People are ALLOWED to criticize.

[lemmy101]

If there was no DRM in single player games, then this wouldnt be a problem for a game like Civ V.

If there was no DRM in single player games, there would be no Civ 5. There would be Civ Rev 2. That's a different argument entirely, though.

 

[Mivo]

I'm pretty sure that has nothing to do with whatever race you're playing. Unlike what most people think, not every Terran is a drooling monkey and not every Zerg is an high-skilled progamer, only held back by racial imbalance.

I responded tongue-in-cheek to the Terran player who generalized that there are no balance issues and that Zerg doesn't do well against Terran because they somehow ball up Mutalisks against Thors. That was very "two months ago", and it begged for an appropriate response.

I do feel that Terran has too many options and can, unlike Zerg, enter the game with a plan and follow through with it almost without consideration for what the opponent does. I also feel that the maps favour Terran, and that the MMM ball is too universally useful. To do "OK" with Terran, the player needs less "skill" than a Zerg or Protoss player, so to reach the same level of play, less is required of Terran. If you play Zerg, your mistakes are punished more harshly.

There is no doubt in my mind that it takes skill to play Terran at a high level.

(We should probably get back to the Civ5 discussion.)

 

[bhavv]

If there was no DRM in single player games, there would be no Civ 5. There would be Civ Rev 2. That's a different argument entirely, though.

really cant see how there wouldnt be a Civ V when Civ 1 - 4 didnt use DRM.

There is absolutely no reason at all why they couldnt have done the same thing again.

 

[lemmy101]

but I do feel the need to point out that you're posting on a fan-ran public forum, not your own domain.

My domain is Earth and as a fellow human being I'm imploring a bit of common human decency and compassion for the developers who worked their socks off and this forum would be their second or third port of call after years of hard graft, so less with the offensive nasty comments please?

Did I do my own infraction graphics in photoshop and start doling them out to other members?

No, I just made my case of why what they were saying was incredibly hurtful, and that the developers WILL read them and be affected by them and are not some anonymous entity at the other side of the internet but real people really close to this forum.

I fail to see how there is any possible argument against that except: "I don't care if I hurt their feelings, screw them"

I'm not even talking about posting negatively about the game, I'm posting about the hate rage, the personal attacks and borderline veiled threats that litter a lot of the hate posts on this board.

If you're defending those, taking into account my initial post in this thread, then.... ouch.... you're not a very nice person. No infractions for you perhaps, but that's all I'm saying.

 

[lemmy101]

really cant see how there wouldnt be a Civ V when Civ 1 - 4 didnt use DRM.

There is absolutely no reason at all why they couldnt have done the same thing again.

I really liked the massive broadband speeds and internet that was around in the Civ 1 days. I could download and pirate Civ 1 in the blink of an eye. It was awesome.

I also loved Civ 4, the way I could put the disk in, install it, then remove the disk and give it back to my friend. It just run and everything because of that lack of DRM. In fact everyone in my street installed it off my one disk and continued to play it forever after. No DRM is great.

DRM,I think you'll find, has been around forever. It's just becoming more sophisticated since (for example) World of Goo, an indie game with no DRM, got like a 98% piracy rate.

I'm sure 2K would have invested money to pay Firaxis staff so 98% of people could get it for free instead of trying to protect their investment by using DRM.

ergo, no DRM, no Civ 5.

Anyway this has been said to death (by me) in the thousands of (vile hate filled) steam hatin' threads that were only the tip of the iceberg of what was to come release day.

 

[Gurd]

If you're defending those, taking into account my initial post in this thread, then.... ouch.... you're not a very nice person. No infractions for you perhaps, but that's all I'm saying.

My reply was aimed at the original poster (TrustyTory). I'm guessing you missed that.

 

[lemmy101]

Oh yeah, I'm a d**k.

Ok, I'll be first to admit I've become a bit of a paranoid looney, biting at anyone who's constructed sentences that sound vaguely like they're disagreeing with me. I should sleep, really.

