Has firaxis lost it?

Gorb said:

That's a flaw with the AI though (and I agree that the AI is easily-abused), not the mechanic itself though.

Click to expand...

I think it is incumbent on the designers of a primarily single-player game to design to the game, rather than saying "well, this WOULD be good if our AI didn't suck."

Also, that was just the first example I could come up with for bad mechanics off the top of my head. Pact of Secrecy, anyone? Glad that got patched out instead of waiting for a paid fix.

A decent mechanic will always fail in the hands of a poor player, or poor AI.

I was defending the mechanic, because as I said it wasn't perfect, but it's no horrific thing like you're making it out to be.

Every designer makes mistakes. That's why people demand post-release support these days. However, by demanding post-release support, you as gamers are responsible for publishers delaying potential issues til post-release. When games weren't patched post-release, there was more incentive to make the release perfect.

(of course, bad games still existed)

Peng Qi said:

So what's the stumbling block for BE, then, you ask? It's competing with Civ V. Civ V had no competition, so even when it kind of sucked, we still thought it was good in comparison.

Click to expand...

Little addendum: it's ALSO competing with stuff like Endless Legend now AND totally getting its behind handed to it by a relatively small group of indie developers who don't have as many resources to make their games, but they have a lot more passion and love for the game that they're making. Because Endless Legend at least has a soul to it, which is more than what can be said for Beyond Earth.

Tripas said:

Because Endless Legend at least has a soul to it, which is more than what can be said for Beyond Earth.

Click to expand...

This is exactly why many still love SMAC, fossilized though it may be.

I find it odd that you buy into this fake loyalty / brand consumerism thing whereby you're forced to only play one game from a particular genre. If I liked a limited amount of genres, I'd play everything from those genres.

It's interesting that people seem to keep referring to Endless Legend over Endless Space. Is it perhaps because Endless Space has a lot more flaws so people don't like using it as an example? I say this as the proud owner of CiV, BE and Endless Legend. And Crusader Kings 2, and the Total War series (various versions of, mainly Rome though), Sword of the Stars (but not the sequel, not yet) and last but not least Europa Universalis III.

Though the notion of a game having a soul is interesting, probably because it's so incredibly contrived. When you say "this game has a soul", you're saying "this game resonates with me in a nice and familiar way". Of course that won't happen in games you don't enjoy.

For me, Beyond Earth has a soul. So does SMAC. They're different, of course. Vastly different.

Gorb said:

I find it odd that you buy into this fake loyalty / brand consumerism thing whereby you're forced to only play one game from a particular genre. If I liked a limited amount of genres, I'd play everything from those genres.

Click to expand...

I think most people have a "current favorite" in most genres that they play largely to the exclusion of other games in said genre. The exception is when there's a very strong flavor or lore element in one game that isn't present in the other or vice versa.

For example, I played a little bit of Red Orchestra 2 while I was playing MW3 and Codblops2, but I still mostly played Codblops. Likewise, I occasionally boot up BE, but it's far more likely I'll be playing Civ V.

Sure, but again that kind of favourite differs massively. Like for me, there's little overlap between BE and EL, because EL is fantasy and BE is spess. CiV is historical (technically not fantasy, though it could be), which I normally find boring. Civilisation games as a rule are the only historical games I can stand

I'm sure I'd find overlap between BE and Endless Space, but Endless Space has a number of detractors and complaints (moreso than EL).

The notion of games "competing", especially months after their optimal sales window has closed . . . isn't really accurate. BE's been out for six months, any major sales have been made now. The only spikes will come from Steam Sales.

(source: common industry figures that the most sales are made within the first month, with a high percentage of lifetime sales often made within the first six months. Google should support this, but I'm being lazy)

ThorHammerz said:

This is exactly why many still love SMAC, fossilized though it may be.

Click to expand...

Playing Beyond Earth has made me reinstall SMAC too.

