Civilization 5 - Consolization?

[Cropper]

I am an oldschooler BTW, so I'll preface with that. Played from Civ 1 onwards, so many years ago.

I grow more concerned about my beloved Civ with each article and newsbite.

This general trend in gaming thats been happening for the last few years has really made gaming in general stagnate and regress. What I am speaking of, of course, is the "Console-ization" of gaming for want of a better word (I hate using that saying because it is flamebait, but I don't know how else to describe it).

This latest news coming out of the recent IGN article concerns me more and more. There is a lot of talk in there about making it more like Civ-Rev, removing religion, espionage, simplifying the gaming experience etc. This sounds alot like what most gaming companies are doing, namely making their game on the consoles first, like the XBOX, and then porting it to the PC by removing a bunch of features I actually enjoyed.

Here's what I'm thinking at this point. I'm holding off on my full opinion until I know more, but what I'm hearing is really bothering me. Civilization should not ever be simplified so as to sell more units or appeal to a more simple-oriented audience.

What really scares me is how this is starting (and its early days I admit) to sound alot like what happened to my other favorite series Simcity. Cities Xl and City Life are so far removed and dumbed down from its best iteration (The almighty and hallowed Simcity 4), that I can't even bring myself to play them.

I should note here that I'm not against Hex-tiles, or single units per hex, though I'm curious how this will work without there being many more hex tiles than we're seeing in the early screenshots.

I like complex. I like deep. I like epic. I like the concept of religion, and the concept of espionage. I like big, deep, immersive games. I like micro-managing, and I like it when my turns take 15 to 30 minutes each. I like looking at the clock and noticing with surprise that 12 hours just flew by and how the heck did that happen? It's what sets apart Simcity and Civilization from the pack. If that is removed, I will have to shake my head and walk away, which will not be easy.

I wonder if a guy who is in his 20's running with this game was a wise move, as he is part of the console generation. Only time will tell. I will withhold full judgement for now, but I've got that queasy feeling, that little voice in the back of my head, telling me something is not good. I hope I'm wrong, but over 25 years of gaming experience has taught me to trust my instincts.

Thoughts? Anyone think I'm way off base here, or share these sentiments?

 

[Robo-Star]

I wonder if a guy who is in his 20's running with this game was a wise move, as he is part of the console generation.

How Old are Civ(4) Fanatics?

 

[snapple232]

I would agree with you that dumbing down Civilization V would be a huge mistake, but I don't think that's what's happening. From my understanding of the various previews that have been written so far, they're applying lessons they learned from Revolution about making the interface more accessible and user-friendly, but plan to keep the core gameplay experience faithful to the main series.

 

[Cropper]

How Old are Civ(4) Fanatics?

That's an interesting thread.

Since the majority of folks in that poll are in their early 20's, perhaps the changes will be well received by the vast majority. I'm starting to think I'm just getting old maybe (I'm 36 so I hope not!), and too inflexible. I swear I'm trying to keep an open mind though, i really want this game to be great, as there is no series I am more passionate about.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

I don't really like the consolization that's happening in a some games/franchises, but I'm also not really concerned it's happening with civ.

I'd like to see civ5 being a deep and complex game, but it doesn't have to have all the concepts civ4 and the expansions had. Some of the features in civ4 were pretty impressive, such as the promotion-system and religion, but in the end they weren't very fun imo. Perhaps they brought some extra depth to the game but they also made it more cumbersome. They could both be replaced with better and more interesting features.

I suspect Firaxis has a good idea how long the ideal game is supposed to take and with civ4 they made it smaller and more compact to fit all those features within the game and keep the time to play through reasonable. Now they're going for a larger, more tactical game that's perhaps is a bit scaled down featurewise. New and additional features could always be added in expansions...

That's what I think and hope. Although, I can't say i played civ4 a lot, perhaps because it was too large, complex and taking too much time to play. The time to play games is a bit reduced compared to 15 years ago also, it might have something to do with it.

