Mr. Grieves
Wondermonger
Why would Firaxis not release another patch? Civ V is currently one of the most-played PC games on the market. Unless they announce CiVI tomorrow or something, I'd be bewildered if they'd stop supporting it this quickly.
SteamDB: "Bison" Depot??
- Thread starter Scirocco16V
- Start date
AmericanDestiny
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2014
- Messages
- 44
No patches were released following Civ 4 Complete.
Mr. Grieves
Wondermonger
Hm, okay. Still, it would seem odd to me to abandon a pretty huge hit like this at the height of its popularity. I'd say that the PC market has shrunk so much since Beyond The Sword that they really can't get away with something like that anymore.
anandus
Errorist
Yes there was, 3.19 (june 2009) was released after Civ4 Complete (may 2009).
Mr. Grieves
Wondermonger
ferretbacon
Obsessor
I agree. I hope they're not too eager to move on to VI. I'm still enjoying V and hope that they'll continue to support/balance it. And I know that IV only had two expansions, but I feel like too much is put on precedent around here. Sure the "Complete Edition" sounds pretty final, but maybe they're planning for "Platinum Edition" or "Totally Complete Edition" after a third expansion.
No, I jest, of course. Not much getting around the word "complete," but I'm still a bit puzzled as to why they're capping this generation. There's a lot of balancing that could be done, a lot of civs that could still be added, and plenty of features that they could implement.
The thing that confuses me about this (at least supposedly) being the end of the line for Civ V is that they just added two new luxuries - albeit within a scenario - and have, as more than a few posters have said on here, a fair amount of balancing that could still be done.
Really, I didn't necessarily expect any more DLC after BNW, but I was surprised that when they balanced Germany, Japan, and America that they didn't also adjust mechanics around a little so that wider strategies would be more workable.
Don't get me wrong, getting one last scenario is actually more than I'd expected in some ways, but if this is indeed the end of major support for the game, then I have to say that I'd probably have preferred a little more tweaking over a (sort of) new scenario.
Really, I didn't necessarily expect any more DLC after BNW, but I was surprised that when they balanced Germany, Japan, and America that they didn't also adjust mechanics around a little so that wider strategies would be more workable.
Don't get me wrong, getting one last scenario is actually more than I'd expected in some ways, but if this is indeed the end of major support for the game, then I have to say that I'd probably have preferred a little more tweaking over a (sort of) new scenario.
PhilBowles
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2011
- Messages
- 5,333
I'm not sure where people are getting the idea that the PC market has shrunk - even without articles like this reporting increases in PC game sales, on a purely anecdotal level the increased numbers of games being released through Steam, and the platform's success, provide strong circumstantial evidence that the PC market is stronger than ever. Consoles have been around longer than PCs and haven't succeeded in killing PC gaming yet - why would they start now?
I think the time is right for Civ VI to be honest - Civ V is now a great game, and the expansions have done their best to add new features within the framework of the original game, but there are definitely places where the tension with the original design shows: BNW vs. vanilla Great People, ideology trees vs. social policy trees and others all show signs of an uncomfortable dual design, while features like global happiness now look outdated by a superior economic model and other constraints on expansion.
Of course, a patch would be welcome first - Civ V hasn't had as many patches as perhaps it should have, but each one it has had has improved the game.
Pedantically, bison isn't a luxury.
Bison are a bonus resource - they don't count towards trade route calculations. And no, I don't think they co-occur with cattle; in fact the New World code that limits particular resources to particular parts of the map is something I'd like to see implemented in the main game, as it adds to the feel of these being different territories.
Scirocco16V
Warlord
I agree. I hope they're not too eager to move on to VI. I'm still enjoying V and hope that they'll continue to support/balance it. And I know that IV only had two expansions, but I feel like too much is put on precedent around here. Sure the "Complete Edition" sounds pretty final, but maybe they're planning for "Platinum Edition" or "Totally Complete Edition" after a third expansion.
No, I jest, of course. Not much getting around the word "complete," but I'm still a bit puzzled as to why they're capping this generation. There's a lot of balancing that could be done, a lot of civs that could still be added, and plenty of features that they could implement.
Actually, the Civ IV complete edition included 4 products: civ 4, warlords, beyond the sword, and colonization (which was a stand alone game but built off of civ 4 engine). If we go purely by precedent, a stand alone game built on civ 5 engine should be next.
The past doesn't predict the future, but it is an indicator of how similar decisions were resolved. It is also the only thing we have to base our guesses on, other than gut feeling and desire, unfortunately.
Firaxis has expanded a bit, since with XCOM they now have 2 big-name franchises. They say the teams are separate but the existence and success of xcom may influence what the civ team does next.
They've said they didn't initially plan on having a Civ 5 expansion and that once they decided to do G&K they didn't initially expect to have a 2nd expansion. Maybe sales of and response to the complete edition and CotNW Deluxe will help them decide what to do next?
Teproc
King
Huh, I could have sworn bonus resources counted for trade routes.
The timeline seems normal to me, and I, for one, welcome our new Civ VI overlords (or I will in, like, 18/24 months or so).
