Civ 5 postmortem in Game Developer magazine March 2011

Game Developer magazine has a feature where a member of a game team reports on a completed development project. The postmortems often have really interesting software engineering insights.

Here are the section headings and a synopsis. "What Went Right / What Went Wrong" is the standard format for the feature.

What Went Right

1. Clear Boundary Between Gameplay And Engine
They prototyped it on the Civ 4 engine! then ported it to the new Civ 5 engine.
2. Our Wonderful, Wonderful Friends
generous collaboration from ATI, Intel, and nVidia assisting development on new hardware
3. Co-Locating Sub-Teams
seating arrangements
4. Experienced and Diverse Art Team
Civ 4 veterans, diverse backgrounds
5. If Only There Were Zombies
strong modding architecture [editorial: ???]

What Went Wrong

1. Clash Between Design Changes And Completing Expected Feature Set
They wanted to do something really new, but with finite development time, 1UPT etc. took time away from other basic features.
2. Our External Design Team Was Not Brought Online Until Very Late In The Process
meaning, private alpha/beta testers a la Civ 4
3. Critical Positions Were Still Missing Entering Production
Telling quote: "[due to MMO popularity, etc] finding qualified networking programmers has become akin to spotting a unicorn in your backyard."
4. Industrial and Modern Eras Were Not As Polished As The First Half of the Game
Every game takes a long time to play through, so the early game got more love.
5. Layoffs and the Obvious Effect on Morale
A short section . The author attributed the layoffs to the recession.

My take: I haven't played Civ 5; it came out at a time when I wasn't gaming, and then many Civ 4 players who I knew well said that the design completely blows chunks out your mom's butt. So personally I was looking for an owning up to "the design is fundamentally broken and sucks - sorry." I didn't really see that; actually the author opines that "I think we succeeded in this concept [1UPT]". But the inside view helps one appreciate their problems and challenges. I'm grateful the article was written and published.

Very interesting. Thanks for that.

I have contended that this game was released far too early. At least 1 year if not 2 years.

I agree with them that the later ages are certainly less interesting than the beginning ones.

Nice to see a little honesty from the developers anyway.

I guess Civ VI will be a blast.

I really, really like CiV. 1UPT and Hexes are a nice thing.

It was good to make this step to hexes and 1UPT and it was a necessary one, even if CIV might not be the best Civ out here. I personally prefer it over the other games, though. I guess Firaxis will figure it out for the expansions or at least Civ 6. I think it will take the best of CIV and CiV and it'll be a blast.

For now, lets keep our fingers crossed for the expansion(s).

Civ6 will disappoint a lot of longtime fans. Some of them will turn away from the series. Some of them will hang around to tell everyone how crappy Civ6 is over and over. They will be accused of ignoring the finer features of Civ6 and frequently be told they just wanted Civ5.5. Eventually Civ6 will get patched and some of the harsher critics of Civ6 will come back to the fold and begin to enjoy the game. Others will say Civ5 was the pinnacle of the series and it's only downhill from there.

Now who the hell wants to go through all that again already?

What's telling for me is that they are asked what went well with the game and they respond with brainless geek-kid speak about seating arrangements and zombies. Oh, that and 1UPT. So they implemented one unit per tile and that's supposed to be some kind of revolution all on its own? Those guys are totally clueless. They are obviously in their own little world ... like a lot of people who work with computers.

very interesting so to paraphrase

what went wrong:

unrealistic deadlines due to over ambitious design goals (1upt/new engine)
not enough testing (late closed beta)
lack of experienced developers (broken mp/staff cuts)

so if I'm reading this right looks like an already ambitious deadline got totally screwed by all those
layoffs

sounds like a project management nightmare , hats off to the developers for doing a good job under difficult conditions

no wonder the game was so... cough... rough around the edges at release

To be clear WRT to the OP, Jet - the italicized lines are your own summaries, correct? Not something written in the actual article? Also, is the article available in its entirety somewhere?

