Civilization is back and better than ever, though exactly how much better is the question that should be asked.
While 'dissapointing' is probably unfair, Civilization V lacks a certain depth of play that the previous games had. It is an amazing game by any stretch of the imagination, and does keep par with the previous games on most counts, but something seems to be missing.
What isn't missing from Civilization V is graphics quality. With a half decent machine, Civilization runs smoothly and sharply and the landscapes are beautiful. Water seems like it might drip off the screen, units are finely detailed and move with lifelike smoothness. Mountains and clouds alike seem straight out of a national park. Civilization V did everything right with the graphics and I can hardly find any fault with it. And even for a game with such good looks, the stability is fine. Only once has the game ever crashed on me and that is more likely a problem on my end due to an over-the-hill graphics card.
The game play and mechanics are also stellar. Many features from Civ IV are preserved, and any Civilization fan will feel right at home playing the latest in the series. Some have decried the removal of unit stacking, but it's not a huge issue and it does require the player to think more strategically. Instead of stacking thirty units on the same tile, you can only have one, which makes it more difficult to defend a city from attack. Another implement, and probably the most obvious, is the switch from a square grid to a hexagonal grid. This update is so intuitive that it's difficult to reason why it wasn't thought of earlier (in fact it was, but not by Firaxis.)
Sound in Civilization V is so well done that it deserves its own segment. Each nation has its own distinct music that is redolent of the culture they represent. It is made with a great orchestra and you really feel like you're ruling the Aztecs or the Japanese. Combat ambiance and unit movement is also crisp and refreshing and there is no sound in this game that ever gets annoying, even after 200+ hours of play.
Where we really start to find issue with the game is the strategy involved. Game mechanics are set in such a way that it is simply to easy to play the game in a highly militaristic way. The game is set in such a way that every other way to win, via diplomacy, science, culture or whatnot, is so much more difficult and taxing than simply invading another country and blowing all their stuff up. It makes for a somewhat shallow game when going through all that effort to win a cultural victory is pointless because someone else could wipe out your nation simply by invading. Civilization added a new feature, city-states, but this doesn't help the problem at all and even makes it more tempting to win a military victory. One inevitably ends up competing with the little state for space and they practically beg to be invaded by insulting you and allying with other nations at random.
Perhaps that's the issue. Because the game has become so one-dimensional, the impetus to continue playing the game seems to drop off - perplexing when compared with the previous games. perhaps Firaxis should have made it easier to win via the other methods, or perhaps a military victory should have been made harder to achieve. Either way, Civilization V, despite succeeding in so many ways, comes out as a bit of a disappointment. The depth of strategy just isn't there anymore. While other victories are interesting and require strategic thought and planning, they're just too difficult to accomplish compared to the military victory.