Gorb said:

I find it odd that you buy into this fake loyalty / brand consumerism thing whereby you're forced to only play one game from a particular genre. If I liked a limited amount of genres, I'd play everything from those genres.

It's interesting that people seem to keep referring to Endless Legend over Endless Space. Is it perhaps because Endless Space has a lot more flaws so people don't like using it as an example?

Click to expand...

Maybe that's because more people have played Endless Legend than Endless Space.

Maybe it's because Endless Legend is the game that most closely resembles Beyond Earth from a gameplay perspective, since it plays kind of like a Civ game, while Endless Space is closer to being a more developed version of Starships.

Maybe it's because they're two games that came out fairly close to each other, so it's a lot fairer to compare the two.

Or maybe it's because people tend to be more forgiving of devs who might start with weaker games and IMPROVE with time, than with those who do the exact opposite, starting with pretty awesome games that somehow just keep getting worse with time. I dunno, just a thought.

Gorb said:

Every designer makes mistakes. That's why people demand post-release support these days. However, by demanding post-release support, you as gamers are responsible for publishers delaying potential issues til post-release. When games weren't patched post-release, there was more incentive to make the release perfect.

Click to expand...

it is the other way around: publishers release half-baked games -> gamers demand post-release support.

Gorb said:

(source: common industry figures that the most sales are made within the first month, with a high percentage of lifetime sales often made within the first six months. Google should support this, but I'm being lazy)

Click to expand...

google is not your friend? my condolences.

the burden of providing evidence lies on the stater. without evidence, your statements are your own personal opinions.

Peng Qi said:

I think it is incumbent on the designers of a primarily single-player game to design to the game, rather than saying "well, this WOULD be good if our AI didn't suck."

Click to expand...

completely agree. a MP-centric design should have made the game better.
do players denounce each other in MP?

secondly, some game mechanics are nearly impossible to teach the AI to handle well. such mechanics must be scrapped.

Gorb said:

The notion of games "competing", especially months after their optimal sales window has closed . . . isn't really accurate. BE's been out for six months, any major sales have been made now. The only spikes will come from Steam Sales.

Click to expand...

The data certainly backs this up in every case I've seen.

But, if it's true that market pressures are not really dictating what happens on the demand side for games, why should we allow them such a tyranny over the supply side that we'll accept substandard games that are bugged and shallow on release?

Why not move toward a business model where the market for games is dominated by companies that are employee-owned? I think, for various reasons, that the gaming industry is particularly suited to employee-owned business model.

I would say the gaming industry is being mismanaged. "Lost it" is probably a phrase that's too melodramatic.

Hail said:

it is the other way around: publishers release half-baked games -> gamers demand post-release support.

Click to expand...

The good old "screw it, we'll fix it in post" mentality of people who have no love for their medium.

Lexicus said:

The data certainly backs this up in every case I've seen.

But, if it's true that market pressures are not really dictating what happens on the demand side for games, why should we allow them such a tyranny over the supply side that we'll accept substandard games that are bugged and shallow on release?

Why not move toward a business model where the market for games is dominated by companies that are employee-owned? I think, for various reasons, that the gaming industry is particularly suited to employee-owned business model.

I would say the gaming industry is being mismanaged. "Lost it" is probably a phrase that's too melodramatic.

Click to expand...

Here are some interesting statistics to bear in mind: Civilization V has pretty much always been at the top of the list for most played games on Steam. Seriously, it's always around the top 5 spot, has been there for YEARS now. When Beyond Earth came out, it knocked CiV out of that spot by quite a few positions, so we know that it sold REALLY well. But then it started falling, while CiV began to rise up... and not even A WEEK after BE's release the status quo had been restored. CiV retook its place on the top and Beyond Earth just kept losing ground. I'm looking at the stats on Steam right now and today BE peaked at about 3.600 while CiV peaked at almost 42.000. And that's just embarrassing, BE doesn't even have 1/11 of the players that CiV has and you can't blame its sales on it. And when your "sorta sequel" fails to grab your audience to that extent, then YOU KNOW you royally screwed up.

