G.D.R civilopedia

[alpaca]

Originally Posted by Venereus

I didn't say dumb people will like the GDR while smart people won't, like some simplistic classification. I just said the GDR was not made to appeal to smart people (wich doesn't mean it can't, or that it's meant for retards). People considered "intelectually inclined" are mainly characterized as fans of "smart humor". So, at a glance, you'd think the "bright-minded" would not be among those to whom the GDR appeals, because the GDR is humor and it's not of the "smart" kind. Dumb humor isn't necessarily bad, it's just different, and by definition easier to understand, so it can appeal to a broader audience. It's the humor style of Civilization that's been dumbed down by the addition of the GDR in Civ5, not the players.

Are you so sure about that? I actually think the inclusion of the Giant Death Robot is a hilarious idea that scores big humour points from me for satisfying genre-consistency for soft SciFi movies. It's kind of like adding a situation of slapstick humour to an otherwise serious novel or movie: It's fun and most people get a little laugh about it. It also creates detachment through counterpoint (the whole game is pretty serious, but they put a joke in at the end that makes you realize it's still just a game), which isn't bad towards the end-game, and that the devs aren't taking themselves too serious.

By the way, a Giant Death Robot is highly impractical from a physics and tactics point of view, so real armies wouldn't develop it. It's plain awesome, though

[Ogrelord]

Things that GDR is good at killing:

1. suspension of disbelief

[cr0ws]

Originally Posted by Ogrelord

Things that GDR is good at killing:

1. suspension of disbelief

My hopes and dream of Giant Love Robots

[Bad Brett]

Originally Posted by mjs0

There is a group of people to whom the GDR appeals
There is a group of people to whom the GDR does not appeal.

I am certain that intelligence (or 'bright-mindedness') is not the deciding factor when determining to which of these groups a particular individual belongs.

I would bet all my money that the people who dislike the unit, on average...

- Would score better on an IQ test
- Play on higher difficulty levels
- Have played Civ for a longer time
- Have more knowledge about physics, mathematics etc.
- Have more knowledge about history

If you look at it the other way, it would surprise me a lot if there's any Deity players, who have played Civ since 1991, with a Master of Science, who actually believe this unit is a step in the right direction.

[cr0ws]

Originally Posted by Bad Brett

I would bet all my money that the people who dislike the unit, on average...

- Would score better on an IQ test
- Play on higher difficulty levels
- Have played Civ for a longer time
- Have more knowledge about physics, mathematics etc.
- Have more knowledge about history

If you look at it the other way, it would surprise me a lot if there's any Deity players, who have played Civ since 1991, with a Master of Science, who actually believe this unit is a step in the right direction.

I dunno about that...a lot of smart people live with their minds in fantasy worlds. Who do you think comes up with such "absurd" ideas?

[neev]

Originally Posted by Bad Brett

I would bet all my money that the people who dislike the unit, on average...

- Would score better on an IQ test
- Play on higher difficulty levels
- Have played Civ for a longer time
- Have more knowledge about physics, mathematics etc.
- Have more knowledge about history

If you look at it the other way, it would surprise me a lot if there's any Deity players, who have played Civ since 1991, with a Master of Science, who actually believe this unit is a step in the right direction.

Wow. It's an elitist, pedantic, and probably true thing to say.

(And just to say, I don't give a damn about the GDR being included or removed.)

[Alki]

Originally Posted by Bad Brett

I would bet all my money that the people who dislike the unit, on average...

- Would score better on an IQ test
- Play on higher difficulty levels
- Have played Civ for a longer time
- Have more knowledge about physics, mathematics etc.
- Have more knowledge about history

If you look at it the other way, it would surprise me a lot if there's any Deity players, who have played Civ since 1991, with a Master of Science, who actually believe this unit is a step in the right direction.

My IQ is 130
I play on Prince level
I've been playing civ since the 1st edition.
I failed Maths and physics
I passed my History exam although what history has to do with fantasy scfi units I have no idea.

I think the GDR is built of pure awesomantium!

[alpaca]

Originally Posted by Bad Brett

If you look at it the other way, it would surprise me a lot if there's any Deity players, who have played Civ since 1991, with a Master of Science, who actually believe this unit is a step in the right direction.

Possibly because there are few players who have played since 1991. I don't regularly play Deity because I don't think it's fun to think about every move for 10 minutes but I did beat a few games on Sid/Deity in Civ3/Civ4 respectively to prove to myself that I could. Master of Science (Physics) is coming in a few months, to be followed by a PhD, but I was only 5 years old in 1991 so I do fail to qualify

I'm not sure that more intelligent people will, on average, enjoy the Giant Death Robot less. Do you have any research that we could compare, about people who like Sitcoms among TV viewers of each intellectual group, or about how many people among IQ classes like slapstick comedy, or about how many people of each group have sticks up their arses? If not, your opinion is as good as mine, but I wouldn't bet all my money on it

Edit: By the by, it would be interesting to see some market research about the clients of the franchise. It's likely that Civ players are on average smarter than players of FPS, but I don't have any facts to back up that assumption, either. So maybe it's the correct marketing move for Firaxis, even though, assuming your assumption is correct, it might slightly irk some of the more intelligent fans - who will buy the game anyways and probably mod it out within a day.

[cr0ws]

I never trust these "IQ" measurement methods. People who boast about their IQ numbers make me laugh.

These tests are highly inaccurate and fail to measure many different levels of intelligence people are capable of being on. It's just a "status" designed to make people feel good about themselves...like a communist party book. My mental wang is bigger than your mental wang.

What one person lags in a certain area they can exceed in others to a person who scores 200+ while totally failing these "tests".

