Anyone else sad they won't play V on release?

Sahkuhnder said:

I do see now that the poll questions could have been phrased better and as you said some pro-Steam people like yourself could have (correctly) voted a "Steam-neutral" vote as Steam didn't influence your decision to purchase Civ5.

Click to expand...

This is generally the problem with forum polls, most often caused by the original poster's own bias. It's not always intentional, but it's almost always there.

Sahkuhnder said:

That still tells us much. Of 629 votes on a Civ-friendly site in the Civ5 sub-forum 91 (14%) said "I will definitely NOT buy the game, because of Steam". One out of every seven potential buyers here on Civfanatics are so against Steam that they told us they will not purchase Civ5 because of it.

Click to expand...

The 'fanatics' are probably the worse sample you could use though, because of our very nature. We are the group of people who will be most demanding of the franchise, we will have the highest expectations and we will all have our own idea of what is or isn't a good move for the developer or publisher to make. But, we are definately not correct, in fact we are most likely to be wrong because of our own emotional attachment.

Sahkuhnder said:

In my own defense I did include two polls in my original post:

Click to expand...

You did, but I trust the second poll even less. Again, I'll use myself as an example and look at the folowing poll option: Publishing (Steam, Deluxe edition, DLC)

For me, I dislike Deluxe/Special/Collectors editions and feel that publishers should release the entire game as the base product and save the 'special' editions for bundles later when they include expansions or other add-ons. I also dislike the basic concept of DLC and prefer larger expansions over multiple small DLC add-ons. Nothing else listed as an option annoys me at all. So if I were to answer that poll (I didn't) the thing that annoys me most would be the option you listed, however since it combined Steam, DLC and Deluxe Edition how would you know which of those were my reason for selecting it? Had I selected that option you would be incorrectly assuming that my reason for picking it was Steam when that is actually your reason. I can just as easily look at that and see a bunch of people that dislike the 'Deluxe Edition' as much as I do.

What you need is a very simple poll with two questions (two polls with the way this forum works which would complicate the results)-

Do you plan on buying Civ 5? [yes/no] and,

(If not buying Civ 5) Is your decision to not buy Civ 5 completely and solely due to the inclusion of Steam Works which makes installing and running the Steam client a requirement to play the game? [yes/no]

Then, if you wanted to remove any reasonable doubt you'd want to track those who said they would not buy and that Steam was the ONLY reason they wouldn't buy. But, if you take that step you're no longer simply polling people but instead pointing out how unreliable polls really are.

bjbrains said:

Yes. You should really start reading my posts, they pretty much talk about your argument right now. You can't conclude that the number of net sales is down because some people refuse to buy the game. You can't conclude the far more relevant point that they made/will make less money even if they lose those sales.

Click to expand...

We both are speculating. I provided data in support of my speculation, both a poll showing one in seven fanatics so disgusted that they refuse to buy, and a mention of the question of the monetary value of the lost loyalty of long-time customers (both now and for Civ6+).

The launch of Civ4 wasn't like this. There were discussions about gameplay and features and people expressed doubts about this detail or that change but there was nothing even distantly close to the number of posts we now have by people who outright refuse to purchase this game. There wasn't endless closed threads containing bitter arguments. The discussion was about the Civ game - not about marketing tactics, over-priced add-ons, confusing versions with varied contents, regional price-gouging, etc.

I don't know how many people have been alienated from this whole hostile, unpleasant mess. I don't know for sure if the additional sales due to the wide market exposure of Steam will net more than the lost sales from people who wanted no part of this and spent their money elsewhere.

What I do see is way too many people upset during what should be a happy event. And to address the OP, that makes me sad.

After watching Gregs playthrough I am very sad I won't be playing Civ5. It looks like a grand game. Lots of cool new stuff to keep the core game from getting stale. With new innovations to make the game even more enjoyable. The only change I dislike is the removal of naval transports (as seen in the video, units that transform into boats, takes away some of the strategic importance of choke points). But I'da been happy to gloss right over that due to all the other cool things. My sole reason to pass on Civ5 is because of the way steam is incorporated. I'm glad the steamworks options are there for people who will use them. I'm glad the devs had the option to use it. But I know that forcing the client in the way that they have is NOT required. It is just the way Valve wishes to do things. So be it. See Stardock::Reactor for an alternate way of doing the same thing as Steamworks. I'm sad to miss the game. But life moves on.

I have class from 8:30 AM - 4:30 AM on the 21st, then I work from about 5:00-10:30. I only get one break in between my classes and that's just enough to squeeze something in for lunch (40 minutes, which I'll probably use to cram for my two tests that day rather than eat), and by the time I drive to work I won't have any time to play from 4:30-5:00. So basically I won't be touching it until at least 11:00 PM... but when I do I probably won't be letting go until 11:00 PM the day after (I'd go later if not for early class on Thursday).

