Are you looking forward to Civ World?

Are you looking forward to Civ World?

  • Yes, and are planning to pay for premium currency

    Votes: 5 1.8%
  • Yes, but will only pay for free

    Votes: 65 23.7%
  • Will play for the first few months, then probably lose interest

    Votes: 18 6.6%
  • Will have a quick look to see what the fuss is about, then will probably leave it

    Votes: 52 19.0%
  • Not at all interested

    Votes: 95 34.7%
  • Will have to wait and see what happens when its released

    Votes: 33 12.0%
  • No opinion

    Votes: 6 2.2%

  • Total voters
    274
Yet I bought Civ Bucks because they are cheap and compared to Zynga Cash or other established FB virtual currency they provide you with a huge benefit and therefor it is value for money. Firaxis did a great job restricting each player to use just 10 Bucks per 24 hours. Imho this is great for the game balance as rich people can not dominate the game and win just by their power of money in the real world.

This sounds like a pretty shabby method of getting into the players' pockets. If what you say is true, and the "bucks" do make a huge difference, then players will need them to stay competitive. This means that the "free to play" slogan doesn't make much sense, it's not free to play in practice if the player's choice is just between either paying or losing.

The system that you describe seems designed to:

1. Lure players with a "free to play" slogan.

2. Let players realize how important the "bucks" are.

3. Facilitate a low spending threshold in your players due to the low price of said "bucks".

4. Give the players who keep spending their money an illusion of "fairness" by limiting the amount of bucks that one player can buy in a given timeframe.

5. Probably (this doesn't follow from what you wrote, but would fit very well into the system you describe) encourage players to bring their friends into the game, and to persuade these friends to spend money themselves, because the per-person spending limit makes groups more effective.

It would probably work economically. The one thing I don't understand is why players allow themselves to be milked so easily. Players will end up buying bucks regularly as if the game was offered with subscription fees - though asking for subscription fees would at least be more honest than first luring players in with a "no charge" premise, and then designing game mechanics that require people to spend more money if they don't want to be left behind.
 
Spending civbucks at the market makes no sense, because 1 civbuck = 100 gold.

And you can't simply change the amount of gold for a civbuck.
If 1 civbuck = 1000 gold then it would be overpowered in the early game where the prices are much lower, especially for the great people.


The picture shows a late game situation at the market.



Spoiler :
 
One thing I can't understand though is the moral outrage at the mere idea of signing up for a Facebook account. It's just a website, and you don't even have to add any friends if you don't want to. Could someone please give me an explanation of that one?
Spoiler Off-topic Reply :
It's not Facebook itself but the company behind it whose mission statement is to capture your personal information without compensating you for it and then combine this information with anything that they can get their grubby little hands on, including your browsing habits, your interests, and if they find a way, they'll even add in your medical records.

Marketing-based personal information really should be compensated (i.e. to the owner of the info) in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per person but they are doing their best to get it for free and then abuse this information for their net profit. That corporation is also trying to steal their own version of the internet and if they succeed, they may find a way to charge you for accessing everyone else's content, quite in opposition to the concept of net neutrality.

Information is power and they will find ways to use and abuse this information to your detriment in the line of profit.

Actually, many companies have been working towards some of these goals for years now--free email accounts are one such way. However, the power of Facebook is that people feel COMPELLED to put in their real information, which was one of the reasons why free email accounts have, for the most part, failed*--although they have at least succeeded in allowing companies to learn about what people are doing and to gain access to the odd innovation that gets emailed around.

Imagine a corporation that knows everything about you and can use that information to control nearly every aspect of your life. That is the ultimate goal that they are driving towards and it is a very scary concept.

As you say, Facebook itself is just a website, but it is how the personal information submitted to that website has been used and will be used that offers a strong reason for people to avoid using it.

* Free email accounts have generally failed due to a large number of users putting in erroneous information--and honestly, why should I have to give my real date of birth, which is carelessly used by many government institutions and companies that I do business with as a key field for accessing a lot of my personal financial info, just to be able to read and send email messages (or to share pictures and play games with others, for that matter)?



I would be fine with playing a non-Facebook version that was a nearly identical game in all other aspects.


Moderator Action: The noticeboard in this forum specifically notes that 'this is not the place to get into editorial rants about how much you loathe facebook or how you think its evil'. Please make sure your posts here are focused on the game. Warned for spam.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
It's not Facebook itself but the company behind it whose mission statement is to capture your personal information without compensating you for it and then combine this information with anything that they can get their grubby little hands on, including your browsing habits, your interests, and if they find a way, they'll even add in your medical records.

