Has Firaxis finally learned to balance the game?

Resorting to petty names like fanbois, and now throwing wild assumptions around. At least don't use the word logic when you go on like that. Look at some other games - MP and SP coexist perfectly fine, and you certainly won't see people on their forums complaining how one will ruin the other. This is a syndrome I've yet to encounter in any other game community, and I'm part of quite a few of them.

Fanbois is no more an insult then being called irrational. I also used the qualifier "some". In general, most MP advocates have been quite well behaved.

I think Civ is a totally different animal then games like Starcraft II. SP and MP can coexist because really, in essence, it's a pretty simplistic game.
 
They've put 3 years + development into ciV. Should they put 5+ years into it? By that logic, Civ VI would be released around 2017 or so. 2K games and Hasborg certainly wouldn't allow that.

Even if they did that, the cost of the base game would probably rise to $100 to compensate for the extra time and resources. :(

Quite the Herculean task I think. It's much easier to release a mod or expansion after they have made their money back on the initial sales of the game. At least that seems to be the correct approach for me.

Well the only reason it took 3 years for Civ5 was that 2K threw Steam at them mid way, I'm sure, and that delayed development. Civ4 which was a totally new code base as well only took 2 years.

Any there is no reason a game needs to take more than a couple years, and the only thing MP needs extra is a couple months for a open beta to stress test the MP system/servers like MMO's do.

All you have to do is spend a bit of money to hire a MP code team and they work in parallel with the core code team and artists. Dan McGarry, the lead Civ4 MP programmer worked out very well, we just need to add to that concept.

And just like the high cost of 3D movies, pays for itself many times over(think Avatar), so would hiring a MP code team, in the end 2K would make 100 times or more the money they spend on extra programmers for MP.

CS
 
Fanbois is no more an insult then being called irrational.

Who's going to be the judge of that? You? Also - I'm not throwing years and numbers around.

You come up with

"Should they put 5+ years into it? By that logic, Civ VI would be released around 2017 or so. 2K games and Hasborg certainly wouldn't allow that."

Whoa. Where did that come out from? Seriously man, you are using THAT ^ line as an argument and then claiming insult on being called illogical (not irrational)?


I think Civ is a totally different animal then games like Starcraft II. SP and MP can coexist because really, in essence, it's a pretty simplistic game.

You shouldn't comment on things you do not have a good grasp of. I know I wouldn't.
 
Don't take me wrong, I love playing the civ series, but balance has always, ALWAYS been the last thing I can associate them with.

Whether it is a leader having very obvious bonuses that are useful in almost any circumstance, or one being utterly useless, traits that make very little strategic viability (Defensive, anyone?), unit or unit promotion (shock?) - civilization has always made me question.. what the *blip* were they THINKING??

You mean Protective? Defensive is not a trait. And Protective is a perfectly fine trait. Not as useful to a human as Aggressive, but the promotions to gunpowder units is very nice.
I know the game can't be perfectly balanced. But you could just do a quick glance at the leaders/civ traits and deduct which ones were in a very clear advantage over the other - and I'm talking about while factoring in the map variance (islands, mass forests etc.). Some civs/leaders/traits/units/civics/etc. were flat out gimped compared to others, regardless of circumstances.

Even after patches, little was solved, and the glaring problems plague the game up to this day as far as official patches go.

So I looked at some civ traits from civ 5 and there you go, they've done it again.. I know, I haven't tried the game. But I look at the Ottoman civ trait and compare it to.. say.. Russia. Oh my God. How is that sea barbarian thing EVER going to make up for mass production? I want someone from Firaxis to explain to me how can this make sense to ANYONE..

So you have already determined the balance of the civs in civ 5, even though you haven't played it. You think your 'at a glance' is apparently better support for something than their playtesting. Do you realize how ridiculous that is?
 
Well the only reason it took 3 years for Civ5 was that 2K threw Steam at them mid way, I'm sure, and that delayed development. Civ4 which was a totally new code base as well only took 2 years.

Sorry, but unless you have some sort of source for this, that's an incredibly unlikely statement. Steamworks provides a number of tools for integrating network functionality into games, along with distribution/publishing tools. Saying that Steam added any significant amount of time (years? really?) without any sort of backup is something I can't take seriously.
 
Sorry, but unless you have some sort of source for this, that's an incredibly unlikely statement. Steamworks provides a number of tools for integrating network functionality into games, along with distribution/publishing tools. Saying that Steam added any significant amount of time (years? really?) without any sort of backup is something I can't take seriously.

Can't you see? It's obvious! Argh! The man's keeping us down! Anything I don't like is 2k trying to squash the brilliance that is Firaxis!
 
You mean Protective? Defensive is not a trait. And Protective is a perfectly fine trait. Not as useful to a human as Aggressive, but the promotions to gunpowder units is very nice.

Yes, I made a typo, and no, protective is not useful at all. Not to humans, not to AIs and not to lab monkeys. Financial on the other hand..

So you have already determined the balance of the civs in civ 5, even though you haven't played it. You think your 'at a glance' is apparently better support for something than their playtesting. Do you realize how ridiculous that is?