 

[Shiggs713]

I like complex. I like deep. I like epic. I like the concept of religion, and the concept of espionage. I like big, deep, immersive games. I like micro-managing, and I like it when my turns take 15 to 30 minutes each. I like looking at the clock and noticing with surprise that 12 hours just flew by and how the heck did that happen? It's what sets apart Simcity and Civilization from the pack. If that is removed, I will have to shake my head and walk away, which will not be easy.

Thats what I'm talking about

I wouldn't be overly concerned though, I'm sure they're working hard to make things right, and even if it gets released and its all messed up, you know we'll have 2-3 expansions and about 20 patches until they do get it right.

 

[mjs0]

I have also been playing video games (and developing software/managing product releases) for over 25 years. At this point my opinion is a little more optimistic.

Do I expect the first release of Civ5 to have less depth than Civ4? Probably...but more likely it is the breadth of the product that will contract (since we already know that certain features such as religion and espionage will be missing), but it is not unusual for the vanilla release of a new version to contain less depth and breadth than the final fully expanded release of the previous version.

I would contend that in many respects at first glance Civ4 vanilla looked like a simpler game than Civ3 fully expanded, it was also derided by some Civ3 veterans for looking cartoonlike. Espionage was much simpler for sure, pollution was a welcome loss for many, combat lost armies and bombardment, there were way fewer civs and leaders, etc... But but at the same time they added new mechanisms which were not fully appreciated until the game was actually shipped and played. I am sure there are many new mechanisms in civ5 as well, which we will learn about over the next six months and come to truly appreciate once it ships.

If I were Firaxis/2K I would look at it this way...
The vanilla release of a new version is the big expense,

• a new game engine,
• new in-game assets,
• a ton of balancing work,
• marketing effort
• etc. etc.

I would want the first release of a new version to appeal to as many people as possible. Yes this will be at the expense of some depth and will dismay some of the hard-core civ fans but at the same time as a business I have to pay for the development of the new core game engine. As long as it is built with expansions in mind I can then at much lower cost add depth and breadth in expansion packs that will be bought by the hard core civ fans. If the casual players don't buy the expansion it is a shame (for them) but because of the cost structure not as critical as if they failed to buy the base game.

So, the net result is that the casual gamers get a simpler game, 2K/Firaxis recoup their development costs and make a profit, and the hardcore fans end up with a great final version of Civ5, with plenty of depth and breadth, the creation of which is partially subsidized by the casual gamers that buy the vanilla release.

This is a much safer approach than to attempt to implement on the new game engine all the breadth of features from Civ4 in one fell swoop and in the process scare off some of the casual gamers with complexity or fail to attract them because too little was invested in eye candy.

 

[King Kalmah]

I think you have a point.Each article I come across is always mentioning how its gonna work on many systems.Also they are using less units and less units means a faster running game.Also the majority of computer games now come out on Xbox360 and computer....

I am only 21 and I see what you mean.I also am a huge Sim City fan....played SC2000 for 7 years and played SC4 for about 5 years before ST drove me away....BTW I'm Cjah if you ever frequented the ST forums..

 

[LordRahl]

I wonder if a guy who is in his 20's running with this game was a wise move, as he is part of the console generation.

Don't forget that he is not just any guy. What I got from articles is that before he started working for Firaxis he was an active civ modder. That's exactly the type of guy you want to have in charge of making the game. He enjoyed the game so much, he decided to make it better on his own, which means he was a fan of the series on a much higher level, than most of us here. I'd rather have guys like that, with passion for the franchise, than programmers for whom this is another 9-5 job. Change is good. Consoles got their CivRev. PC's will get their Civ5.

 

[Dale]

This general trend in gaming thats been happening for the last few years has really made gaming in general stagnate and regress. What I am speaking of, of course, is the "Console-ization" of gaming for want of a better word (I hate using that saying because it is flamebait, but I don't know how else to describe it).

You realise that games are just coming home don't you? All games started on consoles (Atari 2600, 8-bits, Amiga, SNES, C-64, etc etc) and were "PC-onised" in the late 80's early 90's. All these games are simply coming home.

 

[PiTiFUL]

I grow more concerned about my beloved Civ with each article and newsbite.

Ditto, looking like CIV4 could be the last of the great CIV franchise for me.