[neev]

Originally Posted by alpaca

Edit: By the by, it would be interesting to see some market research about the clients of the franchise. It's likely that Civ players are on average smarter than players of FPS, but I don't have any facts to back up that assumption, either. So maybe it's the correct marketing move for Firaxis, even though, assuming your assumption is correct, it might slightly irk some of the more intelligent fans - who will buy the game anyways and probably mod it out within a day.

I've seen a poll a couple of years ago on the Civ4 forums, asking civfanatics their age and what they do for a living. The average forumer was near his 30's and had a highly qualified job. It of course blasts any other game "attendance", but mainly because most teenagers (i.e. people who didn't yet have the chance to graduate, etc) don't play Civ, but action-based games instead. I'm not sure these teens won't be clever chaps in ten or twenty years, though.

[Bad Brett]

Originally Posted by cr0ws

I never trust these "IQ" measurement methods. People who boast about their IQ numbers make me laugh.

I agree. But that wasn't the point. People who are good at logic usually score better at these tests. People who are good at logic usually are better Civ players. And I believe that features like the GDR is less popular among better Civ players than among "casual" Civ players.

And there's really nothing strange about that, except that it's almost prohibited to talk about intelligence. If I had said "Amatuer ice hockey players are more likely to replace the puck with a ball during a practice". You can hear people brag about their bands getting a record contract, you hear people brag about how good they are at baseball, but you are not allowed to brag about your own intelligence.

Anyway, I didn't intend to upset anyone with my post. It was more of an observation, or, a theory.

[Ogrelord]

Everybody (should know) that the future of warfare lies in staging weapons in space. Any sort of of orbital weapon platform would be more plausible then a over-the-top Giant Disaster Robot.
Plus think of all the lewd pictures you can carve by burning the hexes with the Orbital Bank Particle Cannon on your opponents territories.

[alpaca]

Originally Posted by neev

I've seen a poll a couple of years ago on the Civ4 forums, asking civfanatics their age and what they do for a living. The average forumer was near his 30's and had a highly qualified job. It of course blasts any other game "attendance", but mainly because most teenagers (i.e. people who didn't yet have the chance to graduate, etc) don't play Civ, but action-based games instead. I'm not sure these teens won't be clever chaps in ten or twenty years, though.

I have a strong distrust of forum polls when evaluating for statistical questions about the whole set of buyers. The main problem is that posters in forums are very likely to belong to the core fanbase (doh!) which means they are the ones that either enjoy the game most, or are truer to games they like. For Civ, I would guess the people who stick around in the forums are those that enjoy the replayability of the game and the deep strategic complexity.

Those people, that is us, don't represent a large part of game sales, even for a game like Civ where I would find it plausible that the fraction of such fans be higher than in less brain-demanding and complex games. I'm sure Firaxis has market research, it's a shame they don't share it

[Perfection]

Originally Posted by Bad Brett

I would bet all my money that the people who dislike the unit, on average...

- Would score better on an IQ test
- Play on higher difficulty levels
- Have played Civ for a longer time
- Have more knowledge about physics, mathematics etc.
- Have more knowledge about history

If you look at it the other way, it would surprise me a lot if there's any Deity players, who have played Civ since 1991, with a Master of Science, who actually believe this unit is a step in the right direction.

If you have a master of science, you probably don't have enough time to play Civ at a deity level (except CivRev).

Originally Posted by Bad Brett

I agree. But that wasn't the point. People who are good at logic usually score better at these tests. People who are good at logic usually are better Civ players. And I believe that features like the GDR is less popular among better Civ players than among "casual" Civ players.

People who are really good at logic often have stuff like jobs that take away from civ time.

[Venereus]

Originally Posted by Alki

My IQ is 130
I play on Prince level
I've been playing civ since the 1st edition.
I failed Maths and physics
I passed my History exam although what history has to do with fantasy scfi units I have no idea.

I think the GDR is built of pure awesomantium!

He did say "on average", so your attempt at a counter-argument based on one subjective observation about yourself fails horribly.

EDIT: I also distrust IQ test and anything like that. And people, stop arguing the GDR is realistic. Tell me you like it, tell me you love it, tell me it adds to the game, just don't tell me it's realistic. Just don't.

[Krikkitone]

The problem is 'Future warfare' isn't something involving 'true warfare' untill we get functining missile defense. any war between major powers is a Nuclear one or a proxy one.

Since the physical laws of the Civ V universe are different (inability to build ICBMs, ability to get to Alpha Centauri at reasonable fractions of light speed) then those physical laws apparently support the existence and plausability of a GDR.

[cr0ws]

Originally Posted by Ogrelord

Everybody (should know) that the future of warfare lies in staging weapons in space. Any sort of of orbital weapon platform would be more plausible then a over-the-top Giant Disaster Robot.
Plus think of all the lewd pictures you can carve by burning the hexes with the Orbital Bank Particle Cannon on your opponents territories.

Sorry but it's like a previous poster mentioned something about sending a rocket into orbit and exploding cargo of rocks,ball bearing and sand and other junk and poof..there go trillions of investments of satelites,spaces stations, missile platforms, no more Star wars for anyone (unless they build it on the moon).

[cr0ws]

Originally Posted by Venereus

He did say "on average", so your attempt at a counter-argument based on one subjective observation about yourself fails horribly.

EDIT: I also distrust IQ test and anything like that. And people, stop arguing the GDR is realistic. Tell me you like it, tell me you love it, tell me it adds to the game, just don't tell me it's realistic. Just don't.

Ahhheeem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2OksmJthZc

[Venereus]

Originally Posted by cr0ws

Ahhheeem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2OksmJthZc

Now where's the video of a thing like that being effective in combat?

[cr0ws]

Originally Posted by Venereus

Now where's the video of a thing like that being effective in combat?

Every great creation begins from a small seed. Compare yesterday's automobile. to today's.