Marketing-based personal information really should be compensated (i.e. to the owner of the info) in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per person but they are doing their best to get it for free and then abuse this information for their net profit. That corporation is also trying to steal their own version of the internet and if they succeed, they may find a way to charge you for accessing everyone else's content, quite in opposition to the concept of net neutrality.

Information is power and they will find ways to use and abuse this information to your detriment in the line of profit.

Actually, many companies have been working towards some of these goals for years now--free email accounts are one such way. However, the power of Facebook is that people feel COMPELLED to put in their real information, which was one of the reasons why free email accounts have, for the most part, failed*--although they have at least succeeded in allowing companies to learn about what people are doing and to gain access to the odd innovation that gets emailed around.

Imagine a corporation that knows everything about you and can use that information to control nearly every aspect of your life. That is the ultimate goal that they are driving towards and it is a very scary concept.

As you say, Facebook itself is just a website, but it is how the personal information submitted to that website has been used and will be used that offers a strong reason for people to avoid using it.


I would be fine with playing a non-Facebook version that was a nearly identical game, but no way will I be catering to the whims of the company behind Facebook by playing the game, sad to say.


* Free email accounts have generally failed due to a large number of users putting in erroneous information--and honestly, why should I have to give my real date of birth, which is carelessly used by many government institutions and companies that I do business with as a key field for accessing a lot of my personal financial info, just to be able to read and send email messages (or to share pictures and play games with others, for that matter)?
Wow, that must be the biggest hopefully ignorant breaking of rules rant on a forum I have ever seen. It's barely relevant to the subject of the thread.

Moderator Action: If you have a problem with a post, please report it rather than responding. This post constitutes an attack on the poster. Warned for flaming.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Edit: Didn't even know there was a report button lol
 
Pardon my language but Facebook is a WhoreHouse, If you want to spend tons of money to compete with people who spend tons of money or you want to end up creating tons of fake Facebook accounts to get ahead, go right ahead and play this game. I for one won't be falling for this trap. Civ5 doesn't even have a playable multiplayer function because of this abomination. Good Riddance!
 
It's nothing special and definitely nothing different from a gazillion other facebook "games". Lost all interest in it in well under a week. Well, at least once again I can completely turn off the fb application platform, since CW wasn't worth keeping it on after all.
 
Zynga makes better civilization games than civilization. So far.

Really Sid Meier? You expect us to play this shipwreck you call Civilization World because it is called Civilization?

I only played for three weeks, and have never reached population number more than 7 and I enjoy battles more when it is on Zynga's Empires and Allies.

Try again, Sid.
 
This sounds like a pretty shabby method of getting into the players' pockets. If what you say is true, and the "bucks" do make a huge difference, then players will need them to stay competitive. This means that the "free to play" slogan doesn't make much sense, it's not free to play in practice if the player's choice is just between either paying or losing.

The system that you describe seems designed to:

1. Lure players with a "free to play" slogan.

2. Let players realize how important the "bucks" are.

3. Facilitate a low spending threshold in your players due to the low price of said "bucks".

4. Give the players who keep spending their money an illusion of "fairness" by limiting the amount of bucks that one player can buy in a given timeframe.

5. Probably (this doesn't follow from what you wrote, but would fit very well into the system you describe) encourage players to bring their friends into the game, and to persuade these friends to spend money themselves, because the per-person spending limit makes groups more effective.

It would probably work economically. The one thing I don't understand is why players allow themselves to be milked so easily. Players will end up buying bucks regularly as if the game was offered with subscription fees - though asking for subscription fees would at least be more honest than first luring players in with a "no charge" premise, and then designing game mechanics that require people to spend more money if they don't want to be left behind.

This is going to be the dominant form of gaming soon. And Sid is ready to step up and take the reigns of hell into his own hands.

Civ World=:satan:
 
i am unwilling to play this game cause i refuse to play in teams.
 
:nono:

Take any and all references and associations to the Civilization franchise out of it. Remove all possible direct and indirect connection with money. Remove facebook. Make a formal apology the the entire nearly 20 year "real" Civilization franchise for this abomination and its thinly veiled attempt to exploit minors and pocket their money online. Take and keep the High Road. I wont be playing it, and 2 parents (who are not civ players) have complained about this to me (I'm a known civ-er who advocates parents allowing kids to play the Civilization I-V franchise incarnations). I will actively be advocating all players, especially minors, avoid this game completely.
 
Top Bottom