Do you think Civ V is doomed?

Anthropoid said:

Presumably the tone and texture of gamer forums have a long-term impact on sales too.

Click to expand...

That's why 2K Games tries to stamp out any and all dissent on their forums.

They know that if an average Joe Blow hears of Civilization 5 and goes to the official forums to check it out and he sees a lot of negative comments then he may reconsider spending his money. If he sees only positive comments then he very well may buy the product.

This forum is very important for doing just that. It tolerates dissent enough that people will see that something is "Rotten in the state of Denmark" if they do their homework.

So, I think it's essential to raise your voices and tell Firaxis and 2K Games that this is unacceptable. That could impact on the total sales of the game.

The more sales generated the better off they are and more likely that they won't bother changing anything.
The less sales generated for this half baked mess the better off we are.

Thormodr said:

That's why 2K Games tries to stamp out any and all dissent on their forums.

Click to expand...

I've seen a lot of very unhappy comments about Civ V at the 2K Games forum.

Öjevind Lång;10123058 said:

I've seen a lot of very unhappy comments about Civ V at the 2K Games forum.

Click to expand...

Generally they get shouted out though or quickly banned.

2K Games knows what they are doing.

Thormodr said:

Generally they get shouted out though or quickly banned.

Click to expand...

Meh, not really. Not more than 'round here.

Thormodr said:

2K Games knows what they are doing.

Click to expand...

Calling a crackdown on dissenting opinions "knowing what they're doing" is rather... unsettling.

Is that the right word for it? Unsettling?

You know, I've been hanging around the 2K forums a bit recently and I see a good number of "dissenting opinions" - IE, negative opinions on the game - being aired there, and many of them by members with accounts over a year old. They obviously haven't been banned, so, I have to ask... Do you people claiming they're squashing anyone who disagrees with them actually have any examples you're thinking of? I can't help but get the feeling this is just more "2K is evil" over dramatization.

What I see VERY little of there is completely nonconstructive negativity, and it wouldn't surprise me if they're banning the "ZOMG CIV V SUCKS!" crowd which doesn't actually contribute anything even semi constructive to the forum. Is this what you're claiming is "squashing dissenting opinions"? If so, do you feel this element is something that should be allowed to run rampant?

Thormodr said:

Generally they get shouted out though or quickly banned.

2K Games knows what they are doing.

Click to expand...

That's misinformation or simply a lie, sorry.

I've been around 2k's forums since the release of Civ 5, when I bought it, and I've been participating of very harsh threads without any problem whatsoever about my harsh comments on the game.

Even when the discussions between people who disagree about the game usually gets to a level beyond tolerable, for my tastes, still the threads takes longer than expected to be closed, usually after some friendly (and mostly unsuccessful) intervention of mods asking for people to take it easy or to discuss the topic and avoid off-topic comments.

I don't like the actual state of Civ 5, but there's a difference between blaming the publisher releasing a(n) (unfinished) game that you don't like and fabricating information about the (non-existing) behavior of the publisher in his forums.

What you're saying simply isn't the truth.

I played Civ IV quite a lot. I always enjoyed it even if I've never 100% understood it on a tactical level. Generally I always favoured combat over any other method. I ordered CiV last week and it hasn't arrived yet but having read so many negative comments I'm already a bit nervous.
That said, if it is a bit "simplified" it may suit ME perfectly because of my tactics on CivIV. A lot of the negative points seem to be about mechanics that I never understood in the first place so I'm optimistic that this game won't feel as broken to me as it clearly has for many diehard Civ fans.
I do wish they'd make another AC though.

I thin that Civ 5 is certainly doomed.

A) It wasn't what we expected.
B) It wasn't what we were promised.
C) It's not fun past the first few hours.
D) Support was pulled from the project before and after the release, and its only a few months old.

Here's to hoping that some small company does for Civ 4 fans what Torchlight did for Diablo fans.

Exactly. Steam wants to sell as many copies of every game they have as possible: thus, a "rate this game" button is not likely.

Gamersgate however, has exactly that function (1 to 5 stars IIRC), as well as a write a review function. If you create an account, and buy a game, you can write a review of it. Mods will screen it to make sure it is not simple ranting, but many of the reviews are basically two liners. You get points toward a purchase for every review you write.

Amazingly different business model in that it is focused on providing gamers with games they will love, not simply volume distributing games in a way that is designed to make the makers/distributors invulnerable to consumer discontent.

AfterShafter said:

You know, I've been hanging around the 2K forums a bit recently and I see a good number of "dissenting opinions" - IE, negative opinions on the game - being aired there, and many of them by members with accounts over a year old. They obviously haven't been banned, so, I have to ask... Do you people claiming they're squashing anyone who disagrees with them actually have any examples you're thinking of? I can't help but get the feeling this is just more "2K is evil" over dramatization.

What I see VERY little of there is completely nonconstructive negativity, and it wouldn't surprise me if they're banning the "ZOMG CIV V SUCKS!" crowd which doesn't actually contribute anything even semi constructive to the forum. Is this what you're claiming is "squashing dissenting opinions"? If so, do you feel this element is something that should be allowed to run rampant?

Click to expand...

They don't squash everyone who disagrees, and I haven't said that.