Drawmeus said:

Yes, I read the thread, and yes, I disagree with your statements. You write "If that person says that they won't buy Civ5 because of Steam then we can conclude that one sale has been lost (assuming the response was truthful)."

I'm pointing out that assuming the response was truthful is itself an error. Not only is there no reason to assume that, there is a positive reason to assume that a segment of the population has an incentive to specifically violate that assumption; a segment of the population has something to gain by lying about this.

You can't validly draw any conclusion deeper than "some portion of the population is dissatisfied with the decision to require Steam for Civ5" from that poll. It doesn't demonstrate that it will lose sales, either net or gross. It doesn't say anything about how many people are dissatisfied. It doesn't say anything about how dissatisfied they are.

Click to expand...

Bold by me.

Are you really saying the voters are liars? Is that how you are justifying ignoring the poll results.

14% of the 629 people who voted said "I will definitely NOT buy the game, because of Steam" and you claim that "doesn't say anything about how dissatisfied they are."

After what I have seen I am so dissatisfied that I will not ever be giving any of my money to 2K for any game at any time now or in the future. I know for certain that I am one lost sale. I was planning to buy, but now I absolutely refuse to. Yes, that's one lost sale right here. Yes, that's one dissatisfied customer that is saying he is dissatisfied.

Call me a liar if it's the best argument you have.

Sahkuhnder said:

After what I have seen I am so dissatisfied that I will not ever be giving any of my money to 2K for any game at any time now or in the future. I know for certain that I am one lost sale. I was planning to buy, but now I absolutely refuse to. Yes, that's one lost sale right here. Yes, that's one dissatisfied customer that is saying he is dissatisfied.

Click to expand...

x2

Same deal for me. Was definitly going to buy Civ5. But most absolutley will not due to steam. And have become so frustrated with 2k (Civ4 patch history +) that I will not support games published by them. I vote with my wallet. My money goes to Stardock and any others like them. 2k helped galvonize my resolve.

White Elk said:

x2

Same deal for me. Was definitly going to buy Civ5. But most absolutley will not due to steam. And have become so frustrated with 2k (Civ4 patch history +) that I will not support games published by them. I vote with my wallet. My money goes to Stardock and any others like them. 2k helped galvonize my resolve.

Click to expand...

How's Elemental working out for ya....

I got taken on that one myself so I can't gloat.

Anyway, nothing wrong with taking a stand for something you believe in.

Sahkuhnder said:

Are you really saying the voters are liars? Is that how you are justifying ignoring the poll results.

...

Call me a liar if it's the best argument you have.

Click to expand...

I'm not calling you a liar. And I'm not calling them liars. I'm saying there's no objective way to know, based on the information presented in that poll. I'm saying that when you say they're not buying the game, you are making that up on the spot based on insufficient information. Your brain is filling in the cracks. The poll is non-binding, and you aren't going to follow up with those individuals as to whether they bought or not, and they know it, so when you present it as fact that N people are not buying the game because of Steam, your 'fact' is worth no more than any other random, made up stat on the internet. If it was a scientific poll, you'd have a point, but it's NOT.

This is a stats/polling reliability argument, and it's becoming increasingly clear that you have no grounding in statistics and lack a basic understanding of good polling practice. With that established to my satisfaction, I'm stepping out of this argument.

rastak said:

How's Elemental working out for ya....

I got taken on that one myself so I can't gloat.

Anyway, nothing wrong with taking a stand for something you believe in.

Click to expand...

The thing about Elemental is that it is a Stardock game. Stardocks history proves that the game will dramatically improve. Even an award winner at lauch (GalCiv2) was given a great deal of attnetion post launch. Lots of free additions and community driven tweaks. Stardock communicates constantly with its customers so we all know where the game is at today, and we have an informed clue as to where it will be tommarow, moving forward. There is never a question as to when or even if a patch will be released. The dev cycle and the level of post-sale support is all available for our purview.

I felt "taken" by 2k as relates to Civ4. Had to buy the BTS expansion to get a fix for the blasted MAF which had been present since the Civ4 launch. But back then we were told that we were full of it... that there was no memory problem. Then even with the expansion pack fix, the MAF was still present, albiet reduced. Researching Stardocks history informs me that this doesn't happen with their games. Stardock supports its games post sale. If there is a problem they fix it, for free. You don't have to buy an expansion like 2k did with Civ4.

krzysp said:

...install Windows on your computer. You just have to... you know, buy windows (a waste of money but still )

Click to expand...

Or...
You could install Linux for free and find yourself a geek who can make it work even though it isn't really supposed to (it was possible with Civ4).

Modiga-Disabled said:

Your sample has to be a good representation of the global population (by global population I don't mean all 6 billion people on Earth, just those who'd consider buying and playing the game). If it doesn't reflect the population as a whole, then there's the risk of it being biased.