So no, I don't think that saying that Firaxis "lost it" is melodramatic. In fact, I struggle to find a more appropriate way to describe them right now.

@Tripas:

But Endless Space came out first . . . which indicates a clear popularity there. Games that come out near each other make no sense as a comparison - only genres are a decent way of dealing with "competing" games in terms of success stories.

Unless you want to compare every game to Battlefield: The New One. Or CoD: The Fifteenth? Every game must suck compared to those sales

It's weird that you think Civ. started off awesome. Have you ever played Civ. original? Or even Civ III? Civ. was a solid great start to a series, but it was horrendously flawed and suffered from interface design of the time. It is no longer a "good game". Civ. III was widely panned (especially after SMAC, and also the design strengths of Civ. II) and then Civ. IV redeemed the franchise for many. CiV polarised debate between 1UPT and MUPT. BE continued that trend.

EDIT: oh, lawdy. A single game doing "badly" isn't indicative of a developer "losing it". There are a multitude of reasons why CiV remains popular. Ironically, it's probably evidence of Firaxis doing well. CiV is a recent product. CiV is going strong. Ergo, Firaxis succeeded.


@Lexicus:

Nobody is letting them settle for sub-standard games. Unless you pre-order games, of course. Then you're giving them money for a non-existent product, letting them do whatever they want with your potential game.

The same goes for people that blindly believe in "indie" developers that aren't really indie. People keep bringing up Endless Legend. That isn't an indie game. Amplitude have a publisher, which probably explains how they're able to fund extended development on Endless Legend when Endless Space hasn't worked out so well (being an earlier product, and developed I think when they were truly indie).

Is the industry mismanaged? Probably, in a variety of ways. A lot of business is, because it's profit-focused to the detriment of all else. Agreed on that.

Gorb said:

But Endless Space came out first . . . which indicates a clear popularity there. Games that come out near each other make no sense as a comparison - only genres are a decent way of dealing with "competing" games in terms of success stories.

Click to expand...

And that's completely irrelevant to as to why people compare BE with Endless Legend instead of Endless Space.

Gorb said:

Unless you want to compare every game to Battlefield: The New One. Or CoD: The Fifteenth? Every game must suck compared to those sales

Click to expand...

Oh wait, you were serious about the whole "sales equal quality" thing? Oh dear...

Gorb said:

It's weird that you think Civ. started off awesome. Have you ever played Civ. original? Or even Civ III? Civ. was a solid great start to a series, but it was horrendously flawed and suffered from interface design of the time. It is no longer a "good game". Civ. III was widely panned (especially after SMAC, and also the design strengths of Civ. II) and then Civ. IV redeemed the franchise for many. CiV polarised debate between 1UPT and MUPT. BE continued that trend.

Click to expand...

You'll polarize anyone when you change something, that's not a sign of failing. It's when you just add a coat of space-paint to your already existing game and then fail to anything to captivate either the fans of the old stuff OR the people looking for something new, to the point that they'll just go back to the previous game in the series (or back to SMAC, a game that's FIFTEEN years old) that I'd say that you truly failed.

So no, BE did not continue any trend.

Gorb said:

EDIT: oh, lawdy. A single game doing "badly" isn't indicative of a developer "losing it". There are a multitude of reasons why CiV remains popular. Ironically, it's probably evidence of Firaxis doing well. CiV is a recent product. CiV is going strong. Ergo, Firaxis succeeded.

Click to expand...

....

OK, you DO realize that the whole topic isn't about "has Firaxis been kind of screwing up continuously in the past 5 years" but rather "with the launch of two pretty weak games in a row, do you think that Firaxis is losing its edge", right?

And thanks for making my point for me, by the way. When the game that you haven't really altered in a truly significant way in over a year is SEVERELY outclassing your brand spanking new sci-fi mod of the same game, then that's just sad to see.