Jet said:

What Went Wrong

1. Clash Between Design Changes And Completing Expected Feature Set
They wanted to do something really new, but with finite development time, 1UPT etc. took time away from other basic features.
2. Our External Design Team Was Not Brought Online Until Very Late In The Process
meaning, private alpha/beta testers a la Civ 4
3. Critical Positions Were Still Missing Entering Production
Telling quote: "[due to MMO popularity, etc] finding qualified networking programmers has become akin to spotting a unicorn in your backyard."
4. Industrial and Modern Eras Were Not As Polished As The First Half of the Game
Every game takes a long time to play through, so the early game got more love.
5. Layoffs and the Obvious Effect on Morale
A short section . The author attributed the layoffs to the recession.

Click to expand...

It's interesting that many of these points are factors that a lot of us here at CFC have mentioned or discussed for months now. Point #1 especially - I don't think that should be a surprise to anyone; the proof is in the pudding. All of these issues point to a rushed development schedule and a premature release... again, not exactly a surprise, but it's nice to know that we weren't completely off-base.

elthrasher said:

Civ6 will disappoint a lot of longtime fans. Some of them will turn away from the series. Some of them will hang around to tell everyone how crappy Civ6 is over and over. They will be accused of ignoring the finer features of Civ6 and frequently be told they just wanted Civ5.5. Eventually Civ6 will get patched and some of the harsher critics of Civ6 will come back to the fold and begin to enjoy the game. Others will say Civ5 was the pinnacle of the series and it's only downhill from there.

Now who the hell wants to go through all that again already?

Click to expand...

I'm not buying the "hey people complained about civ4 too!" argument that tries to dismiss most criticism of civ5 as just invalid whining. I was there from day 1 at both 4 and 5's release. There was not the same kind of complaining about the core gameplay and design of civ4 nearly 6 months and multiple patches after release. You know what's telling? There are still more people browsing the civ4 strategy forum on civfanatics than there are in the civ5 strategy forum to this day.

Civ4 is still going strong after so many years. We'll see if so many people are still playing and modding 5 in 2017.

Jet said:

1. Clash Between Design Changes And Completing Expected Feature Set

Click to expand...

more like realizing that the proposed design does not work at all on the holistic level?

Jet said:

2. Our External Design Team Was Not Brought Online Until Very Late In The Process

Click to expand...

umm.. how many actual beta-testers does firaxis employ?
let me guess. zero?


inviting external testers after all the features were highly likely set in stone, is imho plain lame

Jet said:

3. Critical Positions Were Still Missing Entering Production

Click to expand...

MP?
AI?
or maybe the guy that was hired to code exclusively automated/manual worker stuff?
i have a feeling that he left after several months

Jet said:

4. Industrial and Modern Eras Were Not As Polished As The First Half of the Game

Click to expand...

yep
i can add to that, that The First Half of the Game was not polished either.
horsemen of the apocalypse, completely mysterious diplomacy, overpowered libraries, unbeatable ICS, pressing end turn a lot immediately come to mind.

Jet said:

5. Layoffs and the Obvious Effect on Morale

Click to expand...

what effect?

i was under the impression that firaxis as a long established company has a system in place. people come and go, but they are just replaceable parts in the mechanism. the mechanism that creates software

what? don't tell me firaxis failed here as well

Jet said:

My take: I haven't played Civ 5; it came out at a time when I wasn't gaming, and then many Civ 4 players who I knew well said that the design completely blows chunks out your mom's butt. So personally I was looking for an owning up to "the design is fundamentally broken and sucks - sorry." I didn't really see that; actually the author opines that "I think we succeeded in this concept [1UPT]". But the inside view helps one appreciate their problems and challenges. I'm grateful the article was written and published.

Click to expand...

you will never hear "we failed" or "the design of our game sucks".

defeatist mentality directly contradicts the "everything is gonna be awesome" corporate culture

snapple232 said:

I'm not buying the "hey people complained about civ4 too!" argument that tries to dismiss most criticism of civ5 as just invalid whining.

Click to expand...

Never once have I implied that Civ5 lacks good cause for harsh criticism. Quite the opposite. I'm merely predicting that Civ6 will have the same. I don't get the "Civ5 sucks, hurry up with Civ6!" crowd. That's all. Doesn't make sense to me. This isn't...um...Star Trek movies.

Horizons said:

they are asked what went well with the game and they respond with brainless geek-kid speak about seating arrangements and zombies

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand this criticism, but the audience for Game Developer magazine is... not hard to identify... - the whole point is to talk about stuff like seating arrangements.

SuperJay said:

Jet - the italicized lines are your own summaries, correct?

