JanghanHong
Enrico Trololo
It's already in the game (Valetta)
DLCs after Brave New World
- Thread starter AbsintheRed
- Start date
It's already in the game (Valetta)
AbsintheRed
Deity
Yep
I think it's more than enough clue for them being planned as full civs
It will certainly not happen in BNW (with Assyria as a full civ, and Ur as a city state), but it might happen in a later DLC/expansion
blackcatatonic
Queen of Meme
Ha. You can tell I haven't played in a while...
seasnake
Conquistador
A fleshed out Sumeria and Hattay would be great as a DLC, also I'd like it if maybe the Pueblo would change their minds and be okay with it. If we had Iroquois, Pueblo and Sioux or Cherokee we'd really have at least three archetypical native american civilizations and really flesh out the American Continent (I expect sioux or cherokee in BNW, so).
And frankly, if there's enough for 48 civs, why not grab a final 2 and have 50?
And frankly, if there's enough for 48 civs, why not grab a final 2 and have 50?
Tsuchinoko
Warlord
I honestly believe that there are easily enough civs worthy of being included in the game to make at least another expansion and a run of DLC. At this point I don't mind how Firaxis go about releasing it though - as long as they continue to release content after BNW, I'll be very happy. In my opinion, the more civs (and leaders) to choose from, the better.
I realise that not everyone wants to see more civs in the game though, for various reasons (not knowing much about their culture, thinking they 'dilute' the appearance of more major/well-known civs, or simply not being interested in them, etc.), which I can understand. However, it'd be very easy for these people to simply alter a couple of values in the game files so that the AI can't pick the civs they don't want to see in game. It's much harder and more time-consuming to produce all the coding and graphics required to add a civ as a mod, so in my opinion, the more Firaxis adds for us, the better.
I realise that not everyone wants to see more civs in the game though, for various reasons (not knowing much about their culture, thinking they 'dilute' the appearance of more major/well-known civs, or simply not being interested in them, etc.), which I can understand. However, it'd be very easy for these people to simply alter a couple of values in the game files so that the AI can't pick the civs they don't want to see in game. It's much harder and more time-consuming to produce all the coding and graphics required to add a civ as a mod, so in my opinion, the more Firaxis adds for us, the better.
I feel the science victory and combat victories could really get a BAMF! In their own expansions.
VossPL
Chieftain
Imho this will be the last expansion. And after it, there maybe will be 2 or 3 DLCs. After that, I think that Civ 6 should be taken into consideration.
I like to think that there will be another expansion for three main reasons:
(1) maximizing profit
(2) there is still much to be improved in the game (espionage, modern era, diplomacy, etc.)
(3) AI
I think Firaxis is aware that EVERYONE complains of the AI. I hope they are working on a new AI system that will blow us away. However, the new AI logic makes the most sense as the foundation of Civ6, not as a development within CiV. And since it will likely take YEARS to get the AI to the point that it will "blow us away." The best thing to do in the meantime is to release another expansion of CiV. After all, there's still plenty of room for improvement - certainly enough to justify another expansion.
(1) maximizing profit
(2) there is still much to be improved in the game (espionage, modern era, diplomacy, etc.)
(3) AI
I think Firaxis is aware that EVERYONE complains of the AI. I hope they are working on a new AI system that will blow us away. However, the new AI logic makes the most sense as the foundation of Civ6, not as a development within CiV. And since it will likely take YEARS to get the AI to the point that it will "blow us away." The best thing to do in the meantime is to release another expansion of CiV. After all, there's still plenty of room for improvement - certainly enough to justify another expansion.
Another full-out expansion, to me, seems unlikely at this point, as BNW will be a solid few years after the initial release, and after BNW they may as well begin allocating resources to Civ 6. I doubt that AI will ever approximate the abilities of a human, at least for gaming and entertainment, so it's likely the AI will not be far improved even with years of work, which means I imagine that Civ 6 won't take as long as you might be suggesting to develop. No AI will "blow us away" in the near future, because the limitations of home computers are still significant enough for many of their potential customers. And BNW sounds as though it may upgrade diplomacy (World Council, Trade Routes), as well as the modern era (maybe a couple new units, likely Broadway and new late-game wonders, and a few civs like Brazil that focus their UU or UA on the late game a bit).
That said, I don't disagree that espionage could use an overhaul. And there are indeed other issues. But a full-out 3rd expansion would likely need to be released in mid 2014 to give enough time to develop it and market it, and by then, I just doubt the resources are going to be spent on that rather than a new full game.
As I said way, way further back on the thread, I imagine we might see a DLC or two yet for CiV, which is profitable because they tend to be just an added civ or two, maybe an added map or two, and yet cost ~ 10.00 USD, which is almost a third of the cost of a full expansion despite being probably less than one-twentieth the work. But a 3rd expansion with any changes to already existing mechanics and systems in the game seems unlikely.
