More Civ, Less Fanatic

vandyr said:

Yes, actually, there was quite a bit of discontent on this very forum when Civ 4 came out.

But its not the point of fear of change, and I'm not accusing anyone of being afraid of change. That has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Its about approaching them as completely different games. If Aion doesn't have what WoW does, and you prefer WoW, go back to WoW. Endlessly complaining that Aion is not WoW does nothing for anyone. Everquest 2 was not Everquest part 2, it was a completely different game set in the world of Everquest. Diablo 2 was a new game in the Diablo series that released barebones compared to Diablo 1 in its current state at that time, etc.

I like Civ IV, and I like Civ V. To me they are completely different games, and I don't view V as a sequel, because its not, its a new game in the franchise. Personally, I like V much more than I did IV at release, however, if asked to compare V to IV BTS, there is no comparison, but its also not realistic to compare the two. No installment to any franchise will release with as much material or as many goodies as a previous iteration that's had years to develop...this will never ever happen. Its just not financially feasible.

The key thing to remember here, is that this is the fifth stand alone game of the franchise, not that it is a sequel in any way, shape or form. It is an entirely different game with different mechanics that, like all games of any franchise, will take time to build up to the content of its predecessor. If there had never been a single mod or expansion for Civ IV, and we got Civ V, everyone would praise it as the best thing since sliced bread.

On a side note, I played Empire Earth III for all of two hours before I tossed that crap in the garbage. In retrospect, maybe I should've visited the forum and voice my displeasure over and over because it wasn't EE II. Again, different games, I just didn't like it.

Click to expand...

Would you agree that Civ V should not be named as such then?

Venereus said:

Would you agree that Civ V should not be named as such then?

Click to expand...

No. Why shouldn't it be named Civ V? Did you even read what you quoted?

vandyr said:

I mean, god forbid anything be different. Why can't Civ 5 have different mechanics than Civ 4? Its NOT Civ 4 2.0, and that's the whole point. I agree the community is polarized, but I really don't think Civ 5 is to blame as much as the players themselves are.

Click to expand...

Others have stated it already in various threads in which even you participated, but for your convenience, I will repeat it once more.

Almost nobody requests Civ5 to have the same mechanics as Civ4. There is even no need for this, since we already have Civ4.
What "we" would like to have is a game with the same amount of different mechanics, and what we have hoped for was a game with even better ones.
This hope has been fostered by the 2k/Firaxis gang, but they didn't deliver.

Furthermore, there is no fear of change. There aren't almost any complaints about the hexes, for instance, yet that is clearly a change.
So, this accusiation is already moot.

Another thing is the alleged desire to have the chance to "discuss" about Civ5 without being disturbed. Yet, some of those who claimed to have such a desire almost exclusively show up in threads with a critical connotation.
In other threads, were people are asking something for instance, these members don't show up... Very, very strange.

Think about that, guys. And then you may come back and request more "civilized" behaviour.

fantsu said:

Let Firaxis know this by posting and someday it will be better.

Click to expand...

||
|| Why wait? Mod it and get it better today!
||
\/

lschnarch said:

Post, post, post.

Think about that, guys. And then you may come back and request more "civilized" behaviour.

Click to expand...

You know Ischnarch. It was a good post, but then this...

Thank you for providing more examples for the reasons why this thread even exists.

lschnarch said:

Others have stated it already in various threads in which even you participated, but for your convenience, I will repeat it once more.

Almost nobody requests Civ5 to have the same mechanics as Civ4. There is even no need for this, since we already have Civ4.
What "we" would like to have is a game with the same amount of different mechanics, and what we have hoped for was a game with even better ones.
This hope has been fostered by the 2k/Firaxis gang, but they didn't deliver.

Furthermore, there is no fear of change. There aren't almost any complaints about the hexes, for instance, yet that is clearly a change.
So, this accusiation is already moot.

Another thing is the alleged desire to have the chance to "discuss" about Civ5 without being disturbed. Yet, some of those who claimed to have such a desire almost exclusively show up in threads with a critical connotation.
In other threads, were people are asking something for instance, these members don't show up... Very, very strange.