I'm going to bow out of this thread now. I think I made my point best in my first post, but then after the ensuing pointless rebuttals I've just started flailing about like a loon. I apologise to all who got in my way. That said I am completely correct, even if I was correct at people who didn't disagree with me in the first place.

Derrr.

 

[Crezth]

really cant see how there wouldnt be a Civ V when Civ 1 - 4 didnt use DRM.

There is absolutely no reason at all why they couldnt have done the same thing again.

Uh, yeah there is. 'Cuz then they're basically giving the game away free to everybody.

Piracy is a problem, you know.

 

[J-man]

Of course people are allowed to criticize the game, if don in a civilized manner. As for me, I don't like the combat AI. It's not very intelligent to say the least and it definitely needs to be fixed. It of course can be fixed with a patch but I wonder if it would have been a better decision to delay the game for a while and fix it. That's a strategy Blizzard uses and they have been quite successful.

 

[Shackel]

DRM is a bigger one.

Piracy is a sale that would have never happened.
--

Anyway, I'm just hoping this doesn't end up like MW2, because its looking like it. Extremely rabid fanboys, awful release. etc.

 

[ohioastronomy]

Uh, yeah there is. 'Cuz then they're basically giving the game away free to everybody.

Piracy is a problem, you know.

What is interesting to me is that there are counterexamples. Galactic Civilizations, for example, didn't have any of that nonsense, and they did just fine.

 

[PieceOfMind]

When I finally get the game, probably in about 2 weeks, I'll be more than happy to give my constructive criticisms.
I've already tried the zoom-to-cursor thing very briefly in the demo, and it was not quite as nice as I was hoping, but still a big step in the right direction.

 

[apotheoser]

And I'm laughing because you're one of those strange individuals determined to be on the losing side of history. Strange.



TvZ is balanced when Zerg players learn Mutalisks don't work against Thors and build Infestors once in a blue moon.

Agree on the wishy-washy storytelling however.

Seriously, Infestors are way under-used. Although NP could probably use a buff.

That said, I think what the OP is getting at is the ridiculous level of fanboyism on these forums. I love Civ, I've been playing it since first came out when I was 12. But there is a lot wrong with Civ 5 and just "wait for modders to fix it" is not the right answer, and there are certain people on these forums who viciously attack anyone with a negative opinion about Civ 5.

 

[Pangaea]

I just wanted to point something out to the die hard zealots who think Civ 5 is "perfect" and anyone who has an issue with it to "shut up" and "play Civ 4." I will NOT shut up and I will NOT play Civ 4 because you disagree with a point I'm making.

This all started with a thread I posted on why Earth locations are randomized, and that I enjoy playing earth maps that have historically accurate start locations. I was blasted as a whiner and got a slew of reasons as to why I was "stupid."

I've been playing Civ probably longer than several of these people have been alive. I remember Joseph Stalin as an ANSI blob on the screen. When units were flashing 1D squares. I remember getting Civ 2, which up until Civ 4, was the best release of the game. In fact I played it for almost 8 years after its release. Civ 3 was played a handful of times. I found it to be a great disappointment - until Civ 4. Yes, it was full of bugs at the beginning but it was an excellent release to us "micromanaging" strategy gamers that escape from reality to control our own empire.

I'll make this clear - I am hooked on Civ 5. Like every other Civ game, 12 hours can fly by like an instant. It's always that "just one more turn" thing that keeps me hanging on. But if I want to SUGGEST, as a PAYING customer, that things improve, that's my prorogative. For example - the graphics are not as over the top as we would believe. The interface is the same old and in fact, I sometimes feel as though I'm playing Empire: Total War or something. Civilization was an anomoly that other games tried to rip off and couldn't re-create, but realizing that this was just released, bugs will work themselves out and mods will be created.

StarCraft II lived up to all of the hype. Civ 5, I'm sure, will get there. But don't for an instance try and tell us who would like to see improvements that we are "whiners" who should "go play Civ 4" like you're accusing us of being "climate change deniers." It's absolutely counter productive and makes you sound like an 18 year old who's been told "no" to that $20 hand out and the car keys.

