Anybody Else Worried About Purchasing Civ5 On Release?

Are You Going to Wait to Purchase Civilization 5?

  • I already pre-ordered it.

    Votes: 49 20.9%
  • I am going to buy it as soon as it comes out.

    Votes: 62 26.4%
  • I am going to wait a little after it comes out to gather information.

    Votes: 55 23.4%
  • I am going to wait until an expansion or DLC combo package comes out to buy it.

    Votes: 24 10.2%
  • I am not going to purchase Civilization 5.

    Votes: 16 6.8%
  • I am not yet sure if I will be purchasing Civilization 5.

    Votes: 29 12.3%

  • Total voters
    235
I will likely just get the base version in some form and buy DLC as I see fit.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm going to assume the DLC will follow a model like other games I've played where its price goes down as time increases. So I'll buy DLC when it makes financial sense for me to do so. That could be the day it's available, it could be 3 months or a year in. It all just depends.

I've come to like the DLC system for the few other games I play, so I won't mind it for Civ I'm sure. 0 day DLC is somewhat annoying, but not enough so to get all internet messageboard indignant about it.
 
I've always waited until the Complete Edition came out to buy Civ, but I am not sure if I will do it this time.
 
So wait, there are people that didn't buy Civ4, but waited till Beyond the Sword came out?

Really?
Why would you do that? Civ4 was a great game and IMHO much better than Civ3 in all ways. You were just punishing yourself cause you didn't want to pay $60 in 2 payments over the course of multiple years?
 
Well I didn't have a computer that could run Civ IV until early last year. I waited until after Colonization came out, I got the Complete Edition which includes all three expansions.
 
OK, not having hardware is one thing, but just waiting for the complete edition seems a bit silly. Especially since, with DLC, its likely that there will never be such a thing as a complete edition...at least not until they cut it off in preparation for Civ6
 
There wasn't a complete edition for civ4 (in the US) until they cut off development in preparation for civ5 so I fail to see what changes things.

You fail to see that some of us are completists. We want the COMPLETE game, and we don't care what 2K defines as "complete", we want the full game, with everything.
 
I don't fail to see that, I fail to see why you would wait for essentially the entire lifecycle to end before you buy. You simply will not get a "complete" game on day 1 no matter what. You didn't in Civ4, you won't here.
 
No offense, but haven't you considered the possibility of some of the users here aren't well paid company managers who can spend $100 whenever it pleases them?

I can understand some users can't afford it.

You forgot about where I said they are already paying for $50 a month for high speed interenet. If you can pay for the internet at $50 a month, in most likely cases they can afford the $100 as well.

I can understand not everyone can afford everything all the time. But think what I said. If you can affoard high speed internet at $50 a month, then you can afford more things as well. If you can't then you really shouldn't be getting high speed internet for $50 a month now eh?

So you can see, I did think about it.;)
 
those two are the same thing

Technically no, I am going to preorder but haven't yet doesn't mean Im waiting for a better deal. Someone may not have the money yet, and they are already set on what they are going to buy. I am going to preorder, and waiting for a better deal, means just that.
 
You forgot about where I said they are already paying for $50 a month for high speed interenet. If you can pay for the internet at $50 a month, in most likely cases they can afford the $100 as well.

What makes you think you know how much people are paying for Internet?

I pay $0 for Internet - at home, my parents pay about $25/month (which is why it isn't good enough for downloading games, but it's not too bad because the DSL lines were recently upgraded in my area), and most of the time I'm on my college's Interent (which sucks even more).
 
You fail to see that some of us are completists. We want the COMPLETE game, and we don't care what 2K defines as "complete", we want the full game, with everything.

This statement is so wrong in many ways. I am not saying he is incorrect, he is correct. What is wrong, is we the community is allowing companies to release games that are not complete now.

If Civ V is a complete game on it's own, how come we are having Zero Day, DLC release then? Dosn't that mean the game could have had the DLC on release day and hence we are buying an incomplete game then.

How can you have Zero Day DLC release and not incorperate it into the game? That means it was intentionally left out of purpose then.

