I am curious how many of you are familar with the abstract phenomenon of "regression to the mean".
I was wondering why it was that many civ3 players were disappointed with civ4 and preferred civ3, and now with civ5 on the way, inevitably many civ4 players are going to be disappointed with civ5 and prefer civ4. I think the above phenomenon plays a big part in that.
People like myself who were impressed with the game civ4 are simply going to be more likely to be less satisified with civ5 because our satisfaction with civ4 was above normal. Conversely, and maybe it's obvious, but the people who were not impressed with civ4 are more likely to be more satisfied with civ5.
More generally, it goes some way to explain why sequels of great games are often perceived to have failed to satisfy the players of the original to the same level. Of course, it goes with sequels to other things like books and movies etc. Consider that if a game doesn't sell well and is considered to be a flop by its players and producers, it is less likely to receive a sequel and so the regression towards the mean resulting in a better sequel never gets experienced. It's perhaps ironic that the better a game is, the less likely it is that a sequel will live up to expectations.
My advice to anyone who enjoyed civ4 a lot would be that they should do the best they can to treat civ5 as an entirely different game. If you bring expectations over from civ4 or make too many comparisions between civ5 and civ4 when you play civ5, you are more than likely going to be disappointed with civ5. Maybe a slightly depressing thought but statistics pretty much guarantees it... Also consider that probably most of the people preordering civ5 or who buy civ5 quickly after release are doing so because they enjoyed civ4. That could result in a bias in "first reactions" to the game - the most fanatical of fans are the group who are most likely to perceive civ5 as being lesser quality than previous games.
I was wondering why it was that many civ3 players were disappointed with civ4 and preferred civ3, and now with civ5 on the way, inevitably many civ4 players are going to be disappointed with civ5 and prefer civ4. I think the above phenomenon plays a big part in that.
People like myself who were impressed with the game civ4 are simply going to be more likely to be less satisified with civ5 because our satisfaction with civ4 was above normal. Conversely, and maybe it's obvious, but the people who were not impressed with civ4 are more likely to be more satisfied with civ5.
More generally, it goes some way to explain why sequels of great games are often perceived to have failed to satisfy the players of the original to the same level. Of course, it goes with sequels to other things like books and movies etc. Consider that if a game doesn't sell well and is considered to be a flop by its players and producers, it is less likely to receive a sequel and so the regression towards the mean resulting in a better sequel never gets experienced. It's perhaps ironic that the better a game is, the less likely it is that a sequel will live up to expectations.
My advice to anyone who enjoyed civ4 a lot would be that they should do the best they can to treat civ5 as an entirely different game. If you bring expectations over from civ4 or make too many comparisions between civ5 and civ4 when you play civ5, you are more than likely going to be disappointed with civ5. Maybe a slightly depressing thought but statistics pretty much guarantees it... Also consider that probably most of the people preordering civ5 or who buy civ5 quickly after release are doing so because they enjoyed civ4. That could result in a bias in "first reactions" to the game - the most fanatical of fans are the group who are most likely to perceive civ5 as being lesser quality than previous games.