Click to expand...

I disagree, a small sample can still reveal useful information and also be used to extrapolate data about a larger group. We have a sample of the most fanatical Civ players. That sample reveals 14% of that group expressing strong dissatisfaction to the point of not buying Civ5. As that sample can be assumed to have above average interest in Civ, loyalty to Civ, etc. than the larger general game playing population does, then the larger group can be assumed to be even less loyal, i.e. greater than 14% game sales lost due to Steam.

Sahkuhnder said:

I see no reason why we can't make an intelligent speculation as to how that dissatisfaction may apply to the general population. If one of seven borg Civfantics are so upset as to not buy the next installment of their beloved game then what is the rate of amongst the Civsortafans or the CivyeahitsCivorthatothergame buyers? I can only believe that the fanatics will be more willing to put up with something they don't like and hold their nose and buy Civ anyway (It's Civ! I have to have it!) than the rate that the general population will tolerate something they don't like (It's Civ. meh. Whatever.)

Click to expand...

====================

Modiga-Disabled said:

Statement 1 is poor because it's reliant on the poll's result fairly representing the population. Something I don't think is safe to assume.

Click to expand...

Statement 1:

Sahkuhnder said:

It appears there is more dislike for Steam than love for it. I think it is reasonable to conclude that Steam is costing 2K some lost sales.

Click to expand...

See comments above for how to use a data sample to make a logical assumption.

Modiga-Disabled said:

Statement 2 seems to disregard the existence of opportunity cost. Decisions have their positives and their negatives. Your "a lost sale is a lost sale" mentality seems to only consider the negative aspect and refuses to acknowledge any positives. For example, a gained sale is a gained sale.

Click to expand...

Statement 2:

Sahkuhnder said:

...any lost sale is still a lost sale. It is still money that 2K could have made, but didn't.

Click to expand...

Yes, a gained sale is a gained sale. That's true. So is my statement that a lost sale is still a lost sale. As a lost sale is money that 2K could have had, then my statement is also true. I am an example of a lost sale and I have money that 2K could have had.

Modiga-Disabled said:

I also think that the sheer number of options present in the poll makes it hard to analyse...

Click to expand...

If you are having difficulty analyzing the poll then please allow me to help. Focus on the 14% of the people who said "I will definitely NOT buy the game, because of Steam". I am going to make a logical assumption that you know what that means.

Modiga-Disabled said:

I went with the neutral answer, that Steam wouldn't affect my decision because I'm happy with Steam and I was almost certainly going to buy Civ V anyway. I'm probably one of the most pro-Steam people on the board though. There's a reason professional pollsters will use as simple choices as possible. They'll go with yes/no if they're able to.

Click to expand...

No problem. This has no bearing on the 14% though.

Sahkuhnder said:

I do see now that the poll questions could have been phrased better and as you said some pro-Steam people like yourself could have (correctly) voted a "Steam-neutral" vote as Steam didn't influence your decision to purchase Civ5.

Click to expand...

Not trying to pick on this guy, but herein lies the perfect example of the true value of internet polls and using them to try to gather any sort of relevent marketing information. In this case the impact that Steam alone has and will have on the sales of Civ 5.

White Elk said:

x2

Same deal for me. Was definitly going to buy Civ5. But most absolutley will not due to steam.

Click to expand...

Here we have what seems like a straight forward example of a 'lost sale' and, as he put it himself, "due to steam."

But, don't chaulk up a lost sale to Steam just yet...

White Elk said:

And have become so frustrated with 2k (Civ4 patch history +) that I will not support games published by them. I vote with my wallet. My money goes to Stardock and any others like them. 2k helped galvonize my resolve.

Click to expand...

So in reality, what is the real reason? I'm inclined to think it's a customer dissatisfied with 2k moreseo than Steam due to the follow-up quote below.

White Elk said:

I felt "taken" by 2k as relates to Civ4. Had to buy the BTS expansion to get a fix for the blasted MAF which had been present since the Civ4 launch. But back then we were told that we were full of it... that there was no memory problem. Then even with the expansion pack fix, the MAF was still present, albiet reduced. Researching Stardocks history informs me that this doesn't happen with their games. Stardock supports its games post sale. If there is a problem they fix it, for free. You don't have to buy an expansion like 2k did with Civ4.

Click to expand...

None of this entire statement has anything to do with Steam. So, while probably not intentionally deceitful, he is one person that would have lied on the poll by simply responding that they won't buy because of Steam when the true reason is more complex and not entirely related to Steam.

So really, "most absolutley will not due to steam" isn't entirely true.

If he is one of your 91 lost sales, scratch him from your list. Still a lost sale, but not lost because of Steam. How many other posters who responded the same way in the poll have similar issues with 2K, Firaxis, the direction Civ 5 took or whatever?