The timeline seems normal to me, and I, for one, welcome our new Civ VI overlords (or I will in, like, 18/24 months or so).
Scirocco16V
Warlord
I find it hard to believe the civ team won't have something new out in time for this year's christmas buying season.
Sporally
Prince
The tech tree has been expanded for the scenario. Would it be hard to transfer it to the main game as a mod? Anyone planning on doing this mod or taking just some of the elements from the scenario's tech tree?
They didn't release the complete edition of Civ4 until the stand alone-game, BtS, was released. Therfore, I won't say history indicates a stand alone-game being released with the Civ5 engine.
PhilBowles
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2011
- Messages
- 5,333
I suspect they've already started Civ VI development, which would prevent them working on anything as large as a third Civ V expansion.
If only, then they'd actually be resources rather than just tile bonuses. A preview of BNW did show bonus resources counting for trade routes, but that's not in the final game for some reason.
The differences between bison and cattle are that bison:
- Appear on either plains or grassland, not just grassland
- Are improved with a camp rather than a pasture
- When improved, add +1 gold as well as +1 production (pastures only add +1 production to cattle).
That's different enough to warrant adding bison to the main game, and plains could use the extra resource.
The tech tree changes the placement of a lot of techs in a way that wouldn't make sense for the main game (such as trapping and calendar), ditto lots of buildings and units - and most of the units it unlocks are UUs in the main game. Plus it has a whole new era structure.
There are individual techs that might warrant making the transition, but the tech tree is wholly different, it's not expanded - yes, it would be difficult to add it to the main game. Though I'd quite like to see the Gunsmith added to the main game as a building - it would make gunpowder units a bit more distinctive and give Gunpowder the tech a bit more of a role.
Sporally
Prince
Ok, just the "interesting" techs then. Buildings is another thing I really want to see ported, and if only wonders had their own graphics...
Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
Scirocco16V
Warlord
BtS was released in July 2007, Colonization in Sept 2008, and IV complete in May 2009.
History indicates a stand-alone game should have come after BNW and before V complete.
As I said, history doesn't predict the future.
I'd love an alpha centauri.
I think Civ VI will be next.
Maybe they'll surprise us all.
Sporally
Prince
How does history indicate a stand alone-game? There's only been 3 of those earlier, and the last was after Civ4. I don't see how you conclude this.
Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
Sendt fra min GT-I9305 med Tapatalk
Scirocco16V
Warlord
Since there wasn't a plan for any expansions I think they had started on VI before they started on G&K, then shelved it for G&K, then started work again after G&K, then shelved it for BNW, and are now back to working on it. Whether it gets shelved again for another expansion or a stand alone game is anyone's guess.
PhilBowles
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2011
- Messages
- 5,333
I just double-checked, actually, and the tech names mostly wouldn't fit well - Piracy, Advanced Piracy, Line-of-Battle... Treasure Fleets is specific to scenario mechanics and shares the name of a social policy. Warships does what Magnetism already does. etc. etc.
The buildings would all be welcome - the Chocolate House would probably be a bit too powerful in the main game, but the Meeting House is a very interesting idea and it's easy to patch in a new religious belief to accommodate it. The Gunsmith is a better fit for the main game than it is for the scenario, where it only affects a couple of units (don't think it affects cannon).
Navigation School only makes sense with scurvy, but then I'm open to adding the Scurvy mechanic to the main game (though with reduced chance to cause attrition - most maps are larger than the CotNW one, and it would be excessively punishing to have a 65% chance of damage per turn in that context), probably modified so that it's a building rather than a national wonder (you don't want to be forced to build all ships in one city in the main game), and the requirement should be a city with citrus rather than that all cities have a university.
Some of the policies are nice, too - a couple would be good replacements for some already in Exploration (not in the scenario, but something I'd also like - make El Dorado a Hidden Antiquity Site, to give value to the Exploration finisher. Any hidden site, when excavated, has a chance of turning into the El Dorado NW, assuming it hasn't already been found. Fountain of Youth and King Solomon's Mines could be done the same way).
There wasn't originally a plan for an expansion because they'd planned to do DLC instead - I very much doubt they've been sitting on Civ VI for that long. BNW was released little more than a year after G&K, the usual timeframe for an expansion based on Civ IV precedent and the time between the final pre-G&K DLC and G&K (and had more content than G&K); I suspect they started work on it pretty much as soon as feedback came through requesting a second expansion. It wouldn't have made sense for them to start development on Civ VI until they were reasonably sure Civ V was finished, as otherwise they'd likely have to scrap a lot of what they'd already done in order to incorporate developments to Civ V into the sequel.
If this Civ 5 complete package is indeed the final thing for Civ 5 I would expect that development for Civ 6 started at the latest when BNW launched.
Is favor more patches & a rework of the Scenarios esp 'into the renaissance' but it would be best if this is done asap so they can turn the game over to the mod communitys.
Seems like the one thing everyone would agree on is transparency with the future for Civ 5.
Is favor more patches & a rework of the Scenarios esp 'into the renaissance' but it would be best if this is done asap so they can turn the game over to the mod communitys.
Seems like the one thing everyone would agree on is transparency with the future for Civ 5.
Similar threads
- Sticky