Click to expand...

Yeah.

Although i normally prefer not to comment on such an incomplete source for having not read the entire article and *now* that i know the Italic inserts were actually pulled off the informed OP's opinion, i can generally figure what those titles may indicate;

What Went Right
1. Clear Boundary Between Gameplay And Engine
2. Our Wonderful, Wonderful Friends
3. Co-Locating Sub-Teams
4. Experienced and Diverse Art Team
5. If Only There Were Zombies

What Went Wrong

1. Clash Between Design Changes And Completing Expected Feature Set
2. Our External Design Team Was Not Brought Online Until Very Late In The Process
3. Critical Positions Were Still Missing Entering Production
4. Industrial and Modern Eras Were Not As Polished As The First Half of the Game
5. Layoffs and the Obvious Effect on Morale

Click to expand...

Right - or slightly wrong;
1. Never heard of any development plans without strict design choices for both.
2. Depends, what's the undercut deals? Highway Billboards are prime real estate even to pub freaks.
3. Sectorial assignments always lead to efficiency unless coordination lacks focus & clear objectives. Just like a code, functions & procedures depend on a declaration header were constants & variables get listed for more than just referencing duties.
4. I expect no less.
5. Pffftttt... haven't seen it yet. Me no can do Scenarios like their DLC or fix 3D models in Nexus, etc.

Wrong - and certainly right in cases;
1. Even though it's rational to assume a design should change if necessary, i doubt it's a reasonable way to call a product done by losing the initial concept to complex chaos.
2. Their fault for not planning waaaayyyyy ahead as i'm absolutely sure they knew of the risk of lacking solid QC from the get-go. If that's the usual syndrome of the Frankenstein team we all heard about.
3. Tough luck, hire everyone in due time or don't start production.
4. Who cares... that's context, not quality. Leave it to the players for evaluation since it doesn't involve product but rather specific design principles.
5. BANG. You got it right there. That's exactly what went horribly wrong and everything crumbled apart like dominoes. We ended up as witnesses to THE mistake.

Zyxpsilon said:

If that's the usual syndrome of the Frankenstein team we all heard about.

Click to expand...

What's THAT supposed to mean?

I think the main Software Engineering insight is that they didn't use Software Engineering.

Dale said:

What's THAT supposed to mean?

Click to expand...

Critical Positions Were Still Missing Entering Production

If Firaxis didn't manage to hire (as in, obtain some help from) a sufficient amount of Beta-testers & QC staff then the above proves production lacked necessary assets even when (and then) the Frankenstein Team contributed critical input, ignored or otherwise by devs.
Thus, still missing... but in a sense that the resource was free to them. Don't forget option 2 & 3 are very closely related, IMO.

elthrasher said:

Civ6 will disappoint a lot of longtime fans.

Click to expand...

And Civ 7 will be tic-tac-toe with hexes.
(see the future development team hard at work below)

Zyxpsilon said:

Critical Positions Were Still Missing Entering Production

If Firaxis didn't manage to hire (as in, obtain some help from) a sufficient amount of Beta-testers & QC staff then the above proves production lacked necessary assets even when (and then) the Frankenstein Team contributed critical input, ignored or otherwise by devs.
Thus, still missing... but in a sense that the resource was free to them. Don't forget option 2 & 3 are very closely related, IMO.

Click to expand...

Frankenstein and beta testers are not critical positions. Lead MP programmer, that's a critical position. The fact the add for an MP programmer has been on Firaxis website for many months says lots about Critical Positions Were Still Missing Entering Production.

Leave Dale alone, he has suffered enough of indifference from the devs already. The way I understood the Franky team was doing their best but was largely ignored/there were no people with free time to fix the issues raised by them.


@Kiwitt

I'll never get bored with this thread, very good job

Moderator Action: No further personal comments please.

Dale said:

The fact the add for an MP programmer has been on Firaxis website for many months says lots about Critical Positions Were Still Missing Entering Production.

Click to expand...

That there are serious problems with the organization we can even see without that :/.
Demo release, patch dates, the "super secret unit", day 1 patch, disaster with the "special characters" + spanish windows, etc.

And another point: MP programmer for PBEM + hot seat? Both are more or less modifications of the SP mode.

I'd bet a little more went wrong then they let up