As much as I would have liked to play Civ V on the release date, I don't appreciate being mugged for the pleasure. Waiting a few days more to pay less than half what Steam wanted to charge Australians is worth it.

wasn't planning on it, but after watching the video, I'm hyped up.

I still haven't decided what I want to buy. Most likely a store copy. No DLC (ripoff)

I'm sad I won't be playing civ next week. My computer needs an upgrade and work is too busy at the moment (I'd get myself fired if I tried to add civ time ... just one more turn!)

But by the time I have time, I'll also have money and maybe some of the inevitable early bugs will be workd out.

(And could we take the Steam discussion elsewhere? If you're sad you won't be playing because you won't use steam, fine, say so. But the rest is off-topic. I'm quite indifferent to steam and would be reading those threads if I cared. Thanks.)

I installed Steam 2 months ago but don't worry, I'm still alive

Sahkuhnder said:

I disagree, a small sample can still reveal useful information and also be used to extrapolate data about a larger group. We have a sample of the most fanatical Civ players. That sample reveals 14% of that group expressing strong dissatisfaction to the point of not buying Civ5. As that sample can be assumed to have above average interest in Civ, loyalty to Civ, etc. than the larger general game playing population does, then the larger group can be assumed to be even less loyal, i.e. greater than 14% game sales lost due to Steam.

Click to expand...

Sample size is not the problem. The fact the people polled are all from this forum and was entirely opt-in, not to mention the question asked and choice of answers given are the problem with the poll that mean any drawn conclusions cannot not be inferred onto the whole.

I won't bother addressing the rest of your post because it all seems to hinge on the assumption that the poll is a good representation of the whole, which you've done nothing to prove is the case.

Seven05 said:

Here we have what seems like a straight forward example of a 'lost sale' and, as he put it himself, "due to steam."

But, don't chalk up a lost sale to Steam just yet...

Click to expand...

You would be mistaken. As it happens my answer on the poll would be more accurate than your summary of my posting. Perhaps because there is less info to be deciphered in the poll.

Steam absolutely knocked it out of the ballpark for me. I also would have passed if Civ5 had been published by Stardock instead of 2k, but required the same steam arrangement. After seeing Gregs playthrough, I would have wavered on my decision to not buy the game. steam IS a deal breaker that even my enthusiasm for Civ cannot get past.

Now, the decision to go with steam was a publisher decision. It was also 2k's decision to choose the DRM level. Then 2k's behavior after dropping the steam bomb added more to my list of grievances against them. My feeling towards Civs publisher plummeted post steam. But it was the steam requirement itself which keeps me from this game.


I don't give much credence to polls in general. Internet polling concerns me even less.... in general. But, the series of steam related polls I have seen here at CFC do have some value for me. The specific numerical results don't mean much. What matters, is seeing a notable number of people unhappy about steam. There is value in knowing that. The polls are significant because they indicate a notable outcry against steam.

I'm still shocked that you ever played Civ 4. Securom is much more intrusive/invasive. It installs high-level drivers, monitors other programs, and will refuse to run if it even detects some programs. Steam is much better.

Also, I think Stardock have lost any credibility they had. Between delivering a terribly broken game (despite knowing about its problems) that continues to be unfinished, and having a terrible refund policy (if you preordered more than 3 months before release, you can only get store credit. And only 75% credit unless you agree to spend time working with tech support). Oh, and putting DRM into impulse that makes Elemental refuse to run if it detects a modded EXE (Such as the large-address fix that stops crashes on larger maps).

Seven05 said:

Not trying to pick on this guy, but herein lies the perfect example of the true value of internet polls and using them to try to gather any sort of relevent marketing information. In this case the impact that Steam alone has and will have on the sales of Civ 5.

Here we have what seems like a straight forward example of a 'lost sale' and, as he put it himself, "due to steam."

But, don't chaulk up a lost sale to Steam just yet...


So in reality, what is the real reason? I'm inclined to think it's a customer dissatisfied with 2k moreseo than Steam due to the follow-up quote below.


None of this entire statement has anything to do with Steam. So, while probably not intentionally deceitful, he is one person that would have lied on the poll by simply responding that they won't buy because of Steam when the true reason is more complex and not entirely related to Steam.

So really, "most absolutley will not due to steam" isn't entirely true.

If he is one of your 91 lost sales, scratch him from your list. Still a lost sale, but not lost because of Steam. How many other posters who responded the same way in the poll have similar issues with 2K, Firaxis, the direction Civ 5 took or whatever?

Click to expand...

Excellent post!

Sakhunder, why do you think it can be discounted that the poll participants were self-selecting for people who thought Steam was an important issue, i.e. those who thought it a problem, and so were more likely to be represented? Also, why do you assume that Steam will be less palatable to Civ gamers not on Civfan than to those on Civfan?