If I want to complain, or make suggestions, then I will do so and I could frankly care less who doesn't like me for it.

Thanks for this. I very much agree with you (though I don't have the same history with the game as you do).

It is unfortunate that most criticism of the game is met with such one-liners as you mention by the fanboys. And it's a shame that seemingly every thread with criticism turns into a name-calling contest. It's perfectly legitimate to be disappointed in the direction the game has headed and in some of the changes (though others are good). When the people who were disappointed have left the site or quietly gone back to Civ 4, I'm sure the forum will go back to its old ways, but for now I think it should be "allowed" to criticise the game without being branded in various ways. It's fairly obvious a lot of people are disappointed.

 

[CaptainBinky]

But there is a lot wrong with Civ 5 and just "wait for modders to fix it" is not the right answer, and there are certain people on these forums who viciously attack anyone with a negative opinion about Civ 5.

Without some sort of accurate poll (and not one just here which wouldn't be completely representative of everyone who plays Civ), I don't see how the bits which are all "wrong" can be said to be anything other than wrong for you - in which case, modding is exactly the right way to address these issues.

 

[Pangaea]

Uh, yeah there is. 'Cuz then they're basically giving the game away free to everybody.

Piracy is a problem, you know.

It's also a problem that is vastly overstated by gaming companies. Generally when a pirate downloads a game, that's not a loss of a sale for a game, as the pirate wouldn't have bought it anyway. So to equal downloads with loss of revenue is a gross exaggeration.

For some it's actually in the other way with DRM. Instead of selling more games by limiting downloads (if that even happens, I don't know), people who don't want sticky fingers in their computers don't buy games with intrusive DRM. So DRM can decrease sales and profits. At least with some people.

 

[jomorisin]

LONG TIME LURKER here.

Valid functional/UI game criticisms are welcome and helpful. This is nothing new and has been occurring for every iteration of Civ.

The helpful criticisms are welcome especially in light of upcoming mods. If you really want to trash Civ 5 wait to see the modding capabilities. That is where the game really grows, and if those capabilities are lacking, you can take the gloves off.

 

[El_Machinae]

I wish I could just put this post in the announcements section, so that everyone here will see it.

lemmy101: Thank you for that post.

Absolutely bang on.

There is an art to successfully complaining about something, and it starts with being polite to the person you are complaining to. Don't act like they have just run over your dog.

Quoting again. This is a post the whole forum needs to read. I've been called troll or fanboy often enough but really I see myself as sticking up for the developers.

If there's a really good post, that's a good call to help build a better community, then feel free to link to it in your signature. Give it a good title, though!

"The post I wanted everyone on CFC to see!" or somesuch. (though remember to read the forum rules on signatures, first)

 

[zomg]

If its civil I personally dont disagree that people should post criticisms as they think of them. But dont you also notice that most of the critical threads turn into rants? Thats where the problem is to me. I also feel there is room for improvement however when I read a post that goes from "this item seems out of whack" to "civ 4 was much better" to "this game shouldnt have been released" to "I want my money back or I'm going kill someone" leaves me wondering what exactly I am supposed to be reading and addressing here. I dont want to read someones meltdown and I agree with people telling them basically to f-off.

 

[apotheoser]

Without some sort of accurate poll (and not one just here which wouldn't be completely representative of everyone who plays Civ), I don't see how the bits which are all "wrong" can be said to be anything other than wrong for you - in which case, modding is exactly the right way to address these issues.

Too bad the SDK isn't out yet then.

But really, how would a poll make it any better? Because more people think something is wrong with a game, that means it really must be "wrong"? What if there were just 100 copies of me; we'd all be more right than just me saying it by myself? That's ridiculous.

It's obviously implied when I say "something is wrong with Civ 5" that I mean "something is wrong for me". It's a waste of time for you point that out, not to mention pedantic.

I might as well point out that when someone says, "No, design choice X is right", they just mean "right for them".