Sure!

Civ VI does require you to adjust your thinking a bit from what long time players are used to. The district system really is brand new to the series, and you have to plan ahead far more than in previous games. Like, not only what bonuses are already there, but what bonuses will be there after you've built your districts, particularly if your Civ has specific adjacency bonuses. Wonders are now much more "nice to have" rather than "throw everything at wonders" (although there are exceptions, Petra being the most swingy in the early/mid game). The AI is ok, better than V, I'd say. If you're struggling with VI, try Maori. They're the equivalent of Civ V Venice, I'd say, where their mechanic is fundamentally different than any other Civ. They feel like a kind of sub-game to the main game, and are lots of fun.

In addition, the game now has a lot of functions built in to the base game that would traditionally have been mods. Randomized tech trees, secret societies, alternate game modes (Pirates! being the most recent), disasters, etc. are all just a checkmark away.

Civ IV was the purest iteration of the original civilization series, with doomstacks, OP wonders, etc. Civ VI has better combat than V, although I prefer air units from IV, and in general has a lot lower power level than IV (which is a good thing). More victory conditions are available (although the religious one is an exercise in frustration the more civs there are), and all are pretty attainable. IV was a very granular game, V was very much not, and VI feels like a nice balance, with the granularity moved to district location and worker action pools.

Now, there are things I'm not a huge fan of in VI, with Great People being probably my least favorite portion. Not sure who was begging for that system, that really has some distinct winners & losers plus the silliness of the military ones generally only affecting units from a certain era. Generic great people were good enough.