You know, I don't like calling out names here, but if I was Greg or Elizabeth, I would be ashamed abit for this kind of marketing.

I am a firm believer that DLC should not be released within 2 months, 1 month the minimum of a game being released.

So I would like an official reason of why we have Zero Day DLC release. If I am wrong in my thinking, I would like to here it from the company who is doing it. Since Firaxis is quiet on this and we have 2 or is it 3 officials from 2K helping us in comments, Why is it not wrong in having Zero Day DLC release?

For me, I am insulted that 2K would do this. I have bought many games from 2K. I would say I am a good customer. Now I am not good enough to have a full game at release time? If you are going to have Zero Day DLC release it should be free, not paid for. So now, I am not good enough to have free Zero Day DLC release, for buying a game on release day to support 2K and Firaxis.

Thanks 2K, I am glad I mean that much to you. So much of 2K values it's customers.

Please explain to me that I am wrong, I would love to read it. I have an open mind. Even though I do not like you guys going the Steam route, I am open to it.

Now I have a problem with Zero Day DLC release. Why should I not have a problem with it? You guys explained why I shouldn't have a problem with Steam, so can you please answer Zero Day DLC release question please?
 
I bought Civ4 very soon after release, but realistically, am probably not going to do that with Civ5, unless there is a demo that proves to be extraordinarily awesome that comes out before/at release. Preordering seems like quite a bad idea with all the different packages coming out at this time, and I don't see any reason why I should make Civ5 the first game I preorder. Sparing an awesome demo or other very compelling reason to buy at release, I likely will wait to see how the dust is settling what with DLC and all first. Not like there aren't plenty of other games I'd like to play, after all.

Affordability-wise, I'm sure I could afford it (although I won't have an income stream in October), but just because it's a Civilization game and I could buy it isn't reason enough to buy it - although it was for Civ4 because Civ3 was (and still is) my favorite all-time game.
 
I think you're misjudging which side I'm on. I'm AGAINST zero-day DLC (and DLC in general, unless it's free). Hence the need to wait for a complete version a few years down the road.

Sorry, I don't know what I was thinking of.
 
This statement is so wrong in many ways. I am not saying he is incorrect, he is correct. What is wrong, is we the community is allowing companies to release games that are not complete now.

If Civ V is a complete game on it's own, how come we are having Zero Day, DLC release then? Dosn't that mean the game could have had the DLC on release day and hence we are buying an incomplete game then.

How can you have Zero Day DLC release and not incorperate it into the game? That means it was intentionally left out of purpose then.

You know, I don't like calling out names here, but if I was Greg or Elizabeth, I would be ashamed abit for this kind of marketing.

I am a firm believer that DLC should not be released within 2 months, 1 month the minimum of a game being released.

So I would like an official reason of why we have Zero Day DLC release. If I am wrong in my thinking, I would like to here it from the company who is doing it. Since Firaxis is quiet on this and we have 2 or is it 3 officials from 2K helping us in comments, Why is it not wrong in having Zero Day DLC release?

For me, I am insulted that 2K would do this. I have bought many games from 2K. I would say I am a good customer. Now I am not good enough to have a full game at release time? If you are going to have Zero Day DLC release it should be free, not paid for. So now, I am not good enough to have free Zero Day DLC release, for buying a game on release day to support 2K and Firaxis.

Thanks 2K, I am glad I mean that much to you. So much of 2K values it's customers.

Please explain to me that I am wrong, I would love to read it. I have an open mind. Even though I do not like you guys going the Steam route, I am open to it.

Now I have a problem with Zero Day DLC release. Why should I not have a problem with it? You guys explained why I shouldn't have a problem with Steam, so can you please answer Zero Day DLC release question please?

I fail to see what the point of your "wait two months" rule would be. You essentially would prefer them to just "take the content out" and sit on it for two months before releasing it---because that would be the practical effect. And why? Because it makes you feel better?