Think about that, guys. And then you may come back and request more "civilized" behaviour.

Click to expand...

First of all, I find the tone of your post argumentative. This discussion is perfectly civil, and asking someone not to be offended by a game is not insulting in any way. Secondly, I can't see how you can possibly miss all the requests for many of the missing mechanics in Civ 4 to be added to Civ 5 including, but not limited to sliders, unit stacks, religion, etc.
Thirdly, if you had read what I've been writing, no game will EVER release as fully developed and fleshed out as its predecessor. Just not going to happen. No matter how much you may or may not like it, comparing Civ V to anything other than Civ IV vanilla at this point is just foolish. All of us have been playing video games long enough to know this.

Fear of change isn't even an issue. I never brought it up nor did I even come anywhere near close to alluding to it.

Jharii said:

You know Ischnarch. It was a good post, but then this...

Thank you for providing more examples for the reasons why this thread even exists.

Click to expand...

What? Does is already account for being uncivilized, if one group is reminded of (as a group, not every single member of it) to behave in the same way which they request from the others?

We clearly face quite some new members, who are unexperienced players.
*I* would have expected the ones who claim to want to discuss Civ5 to help these new members. I just don't see this happen. Quite some of the "vocal supporters" (there are less vocal supporters) seem to have slipped my notice in supporting others.
So, something doesn't seem to fit.

Honestly, that confused me. When people want to discuss, then they should do.
It is just that easy.

lschnarch said:

What? Does is already account for being uncivilized, if one group is reminded of (as a group, not every single member of it) to behave in the same way which they request from the others?

Click to expand...

Really? Did you actually read what you posted?

"And then you may come back and request more "civilized" behaviour."

Sorry, and with all due respect, acting like you are some parental or authority figure over anyone else like this...

Seriously, if you can't see that is completely insulting and degrading, then I don't know what else to tell you.

vandyr said:

Yes, actually, there was quite a bit of discontent on this very forum when Civ 4 came out.

But its not the point of fear of change, and I'm not accusing anyone of being afraid of change. That has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Its about approaching them as completely different games. If Aion doesn't have what WoW does, and you prefer WoW, go back to WoW. Endlessly complaining that Aion is not WoW does nothing for anyone. Everquest 2 was not Everquest part 2, it was a completely different game set in the world of Everquest. Diablo 2 was a new game in the Diablo series that released barebones compared to Diablo 1 in its current state at that time, etc.
..........

The key thing to remember here, is that this is the fifth stand alone game of the franchise, not that it is a sequel in any way, shape or form.

Click to expand...

See, the what's frustrating about this argument is that they should not have called it Civilization V if it was not going to be a sequel. If they had called Civ V anything else, people would not have been nearly as upset...but then many people might not have bought the game. That argument does not work with any other kind sequel. The Two Towers followed up from the Lord of the Rings. Iron Man 2 followed up from Iron Man. Nobody, except game companies calls something a sequel if it is a "different stand-alone title."

It is an entirely different game with different mechanics that, like all games of any franchise, will take time to build up to the content of its predecessor. If there had never been a single mod or expansion for Civ IV, and we got Civ V, everyone would praise it as the best thing since sliced bread.

Click to expand...

This is another frustrating argument, that gets thrown around a lot. My question remains, why wouldn't Firaxis build upon what was already there in Civ IV BtS. I mean, I can understand if the game is a little buggy, or needs rebalancing. But how do you justify literally removing features that were already there in the first place? You are saying that it will take Firaxis five years to REPLACE the things they left out? People would never stand for that anywhere else. You would be mad if you got the next version of ,say, the iPhone and it had no camera. It's another argument that dosen't hold anywhere else, but people seem to be making exceptions just because it's Civ...

Your last point is pure opinion. I like vanilla Civ IV far more than Civ V, and I doubt I'm alone. It's not the things that we got in a couple of expansions that are the problem. It's the discrepancies between core game mechanics in the two games.