To reiterate the points from earlier:
- Based on previous patterns two expansion packs seems most likely
- We are yet to know how DLC will change the whole production cycle, but we know that with the first DLC run there was a year longer wait for the first expansion
- From the above two we can conclude that if there is DLC released after this expansion, it is likely that either there won't be a third expansion, or a third expansion won't be released for another year
- This would put a third expansion in mid 2015 (June/July release), which would seem unlikely as it would push Civ VI back to around 2017 (~September release)
- If there were DLC following Beyond the Sword, Civ VI may be released around late 2016 (~September release)
- If there wasn't, who knows what's going to happen
I'd also make the point that nobody is happy with the game until the new one is released, at which time it becomes the greatest ever making any new game terrible in comparison. It happened with Civ IV despite long periods of serious bugs, terrible AI and even fan made patches just to make it playable, and it'll happen to Civ V. The AI is always a complaint because put bluntly, we can't yet make AI that is good enough to play like a human, and it will always seem somewhat artificial.
- Based on previous patterns two expansion packs seems most likely
- We are yet to know how DLC will change the whole production cycle, but we know that with the first DLC run there was a year longer wait for the first expansion
- From the above two we can conclude that if there is DLC released after this expansion, it is likely that either there won't be a third expansion, or a third expansion won't be released for another year
- This would put a third expansion in mid 2015 (June/July release), which would seem unlikely as it would push Civ VI back to around 2017 (~September release)
- If there were DLC following Beyond the Sword, Civ VI may be released around late 2016 (~September release)
- If there wasn't, who knows what's going to happen
I'd also make the point that nobody is happy with the game until the new one is released, at which time it becomes the greatest ever making any new game terrible in comparison. It happened with Civ IV despite long periods of serious bugs, terrible AI and even fan made patches just to make it playable, and it'll happen to Civ V. The AI is always a complaint because put bluntly, we can't yet make AI that is good enough to play like a human, and it will always seem somewhat artificial.
AbsintheRed
Deity
You mean Brave New World, not Beyond the Sword
Anyway, I think the 2 most likely scenarios are:
- At least a year long DLC run after BNW is released, and no 3rd expansion
- 3rd expansion ~1 year after BNW, and a brief DLC run after it
...yes, I did mean Brave New World.
If they went for a third expansion, I severely doubt that they'd go ahead and do a second DLC run. Considering that they're following Civ IVs release cycle so far apart from a year break with DLC after the initial release, I would severely doubt that they'd go for a third expansion. The fact that Civ V gold is Civ V and the first expansion (and DLC if I'm not mistaken), as it was with Civ V, suggests that they are going down the same route. Surely it would get a bit too complicated to go for a third expansion. It would likely be easier to just go for a second DLC run then release a Civ V complete afterwards, but we'll see.
If they went for a third expansion, I severely doubt that they'd go ahead and do a second DLC run. Considering that they're following Civ IVs release cycle so far apart from a year break with DLC after the initial release, I would severely doubt that they'd go for a third expansion. The fact that Civ V gold is Civ V and the first expansion (and DLC if I'm not mistaken), as it was with Civ V, suggests that they are going down the same route. Surely it would get a bit too complicated to go for a third expansion. It would likely be easier to just go for a second DLC run then release a Civ V complete afterwards, but we'll see.
If there were new DLC after BNW, it would be interesting to see if they made that DLC reliant on having BNW. On the one hand, you don't want to prevent potential buyers from grabbing it due to not having BNW; on the other, it might just give a nudge to those considering buying BNW to do so as there's extra content for it. They could just do what the DLC packs currently do, which is be available for use with vanilla with extra files for G&K needs such as spy names.
There are some DLC packs I would love to see. One would be an updated ancient wonders scenario with the Hittites and Sumerians as full civilizations and perhaps some ancient world natural wonders. A second pack would include another Native American civilization (hopefully one or two will be added in BNW), and then have a cracking Colonization-type scenario where you could play as either one of the European civilizations or as one of the natives. The third pack would be an "enemies of Rome" pack, including Illyria and the Gauls, with a couple of Roman-based scenarios.
I appreciate that these aren't everyone's "cup of tea" but they sure are mine
!
There are some DLC packs I would love to see. One would be an updated ancient wonders scenario with the Hittites and Sumerians as full civilizations and perhaps some ancient world natural wonders. A second pack would include another Native American civilization (hopefully one or two will be added in BNW), and then have a cracking Colonization-type scenario where you could play as either one of the European civilizations or as one of the natives. The third pack would be an "enemies of Rome" pack, including Illyria and the Gauls, with a couple of Roman-based scenarios.
I appreciate that these aren't everyone's "cup of tea" but they sure are mine
!