Also, this argument that they are "taking content out" is all wrong. You are essentially saying that, if they decided not to sell any DLC, they would have made those extra civs anyway. I don't see any reason to be so sure of that. I'm sure the designers love Civ and want to make the best game possible, but they are not a charity organization. They have to do what is profitable. Have you considered that if they weren't selling DLC, they wouldn't have had a reason to make those extra civs in the first place? What is the incentive for creating two extra civs when players will be more than happy with eighteen? So then those extra civs wouldn't be in the release at all. They just wouldn't have been made.

Releasing DLC along with release is not somehow a violation of business ethics. Consumers have a right to a complete game, but that means complete as in all the features work, there aren't any crippling bugs, the game is balanced, etc. Not that consumers have the right not to be sold additional content, which is frankly just ridiculous. I mean who does that hurt? The people who buy the DLC can enjoy it, and the people who don't have exactly the same game as if there wasn't any DLC at all. So who's the injured party?

Again, we are complaining because they are letting us buy more stuff. I fail to see the problem here.
 
This statement is so wrong in many ways. I am not saying he is incorrect, he is correct. What is wrong, is we the community is allowing companies to release games that are not complete now.

If Civ V is a complete game on it's own, how come we are having Zero Day, DLC release then? Dosn't that mean the game could have had the DLC on release day and hence we are buying an incomplete game then.

How can you have Zero Day DLC release and not incorperate it into the game? That means it was intentionally left out of purpose then.

You know, I don't like calling out names here, but if I was Greg or Elizabeth, I would be ashamed abit for this kind of marketing.

I am a firm believer that DLC should not be released within 2 months, 1 month the minimum of a game being released.

So I would like an official reason of why we have Zero Day DLC release. If I am wrong in my thinking, I would like to here it from the company who is doing it. Since Firaxis is quiet on this and we have 2 or is it 3 officials from 2K helping us in comments, Why is it not wrong in having Zero Day DLC release?

For me, I am insulted that 2K would do this. I have bought many games from 2K. I would say I am a good customer. Now I am not good enough to have a full game at release time? If you are going to have Zero Day DLC release it should be free, not paid for. So now, I am not good enough to have free Zero Day DLC release, for buying a game on release day to support 2K and Firaxis.

Thanks 2K, I am glad I mean that much to you. So much of 2K values it's customers.

Please explain to me that I am wrong, I would love to read it. I have an open mind. Even though I do not like you guys going the Steam route, I am open to it.

Now I have a problem with Zero Day DLC release. Why should I not have a problem with it? You guys explained why I shouldn't have a problem with Steam, so can you please answer Zero Day DLC release question please?
I started to type up a really long response to this, but I'm just going to state my opinions without comment, as a counterpoint.
First what I don't like...

1. I'm not a big fan of DLC for basically one reason...I am concerned about the effect of DLC on the community (fragmentation and modding)

2. I really dislike retailer or channel specific unique bonuses. The D2D offer of the first premium DLC pack for free is OK as it is also available for purchase if I don't buy from D2D. However forcing me to choose (sight unseen) between different mappacks and/or the Deluxe edition or the Boxed Special Edition is annoying.

However...IF Firaxis have a good answer to #1 above then I really have no issues with DLC in general.

In fact I quite like the fact I will get access to additional content sooner than waiting for an expansion pack. I like the fact that I will be able to pick and choose which ones I am interested in and just pay for those. I don't expect to buy much DLC but I like having the choice.

Also I will not mind at all if DLC I purchase is bundled into the first expansion pack as I will have got good use out of them, meaning that for me their cost will have already been fully depreciated, besides which I personally buy expansion packs for gameplay changes and to stay in sync with the mod community, not to get additional Civs.

I do not feel any different about 0-day DLC with the exception of point #2 above regarding exclusive bonuses; I guess you could say I am fine with the concept but slightly unhappy at the execution based on what we currently know.

I don't see this as radically different to any product I buy that has add-ons or additional services available at the time of purchase.

At the end of the day whether I buy DLC will be a value-based decision...is the item worth to me the price being asked. I suspect that the answer will be yes for some but no for most.
 
Top Bottom