I don't think it was this thread, but I have described the moderating at @2K as heavy-handed. My other impression was that the place had too many idle teenagers.

My experiences at 2K were entirely as a lurker and mostly in the pre-release phase , when we were all information hungry. I noticed a number of "HEY! where did my/that thread/post go? All I said was.." posts. I only noticed one thing disapear personally. The particulars are water under the bridge to me, and I have no desire to go back there and dig up proof.

I used to moderate one of the boards on another forum that used software like this one for years. I learned that people often come to forums to vent, and it's usually best to let them do so, even if it annoys the resident socializers, debaters, inquisiters and know-it-alls. Let them vent and they usually evaporate, try to put a stopper on them and they'll likely explode all over the forum in an Everett37 kind of way.

Please take my word for it that the moderators on this forum do a better job than what I witnessed over at 2K. I couldn't imagine the STEAM wars we had here taking place at 2K. By the time Steam was public, it was a done deal, so nothing constructive came of the debate , even if there were some important issues and priciples discussed. Just because it was non-constructive doesn't mean it didn't need to be said.

I think it was as much on account of heavy-handed moderators as an excess of idle teens, it's not a winning combination.

Anthropoid said:

Exactly. Steam wants to sell as many copies of every game they have as possible: thus, a "rate this game" button is not likely.

Gamersgate however, has exactly that function (1 to 5 stars IIRC), as well as a write a review function. If you create an account, and buy a game, you can write a review of it. Mods will screen it to make sure it is not simple ranting, but many of the reviews are basically two liners. You get points toward a purchase for every review you write.

Click to expand...

GOG.com is better still: the games are all DRM-free and you can vote and review a game even if you haven't purchased it! In spite of all that, they're selling plenty of games, regardless of rating. Because pretty much all those games are rather good (they are "Good Old Games").

Rusty Edge said:

Please take my word for it that the moderators on this forum do a better job than what I witnessed over at 2K. I couldn't imagine the STEAM wars we had here taking place at 2K. By the time Steam was public, it was a done deal, so nothing constructive came of the debate , even if there were some important issues and priciples discussed. Just because it was non-constructive doesn't mean it didn't need to be said.

Click to expand...

While I'm quite fond of the mods around here, I have to say the ones on 2K are, on average, about as good. And then there are 2K Greg and 2K Betty dropping by from time to time, which is nice. They both seem genuinely nice people and will NOT pile on you for not liking Civ V or steam.

The modding policies are pretty much equivalent between the two forums.

All in all.... I don't think 2K Forums are any better or worse than these here, in terms of moderation.

blind biker said:

GOG.com is better still: the games are all DRM-free and you can vote and review a game even if you haven't purchased it! In spite of all that, they're selling plenty of games, regardless of rating. Because pretty much all those games are rather good (they are "Good Old Games").

Click to expand...

I cant find anything great on gog.

Far from doomed. The inevitably outcry by those who expected a carbon copy of Civilization 4 has made it seem like a majority of the people who bought the game hate it.

I believe the fundamental changes divided gamers. I personally like Civ5 a lot more (always HATED Civ4's end game; I probably finished 2 games in total). Stacks of doom were annoying and mindbogglingly unstrategic. In civ5 it's a tactic to attack the enemy's strategic resources to make the troops less powerful.

I just can't put my finger on WHAT exactly is so wrong with Civ5. And don't try to quote me sullla's review, that's just one voice in the crowd.

Deussu said:

I believe the fundamental changes divided gamers. I personally like Civ5 a lot more (always HATED Civ4's end game; I probably finished 2 games in total). Stacks of doom were annoying and mindbogglingly unstrategic. In civ5 it's a tactic to attack the enemy's strategic resources to make the troops less powerful.

Click to expand...

I can translate this :

Single player---> civ4>civ5
Multiplayer---> civ5>civ4

Really 2k you should learn something from civ 5, don't release shoddy products or you'll get end of the stick not just the consumer. I'm hoping civ 5 isn't raking in alot of money, they'll learn then. Greedy corporate bast****. 6 mil wasn't enough with civ 4? Sheesh.

Shmike said:

Really 2k you should learn something from civ 5, don't release shoddy products or you'll get end of the stick not just the consumer. I'm hoping civ 5 isn't raking in alot of money, they'll learn then. Greedy corporate bast****. 6 mil wasn't enough with civ 4? Sheesh.

Click to expand...

I believe Civ V is seling quite well. If it weren't, a quite likely reaction by the developers would be to decide that the Civ title has run its course and never bother to produce Civ VI. Don't cut your nose to spite your face.

Negativity and 'slagging off' towards everyone and everything seems to be a compulsory element of being a man these days ... as our numbers multiply we get less happy, just like in Civ5

Deussu said:

I just can't put my finger on WHAT exactly is so wrong with Civ5. And don't try to quote me sullla's review, that's just one voice in the crowd.

Click to expand...

sullla told you, and he is right.

A voice of a former teamplayer in cIV is not just another voice in the crowd. He understands the game better than most of us, and he saw the failures early on.

And by my experience after 400 hrs of play, sullla is right. He needed only 30 odd hrs to figure out all the mess, it took me maybe 200 hrs, so I'm not bagging him!