We've already got the descriptions, and we've got the track record. How ridiculous is it?
 
We've already got the descriptions, and we've got the track record. How ridiculous is it?

Because nobody here has any idea of what the game is actually like? What's stopping Civ5 from having relevant barbarians up through the early modern period, which would make the German/Ottoman SAs rather useful? It's already known that barbarians are pegged to the tech leader, so if you think the Germans will get four Warriors and a Spearman out of their SA, it's unlikely.

About as unlikely as Firaxis giving civs completely worthless SAs, in fact. :D
 
Because nobody here has any idea of what the game is actually like? What's stopping Civ5 from having relevant barbarians up through the early modern period, which would make the German/Ottoman SAs rather useful? It's already known that barbarians are pegged to the tech leader, so if you think the Germans will get four Warriors and a Spearman out of their SA, it's unlikely.

About as unlikely as Firaxis giving civs completely worthless SAs, in fact. :D

We've already got the descriptions, and we've got the track record. How ridiculous is it?

I rest my case, because I'm tired of sounding like a broken record.
 
Educated guesswork and past knowledge only go so far when delving into an unknown environment.

Especially when the game has major changes, and is being made by a mostly different team. I don't think we can judge the true power of *anything* without access to the full game- many pre-launch "imbalances" turn out to be weaker than we thought, and/or the ones that everyone bemoans as useless are better than we thought.
 
Who's going to be the judge of that? You? Also - I'm not throwing years and numbers around.

You come up with

"Should they put 5+ years into it? By that logic, Civ VI would be released around 2017 or so. 2K games and Hasborg certainly wouldn't allow that."

Whoa. Where did that come out from? Seriously man, you are using THAT ^ line as an argument and then claiming insult on being called illogical (not irrational)?




You shouldn't comment on things you do not have a good grasp of. I know I wouldn't.

Wow. A little surprised that someone who is so offended about being insulted would be so casual in flinging them around. Get off your high horse. ;)

The numbers weren't exact of course but it would definitely delay the game by a significant period of time. 2K isn't going to allow that in my opinion.

Especially when they can't justify it to their shareholders. MP makes up a small portion of the player base. That's the reality of it, like it or not.

At best, it will come in an expansion, DLC or a mod. Rightly or wrongly.
 
Uh, I'm the offended one? How did you figure that one out? :lol:

As I recall you started out with petty fanboi remarks and then proceeded comparing them to "real" insults which were directed at you. :mischief:

Again you're just making things up. Significant time? Does that come from your experience? I actually playtested/beta tested several turn based (Heroes of M&M) and RTS games (WC3/SC2) and participated in dev discussions about MP game balance first hand. The amount of time required for balancing is a tiny, tiny spec compared to the game cycle.

From what I've deducted you mostly or only play SP. Which is fine, but again, I wouldn't speak of things I don't know about.
 
Sorry, but unless you have some sort of source for this, that's an incredibly unlikely statement. Steamworks provides a number of tools for integrating network functionality into games, along with distribution/publishing tools. Saying that Steam added any significant amount of time (years? really?) without any sort of backup is something I can't take seriously.

I don't say stuff unless I know what I am talking about. You won't hear this from 2K, but they can't hide the fact that there is indeed a Gamespy Civ5 lobby present on the GS server cluster. How do I know? Because two MP modders have told me they can hook into it, just like we do with the Civ4 lobby at Civplayers to display the lobby game list on a web page. http://civ4.civplayers.com/gslobby Every GS lobby has a unique ID, #civ3con for the Civ3 Conquest lobby and #civ4bts for the Civ4 BTS lobby.

Which means since we now know that Steamworks is powering the game that at some point they were using Gamespy and mid development they had to switch to Steam, and no one in Firaxis would have had any experience programming to the Steamworks API. So now they have to go out and hire that expertise, and this likely combined with what ever 2K/Firaxis politics/debate etc their was, delayed many parts of the game. And anyone that is a programmer here knows well that when one part of a game is delayed it tends to have a snowball effect on the rest of the game and the entire project gets delayed.

So is that enough of an explanation for you?

CS
 
Wow. A little surprised that someone who is so offended about being insulted would be so casual in flinging them around. Get off your high horse. ;)

The numbers weren't exact of course but it would definitely delay the game by a significant period of time. 2K isn't going to allow that in my opinion.

Especially when they can't justify it to their shareholders. MP makes up a small portion of the player base. That's the reality of it, like it or not.

At best, it will come in an expansion, DLC or a mod. Rightly or wrongly.

In my opinion it is likely 2K that drove the move to Steamworks and it is the other way around, 2K would love to make money for their share holders( and make no mistake MP=Cash) and likely it is only the huge reputation that is Sid Meier that is defending the last PC game genre not to embrace MP.....but that is just my opinion.

CS
 
I don't really know if an improved mp would make them that much more money. TBS are naturally more SP then MP, and with civ making a map and some starting locations nautrally being better then others, it's hard to see Civ5 having a massive mp community like console games and RTSs.
 