Gorb said:

The same goes for people that blindly believe in "indie" developers that aren't really indie. People keep bringing up Endless Legend. That isn't an indie game. Amplitude have a publisher, which probably explains how they're able to fund extended development on Endless Legend when Endless Space hasn't worked out so well (being an earlier product, and developed I think when they were truly indie).

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, they've got a publisher, Iceberg Studios. TOTALLY didn't have to search it on Google for who these guys even are. Truly, a renowned and mighty publisher, the likes to rival something like freaking 2K. Yes, clearly the guys making Endless Legend are on the same level as Firaxis in financial terms, so it's really no wonder that they managed to completely outclass the people who have been making games like this for almost 20 years now.

The thread phrasing is obviously wrong:

Has Firaxis lost it - No, not by a long shot

Are Firaxis perhaps starting to lose it - Eh, possible because BE was mediocre and I have absolutely zero interest in Starships

better now?

Gorb said:

Every designer makes mistakes. That's why people demand post-release support these days. However, by demanding post-release support, you as gamers are responsible for publishers delaying potential issues til post-release. When games weren't patched post-release, there was more incentive to make the release perfect.

Click to expand...

Also, this is baloney. The post-release thing should not exist, basically if you release a good, stable, balanced game, there's really no need for major changes. However, if you whip up a half baked product and hype it up with smoke and mirrors to scam the fans into buying it before the jig is up and your half baked product is found out, you're gonna lose your share quickly, because the masses are stupid, but not that stupid. Then, when they release "a patch" that really improves bugger all, they're hailed as awesome and whatnot for something they shouldn't even need to do in the first place.

This is why if Half Life 3 ever comes out, it will be THE Half Life 3, and it is (I guess) also why iPhones are good

The thread phrasing is obviously wrong:

Has Firaxis lost it - No, not by a long shot

Click to expand...

Agreed. Firaxis hasn't lost it but judging from a reading of some of the posts in this thread as well as in others on these boards, some of the posters here definitely have

Tripas said:

Oh yeah, they've got a publisher, Iceberg Studios. TOTALLY didn't have to search it on Google for who these guys even are. Truly, a renowned and mighty publisher, the likes to rival something like freaking 2K. Yes, clearly the guys making Endless Legend are on the same level as Firaxis in financial terms, so it's really no wonder that they managed to completely outclass the people who have been making games like this for almost 20 years now.

Click to expand...

Money isn't defined by how well-known a publisher is. This is not how economics works.

The rest of your post is as incredibly wrong as this paragraph, so I'll leave it at that, sorry.

Gorb said:

Money isn't defined by how well-known a publisher is. This is not how economics works.

The rest of your post is as incredibly wrong as this paragraph, so I'll leave it at that, sorry.

Click to expand...

I never claimed that money is defined by how well-known someone is, but I'm not surprised that you misinterpreted that as well. And here you were talking about recurring trends.

But hey, you want to use that as an excuse to not address any of the previous points, that's fine. It just means I can focus on having an actual discussion with anyone else.

Hey, if you want to explain what you actually meant by saying "truly, a renowned and mighty publisher, the likes to rival something like freaking 2K. Yes, clearly the guys making Endless Legend are on the same level as Firaxis in financial terms", I'm all for that.

Sadly, I don't think there are many other ways to interpret it

What, you need a diagram on how someone like 2K, a company that pumps out stuff like Evolve, the WWE and NBA series, Bioshock and Civilization (just to name a few) and is in turn owned by Take2 (a company that makes BILLIONS per year) is probably not on the same financial level as a company like Iceberg Interactive? A company whose biggest game is freaking Killing Floor or whatever? Really, you need me to explain that?

Yes, I need you to. Unless you know the specific breakdown of budget per project compared to the budget assigned to the Endless series as well as Killing Floor (which makes a killing, pun intended, off of the huge amount of DLC it offers piecemeal).

To tie this back to topic, you can't declare Firaxis as having "lost it" without backing up your claims of such.