What I am speaking of, of course, is the "Console-ization" of gaming for want of a better word (I hate using that saying because it is flamebait, but I don't know how else to describe it).

Simplification... but itll look real purdy.

What really scares me is how this is starting (and its early days I admit) to sound alot like what happened to my other favorite series Simcity. It's so far removed and dumbed down from its best iteration, that I can't even bring myself to play the latest series anymore.

Um I would question based on this statement whether or not you've ever played SimCity, each new generation has been more complex then the last and the last SimCity game was the most complex indepth game of the series, granted it was broken and never fixed but to claim it as dumbdown!?! Ludicrous.

I should note here that I'm not against Hex-tiles, or single units per hex, though I'm curious how this will work without there being many more hex tiles than we're seeing in the early screenshots.

Hex = good, One unit per tile = what the hell are they doing!?! SOD needs addressing but this is the other extreme.

I like complex. I like deep. I like epic. I like the concept of religion, and the concept of espionage. I like big, deep, immersive games. I like micro-managing, and I like it when my turns take 15 to 30 minutes each. I like looking at the clock and noticing with surprise that 12 hours just flew by and how the heck did that happen?

In other words, I like CIV... me too!

It's what sets apart Simcity and Civilization from the pack. If that is removed, I will have to shake my head and walk away, which will not be easy.

Never have to walk away... itll just be CIV4 forever... hope we are wrong.

 

[mjs0]

You realise that games are just coming home don't you? All games started on consoles (Atari 2600, 8-bits, Amiga, SNES, C-64, etc etc) and were "PC-onised" in the late 80's early 90's. All these games are simply coming home.

Ooh, ooh I can't let that falsehood stand...

The first computer game I ever played was on an aging DEC machine in the early 1970s.
There is even a wikipedia page about the game based on the recently finished original run of Star Trek.

I can't wait to play Civ/370 when gaming really comes home to its mainframe roots.
Turn-based is perfect for that old 3270 emulator anyway.

 

[cspyr0]

Hah - I thought the title of this was a pun combining the word consolation and the title of their expansion, colonization.

I'm pretty excited about the changes myself, as I was never a fan of making/sending missionaries nor am I a fan of stacks of doom. But since they can't just make the same game all the time, they have to make changes. Theoretically at some point I'll think a game is perfect, and be pissed when they want to change it!

It may be an age thing as I recall being annoyed quite a few times at the games my cousins (who are ~10 years younger than I) would play since they all seemed to be really easy. Shouldn't it be frustrating like when I played Mega Man or that retched Ninja Turtles NES game? Is Nintendo no longer attempting to profit from replacing controllers that "somehow" slammed themselves against a wall?

Hopefully when they say they're simplifying Civ they mean that it will be more simple to learn, but still difficult to master.

 

[Abremms]

I would agree with you that dumbing down Civilization V would be a huge mistake, but I don't think that's what's happening. From my understanding of the various previews that have been written so far, they're applying lessons they learned from Revolution about making the interface more accessible and user-friendly, but plan to keep the core gameplay experience faithful to the main series.

this^

it says right in the IGN article that they are striving to preserve the depth the pc crowd loves, while streamlining the interface to make it more user friendly. game depth does not mean fighting a poorly designed interface and lets be honest, interface has never been a strong suite of the civ series.

It's all an attempt to make the game more accessible without compromising on the depth or details.

thats the first line of the paragraph AFTER it talks about civ rev. i think a lot of people are so busy foaming at the mouth and taking cover from the falling sky at that point that they just gloss right over it.

i have complete confidence in Jon Shafer, he was the lead designer on BtS and that was a great expansion. before that he was a modder. he knows the game, knows the series and clearly cares about it.

beyond that, we just don't KNOW that much yet. i think people are getting little snippets of information and drawing some very far-reaching conclusions that aren't necessarily correct.

for instance, religions are gone as the system we knew in civ4, but i read somewhere that there is a religious branch in the CivTree (still waiting for more details on that.) for the life of me, i cannot find a source so i could be wrong. still, i sincerely doubt that religion will be completely ignored.

espionage is removed, but with the new diplomacy system (which we know almost nothing about) who's to say there aren't espionage options there? or religion options for that matter. the point it, take a step back. take a deep breath. speculation is all well and good, but lets wait till we get more info before we pass too much judgement.