I like Civ IV, and I like Civ V. To me they are completely different games, and I don't view V as a sequel, because its not, its a new game in the franchise. Personally, I like V much more than I did IV at release, however, if asked to compare V to IV BTS, there is no comparison, but its also not realistic to compare the two. No installment to any franchise will release with as much material or as many goodies as a previous iteration that's had years to develop...this will never ever happen. Its just not financially feasible.

Click to expand...

I point you in the direction of a couple games which handily refute the idea that franchise can't develop more with each iteration.

Assassin's Creed. The first one was interesting, but shallow. Assassin's Creed 2 was dramatically richer, longer, more detailed and successfully integrated elements from different types of games. At release.

Fable...Nice idea but short and underdeveloped...Fable II built upon the original, larger, more vibrant world, more depth, more quests, more roleplaying...At release.

By that logic, 2, 3 and 4 should all have different names as well.

And come on, Assassin's Creed? Lets talk about games with substance. I like Asassin's Creed, but that's like comparing a car with a spaceship.

Jharii said:

Seriously, if you can't see that is completely insulting and degrading, then I don't know what else to tell you.

Click to expand...

Honestly, sometimes people seem to look out for being insulted.
If I were as easily to insult as you seem to be, the mods wouldn't have any free minute anymore, so much "whiners", "haters", "go away" and whatnotever I could find here.

Being "civilized" means also to be a bit relaxed.

lschnarch said:

Honestly, sometimes people seem to look out for being insulted.
If I were as easily to insult as you seem to be, the mods wouldn't have any free minute anymore, so much "whiners", "haters", "go away" and whatnotever I could find here.

Being "civilized" means also to be a bit relaxed.

Click to expand...

Considering that there is no possible way that you could actually insult me, you should probably go look up what civilized means. Relaxed is not a prerequisite of civility.

You can paint a stick all pretty colors, spray it in perfume, and cover it with chocolate, all before poking someone with it. It's still a stick and you're still poking someone with it.

Thanks, but I chose once to not converse with you. I will choose to go that route again.

vandyr said:

And come on, Assassin's Creed? Lets talk about games with substance. I like Asassin's Creed, but that's like comparing a car with a spaceship.

Click to expand...

The point remains...I'm not going to "upgrade" from a space shuttle to the moon lander...I'm not going to "upgrade" from a Ferrari to a Model T.

sketch162000 said:

The point remains...I'm not going to "upgrade" from a space shuttle to the moon lander...I'm not going to "upgrade" from a Ferrari to a Model T.

Click to expand...

No, that's not a point. That's a very bad example. A game designed around everything interacting with a single unit with limited and dictated gameplay paths can hardly compare to something on the scale of Civ. Not talking down to AC, its an excellent game, but lets be real here, its a fire-and-forget game title with an nth of the depth of any rts or 4x strategy game. Hardly a reasonable measuring tool for anyone's expectations of what Civ 5 should release with.

And as to your examples of upgrades, you are absolutely 100% correct. Any gamer with a reasonable history of gaming in this genre knows that the next item in the franchise is more than likely going to release with less than its predecessor. Case in point: Civilization 3. Would you like another? Civilization 4. Coming into Civ 5 with any other expectation is naive. Which is why, knowing this, you should stick with the fully expansioned/patched/modded Civ 4 until such time as Civ 5 has had time to achieve all that.

vandyr said:

Any gamer with a reasonable history of gaming in this genre knows that the next item in the franchise is more than likely going to release with less than its predecessor.

Click to expand...

Well, that is just depressing Thanks for the protip...

The best game ever was (Colossal) Adventure (or maybe even mainframe Star Trek). We've been going downhill since that point.

Man, remember when this thread used to be civil? Those were the days.

SuperJay said:

Man, remember when this thread used to be civil? Those were the days.

Click to expand...

Kumbaya.

Jharii said:

Kumbaya.

Click to expand...

Indeed! Let's roast marshmellows over the campfire!

You know, I was assured this thread would end badly and have to be locked again. I was like "no, no... it's going well, it's a constructive discussion, I really think there's hope."

Even in my ripe old age, I am so dang naive sometimes.

naivity is perhaps the most important prerequisite for civilization...