AbsintheRed
Deity
I don't think it's an issue at all
The number of potential buyers, who want to buy DLCs for the vanilla game (after 3 years), but don't want to buy the expansion packs, is close to zero
Firaxis should simply choose, that all further DLCs require the BNW expansion.
There are some DLC packs I would love to see. One would be an updated ancient wonders scenario with the Hittites and Sumerians as full civilizations and perhaps some ancient world natural wonders. A second pack would include another Native American civilization (hopefully one or two will be added in BNW), and then have a cracking Colonization-type scenario where you could play as either one of the European civilizations or as one of the natives. The third pack would be an "enemies of Rome" pack, including Illyria and the Gauls, with a couple of Roman-based scenarios.
I appreciate that these aren't everyone's "cup of tea" but they sure are mine
I think the Sumer-Hittite double civ pack would be extremely popular
Same with Zulu or Portugal, if either of those is left out from BNW
Bakspatel
Prince
I think there is pretty much no chance that Sumeria and the Hittities will arrive as a DLC.
When discussing the Pueblo, they mention that this is the first time with Civ 5 that they had to cancel a leader. If it is the first time and had serious consideration of adding those civs, why didn't they ever bother to seriously add them? Why would they prefer to add Babylonia and Assyria first?
How much I would like to see more DLC, I for some reason have a feeling we will not be seeing anything and that they will move on to working out plans for Civ 6. You can't really blaim them, 43 civs already is quite a lot. Some extra funds could be a consideration but them you might be getting issues of how to implement new civs; the main argument for them seems to be a different type of playing. And there are not many fan favourite civs (pretty much only Portugal and Zulu are left and they are highly likely to be included in BNW) left that would guarantee good sales.
But I hope I'm wrong.
When discussing the Pueblo, they mention that this is the first time with Civ 5 that they had to cancel a leader. If it is the first time and had serious consideration of adding those civs, why didn't they ever bother to seriously add them? Why would they prefer to add Babylonia and Assyria first?
How much I would like to see more DLC, I for some reason have a feeling we will not be seeing anything and that they will move on to working out plans for Civ 6. You can't really blaim them, 43 civs already is quite a lot. Some extra funds could be a consideration but them you might be getting issues of how to implement new civs; the main argument for them seems to be a different type of playing. And there are not many fan favourite civs (pretty much only Portugal and Zulu are left and they are highly likely to be included in BNW) left that would guarantee good sales.
But I hope I'm wrong.
Canada can come too?
I wouldn't mind some new fantastic scenarios. Frankly, the Civil War doesn't sound like much fun. What's so civil about war anyway?
They missed a real opportunity last year with 2012. Could've had a scenario where the world is falling apart--hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, giant tornadoes, superstorms, and other phenomena can occur at any moment--and everyone's scrambling to save as much of their population as possible. Civ's declare war just to claim the highest ground against the rising sea level, or just to grab the resource they need (iron, alumium, oil) to complete their mega-ark project.
And how about some holiday DLC for Halloween? Zombies are popular everywhere, so why not Civ? A global virus has zombie hordes appearing, first in the city states and then moving towards the rest of the world. Using a mechanic similar to Germany's UA, they can covert defeated enemies into more undead. Research tree could be altered to include specific anti-zombie techs, possibly even a vaccine that cand end the nightmare.
They missed a real opportunity last year with 2012. Could've had a scenario where the world is falling apart--hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, giant tornadoes, superstorms, and other phenomena can occur at any moment--and everyone's scrambling to save as much of their population as possible. Civ's declare war just to claim the highest ground against the rising sea level, or just to grab the resource they need (iron, alumium, oil) to complete their mega-ark project.
And how about some holiday DLC for Halloween? Zombies are popular everywhere, so why not Civ? A global virus has zombie hordes appearing, first in the city states and then moving towards the rest of the world. Using a mechanic similar to Germany's UA, they can covert defeated enemies into more undead. Research tree could be altered to include specific anti-zombie techs, possibly even a vaccine that cand end the nightmare.
ScottMcPwn
Huscarl
Canada can come too?
I really don't think Canada is a worthy civ, theres far too many better choices to include it.
phaethon16
King
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2013
- Messages
- 722
I think that past civ games aren't entirely reliable when you're looking for trends in regards to a possible third expansion. The reason I say this is because civ 5 is just so detailed and different from the other versions that it's totally imaginable for them to add more to it. I personally have been really pleased with the current expansions, so I'm hoping for another. Also, there are too many needed civs to just have another round of dlcs.
We spoke earlier in the thread about the Sumerians and Hittites being part-done; what about the Goths (and a couple of other civs in the G&K scenarios)? The Goths, in particular, had their own UA, UB and UU already, which were unique in the game - the UA didn't even copy elements of other UAs. All they would require is the leader...so pop them down as a possible either for BNW or a DLC.
Similar threads