 

[Cropper]

Um I would question based on this statement whether or not you've ever played SimCity, each new generation has been more complex then the last and the last SimCity game was the most complex indepth game of the series, granted it was broken and never fixed but to claim it as dumbdown!?! Ludicrous.

Just wanted to clarify, that's not what I meant. I was referring to Cities XL and City Life when i speak about the new generations of the game that I can't stand, NOT the almighty Simcity 4 which I hold a deep passion for.

 

[Ahriman]

I see no evidence of Dumbing Down/Consolization in the Civ 5 details we have seen so far. Removing weak mechanics like espionage is good, because tbh they never worked well. Similarly I hope that Corporations are gone, they are a weak mechanic.

Religion, in its current form, isn't terribly interesting, though I'd like to see religion still in the game somehow. Changing to the hex 1UpT system has the potential to significantly increase the combat depth - not dumbing down at all. Finite resource availability will definitely improve the game.

I am impressed by the designers willingness to tinker with some of the core mechanics that are getting stale, like Stack of Doom combat. It seems likely that we have the potential for a much larger change between Civ4 ->5 than between most of the previous increments, and I see this as positive.

The modding ability possible with Civ4 means that something new will have to be significantly different in order to be worth purchasing; if it wasn't, it would be easy to do with a modded civ4.

 

[Shiggs713]

Just wanted to clarify, that's not what I meant. I was referring to Cities XL and City Life when i speak about the new generations of the game that I can't stand, NOT the almighty Simcity 4 which I hold a deep passion for.

thank god you clarified that. I was wondering myself but didn't say anything. Simcity4 - Rush Hour was pretty damn good. Cities XL and City Life weren't really the same series though there was some sort of passing of the torch, cause we all know there isn't gonna be Simcity5, at least for a long long time. But yea, XL and City life was horrible.

 

[King Kalmah]

I never got to play XL or city life,but I bet money they were better then SC4 vannilla cause that was bad.If it wasn't for Rush Hour I don't think i would have gotten into SC4 at all.

 

[tom2050]

It might not be clear, but there is a trend to that side of the fence compared to Civ 2's gameplay. Although the algorithm's may be complex, they are simplifying the ability to play the game, because attention spans are shorter these days than they used to be. And they want to include more casual gamers (which Civ 4 started heading towards).

Casual gamers is the vast gold pile they want their grubby hands on , therefore those who like complex, won't get complexity as in Civ 2 and 3; but 'streamlined, no-thought needed' gameplay. This allows everyone to play, while those who like complex, can dig down just a bit deeper to gain subtle advantage.

2K games started this, and it started with Civ 4, and will continue on... the days of Civ 2 and 3 are over forever and never coming back.

Tom

 

[Carver]

What really scares me is how this is starting (and its early days I admit) to sound alot like what happened to my other favorite series Simcity. Cities Xl and City Life are so far removed and dumbed down from its best iteration (The almighty and hallowed Simcity 4), that I can't even bring myself to play them.

I should note here that I'm not against Hex-tiles, or single units per hex, though I'm curious how this will work without there being many more hex tiles than we're seeing in the early screenshots.

I like complex. I like deep. I like epic. I like the concept of religion, and the concept of espionage. I like big, deep, immersive games. I like micro-managing, and I like it when my turns take 15 to 30 minutes each. I like looking at the clock and noticing with surprise that 12 hours just flew by and how the heck did that happen? It's what sets apart Simcity and Civilization from the pack. If that is removed, I will have to shake my head and walk away, which will not be easy.

You, kind Sir, are my kind of gamer. I agree with 100% of your substaintial post.

It may be that Simcity4 and Civ4 will represent the apex of strategy games. I fear we are entering a dangerous time. A new Dark Age may be upon us.

Difficult to see, the future is.

If the future be consolization, defeated we are. As Yoda on Dagobah, as Obi-Wan on Tatooine, lost and scattered in the forest and the desert we will be. Raided, the Temple of TBS games has been. Keep our strength, we must. Restored, order will be - in time, in time.