ones that think it's improved with each release. I do know that some people hate the 'one unit per tile' change so that could be part of it.

[Undercovergeek]

i think it was 4 you were resource dependant - didnt have iron? no armour for you, no horses? no cav units and you had to find these resources or trade for them - made it much more immersive for me

[Barthheart]

i think it was 4 you were resource dependant - didnt have iron? no armour for you, no horses? no cav units and you had to find these resources or trade for them - made it much more immersive for me

You need the same in VI....

[Yskonyn]

i think it was 4 you were resource dependant - didnt have iron? no armour for you, no horses? no cav units and you had to find these resources or trade for them - made it much more immersive for me

This is exactly the case in VI and with the ‘one unit per tile’ the turtle tactic of doom stacks is mitigated.
Yes, the overal flow has become more boardgame-like over computer strategy game-like in the traditional sense, but I am firmly in the camp of VI is King.
Lots of strategies work, lots of goals to pursue and with the two expansions there is lots of variability in a game of Civ.
I ‘ve loved or liked every Civ so far, but 6 is the most fun I’ve had.

[bbmike]

Yeah, and Civ6 keeps getting better. 

[Martok]

Either way though, their space roots are absolutely showing here as there seems to be an unbalanced against the historical games and their fantasy spin-offs

A couple points... 

1.)  Space 4x titles make up only half the games on that list. 

2.)  I suspect that -- directly or indirectly -- this is at least partially due to how many 4x games are set in space (versus historical, fantasy, etc.).  Given the numbers, sheer Law of Averages meant that at least a plurality of the games on the list were probably going to be space 4x titles. 

I would be curious why they didn't include one of the EU titles in this list.

Because they're not 4x games.  The EU series are grand-strategy, just like the rest of Paradox's portfolio (Stellaris being the lone exception). 

I'm not sure I would have put DWU in the #1 slot.  Not sure who I would have though.  I've been playing it again.  While I enjoy it, there are some very frustrating and glaring issues with it. 

DWU admittedly isn't my personal #1 either; I would rank it either 2nd or 3rd on my own list.  However, given the degree to which a lot of folks *do* enjoy the game, combined with the overall influence/impact it's had on the genre (which was one of the criteria used to select their games for the list), I can see why it made the top spot. 

I keep hearing people say Civ IV was the better of than Civ games...why? What changed that left that one king?

It was the last Civ game where the AI was decent (and without obvious cheating), and it doesn't look cartoony like Civ VI.  It was also the last game in the series to not inflict that 1UPT nonsense on the player.   

[Steelie]

Good list. I agree with replacing SotS with Stellaris. SotS was good, but not top ten good. And as a Civ player since the original, I agree with bbmike that it improves with each release. Once a new Civ rolls out, I never go back to a prior version.

[Barthheart]

...
It was the last Civ game where the AI was decent (and without obvious cheating), and it doesn't look cartoony like Civ VI.  It was also the last game in the series to not inflict that 1UPT nonsense on the player. 

You are just wrong here. The only reason the AI was good in Civ IV was the "stacks of doom".. and don't kid yerself about he game not cheating in IV.