Uh, I'm the offended one? How did you figure that one out? :lol:

As I recall you started out with petty fanboi remarks and then proceeded comparing them to "real" insults which were directed at you. :mischief:

Again you're just making things up. Significant time? Does that come from your experience? I actually playtested/beta tested several turn based (Heroes of M&M) and RTS games (WC3/SC2) and participated in dev discussions about MP game balance first hand. The amount of time required for balancing is a tiny, tiny spec compared to the game cycle.

From what I've deducted you mostly or only play SP. Which is fine, but again, I wouldn't speak of things I don't know about.

Wow! You certainly have an extensive resume in the gaming world! I am truly impressed and I have seen the error of my ways. ;)

This is fantastic! We might as well close the thread now. The problem is solved. Huzzah! Take your extensive gaming pedigree to Firaxis and get a job there. They'll be sure to snap you up immediately. Then you effect the changes you so desire for Civ VI. Should be really easy since you've got it all worked out in your mind. Good luck with that. :goodjob:

Sorry to have insulted, demeaned or otherwise insulted you in any way, shape or form, Oh Gaming Guru. :worship:
 
So is that enough of an explanation for you?

CS

Indeed, although it is surprising. I figured that Steam was chosen from before coding work started as the base for any netcode to save time on trying to build their own APIs. Although, it is somewhat surprising that 2k would foot the bill for licensing two MP managers (GameSpy/Steam); surely those can't be cheap, although Steam probably saved money in the end.

I'm curious when the decision was made, since Steam integration has been known since Civ5 was announced.
 
Wow! You certainly have an extensive resume in the gaming world! I am truly impressed and I have seen the error of my ways. ;)

This is fantastic! We might as well close the thread now. The problem is solved. Huzzah! Take your extensive gaming pedigree to Firaxis and get a job there. They'll be sure to snap you up immediately. Then you effect the changes you so desire for Civ VI. Should be really easy since you've got it all worked out in your mind. Good luck with that. :goodjob:

Sorry to have insulted, demeaned or otherwise insulted you in any way, shape or form, Oh Gaming Guru. :worship:

Ouch. Didn't mean to push any buttons, overabundant sarcasm speaks for itself you know :)

TBS are naturally more SP then MP

It's not true at all, at least in my experience. I'm from east europe, from a country where most people think that the "brain" of the computer is in the monitor.

Now, in all this computer illiteracy, we have this gaming cafe for like 10 years. It's called Heroes and for good reason - the most popular game is Heroes of M&M - I've played so many games there with so many people it's just unimaginable for me to look back on Heroes and think of it as a SP experience, despite it being a TBS game, allegedly more of a SP title.

It's like playing Chess on a much more complex level, and so is Civ, playing against a living opponent who you must outwit in the true meaning of the word is a completely different experience than going up against an automated AI.

That said I do hope that Firaxis will see the potential this game has and make it more accessible and fair when people decide to compete, and tweak the game to be fun for any group. Others have done it before and it can never be a mistake to leave the door open for people who enjoy MP.
 
Ouch. Didn't mean to push any buttons, overabundant sarcasm speaks for itself you know :)



It's not true at all, at least in my experience. I'm from east europe, from a country where most people think that the "brain" of the computer is in the monitor.

Now, in all this computer illiteracy, we have this gaming cafe for like 10 years. It's called Heroes and for good reason - the most popular game is Heroes of M&M - I've played so many games there with so many people it's just unimaginable for me to look back on Heroes and think of it as a SP experience, despite it being a TBS game, allegedly more of a SP title.

It's like playing Chess on a much more complex level, and so is Civ, playing against a living opponent who you must outwit in the true meaning of the word is a completely different experience than going up against an automated AI.

That said I do hope that Firaxis will see the potential this game has and make it more accessible and fair when people decide to compete, and tweak the game to be fun for any group. Others have done it before and it can never be a mistake to leave the door open for people who enjoy MP.

You didn't push any buttons really. I don't agree with your position or your general snotty tone and the need to blow your own horn. You got sarcasm in response. Congrats.

As someone has previously stated, designing ciV for MP would leave a lot of interesting and fun elements out all for the sake of balance such as city states or barbarians. It would make the game a lot duller in SP. Plus the fact that you'd have to balance 30 odd Civilizations/Leaders. (As compared to how many in Starcraft II?)

You may think you know better than Firaxis/2K games but I think you are sadly mistaken. MP players make up a tiny minority of Civ players. They made the correct choice catering to the vast majority of Civ players who actually like an interesting and varied game experience. Randomness leads to unique game situations that make players want to play again and again, trying different Civs, approaches and strategies. MP seeks to get rid of the randomness all in order to level the playing field.

You might as well design a flat plain (so there are no geographical advantages) with each player in a corner with exactly the same resources. All the traits and UU would be totally generic. That sounds perfectly balanced to me. Then you would see who is the better Civ player.

Well, except for it not really being Civ anymore. Not a game I'd be interested in.
 
Top Bottom