I pledge to not buy Civ 6 until it is released

[LDiCesare]

TMIT did not say that the existence or not of a MP component was the issue; he said LYING ABOUT ITS EXISTENCE is the issue. If some of you want to defend FXS practices, fine, your opinion, but please do not deviate from the main point: the marketing practices during the release time of Shafer's civ.

But the point is that, to a SPer, MP is a different game, so whatever they say about it, it's not relevant to the game the SPer is buying.

 

[thecrazyscot]

But the point is that, to a SPer, MP is a different game, so whatever they say about it, it's not relevant to the game the SPer is buying.

Exactly what I've been trying to say all along ^_^

 

[Lemon Merchant]

But the point is that, to a SPer, MP is a different game, so whatever they say about it, it's not relevant to the game the SPer is buying.

No, TMIT's point has nothing to do with the difference between MP and SP. His point is about the game developer deliberately (or accidentally) misleading the buyers of the game.

The fact that the MP didn't work on release when it was a promised feature is the issue. It's an ethical point, and has no bearing on whether one plays MP or SP which is irrelevant for that particular argument in this thread.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Let's look at this formally.
Does multiplayer exists in the game? Yes.
Did developers promise game without bugs? Of course not.
You can't go to court about false advertisement here.

Let's look informally.
How many active MP players in civilization? Less than 1%.
How many of them are affected by MP bugs often? We don't know, but surely not all of them.
What priority should have bugs which only affect one game mode and for vary small share of players? Not very high.

I understand the reaction of people affected by MP bugs and I would like to see some decent multiplayer myself, but honestly I don't see reason for such holy crusade I see in the thread.

 

[Aristos]

What holy crusade? In any case, I am campaigning so that others pre-order to become paying betas, thus ensuring that when I buy, I will get a finished, patched and more than likely fairly priced product.

So, yes, please, go on and pre-order! It's the holy thing to do! Pre-order now!

 

[stealth_nsk]

What holy crusade? In any case, I am campaigning so that others pre-order to become paying betas, thus ensuring that when I buy, I will get a finished, patched and more than likely fairly priced product.

So, yes, please, go on and pre-order! It's the holy thing to do! Pre-order now!

Fair position too

 

[Red Menace]

What holy crusade? In any case, I am campaigning so that others pre-order to become paying betas, thus ensuring that when I buy, I will get a finished, patched and more than likely fairly priced product.

So, yes, please, go on and pre-order! It's the holy thing to do! Pre-order now!

the AI is my biggest concern, if its as stupid as Civ V's on release than i'd consider it a waste of money, after all why buy immediately when I can get it on sale months or a year after with (hopefully) better AI. so I will wait for user reviews after release, unless they do something so amazing I have to pre-order.

I usually take your stance, let the others pay for a beta, I want the finished product (preferably on sale)

 

[LDiCesare]

No, TMIT's point has nothing to do with the difference between MP and SP. His point is about the game developer deliberately (or accidentally) misleading the buyers of the game.

The fact that the MP didn't work on release when it was a promised feature is the issue. It's an ethical point, and has no bearing on whether one plays MP or SP which is irrelevant for that particular argument in this thread.

And my answer is that people don't care if other people are misled.
Game publishers can have a poor track record of MP games, constantly pretend that their MP is great and failt o achieve it while at the same time providing great SP experience. So they mislead their MP audience, not their SP audience, and the SP audience doesn't mind.
My answer was not about ethics. It was about how people react in reality. Trying to change that is both unlikely and ethically shady by itself.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Let's look at this formally.
Does multiplayer exists in the game? Yes.
Did developers promise game without bugs? Of course not.
You can't go to court about false advertisement here.

On release, you could seriously have made a case for a class action suit. It wasn't "some bugs in MP". It was "you can't play MP, at all, without it de-syncing in short order". At the time it was literally as bad as Paradox's false advertising wrt cross-platform MP in EU IV is since patch 1.6. Making a case that the product works in MP in either situation would be difficult, because you can't actually play MP in those cases.

At this point in time, MP works...very poorly. You still can't do what it advertises (putting 5+ people in a game melts it). It'd be harder to take to court though. But on release? No. There was no rational way to claim that was a working feature.

Let's look informally.
How many active MP players in civilization? Less than 1%.
How many of them are affected by MP bugs often? We don't know, but surely not all of them.
What priority should have bugs which only affect one game mode and for vary small share of players? Not very high.

When a feature doesn't work at all initially, and works very poorly after, you would not expect what's left of the community that uses it to be very large.

But as I've stated repeatedly, the problem there was dishonesty on release, not prioritization. Civ has a track record of poor quality on release, something that is not even well-disputed here. Despite that, we have pre-order spam, even by consumers acknowledging the poor release quality. That the market is by and large ignoring active dishonesty by a company plus a track record of poor release quality is exactly why I'm calling it a doormat market, on average.

I'd rather the game be good on release. However, market behavior provides disincentive for that.

 

[MisterBoomBoom]

Does anyone know how long the game will be available for Pre-order status (via steam)? Can you still pre-order it the day before going on sale for example?

 

[Ryika]

They last until the second the game is released. Not sure if that's a hard rule, but I've never seen presales that end before the game is released on steam.

 

[Ricci]

What holy crusade? In any case, I am campaigning so that others pre-order to become paying betas, thus ensuring that when I buy, I will get a finished, patched and more than likely fairly priced product.

So, yes, please, go on and pre-order! It's the holy thing to do! Pre-order now!

I take the holiness of the matter comes due to the "leap of faith" some people are putting over Firaxis.. .. Right

 

[rastak]

What holy crusade? In any case, I am campaigning so that others pre-order to become paying betas, thus ensuring that when I buy, I will get a finished, patched and more than likely fairly priced product.

So, yes, please, go on and pre-order! It's the holy thing to do! Pre-order now!

Nah, we got plenty of time to pre-order....

 

[Ricci]

And my answer is that people don't care if other people are misled.
Game publishers can have a poor track record of MP games, constantly pretend that their MP is great and failt o achieve it while at the same time providing great SP experience. So they mislead their MP audience, not their SP audience, and the SP audience doesn't mind.
...

What some people care or mind about is absolutely irrelevant in concern to commercial fraud against others, and themselves.
As is what some people care or mind about their civil rights irrelevant in concern to those rights being trampled or not.

 

[Aristos]

I take the holiness of the matter comes due to the "leap of faith" some people are putting over Firaxis.. .. Right

I take it you did not read/understand the spirit of that post, or you didn't understand the sarcasm. From your previous posts, you seem to be more in line with my thinking than against it... read again.

Nah, we got plenty of time to pre-order....

True, but the sooner you pre-order, the sooner they may start working on the balanced, patched, fairly priced version I will buy.

Moderator Action: Two posts merged. Please use multiquote

 

[rastak]

True, but the sooner you pre-order, the sooner they may start working on the balanced, patched, fairly priced version I will buy.

You might be waiting for the first expansion.

Either way, I am more than happy to test it for you!

 

[LDiCesare]

What some people care or mind about is absolutely irrelevant in concern to commercial fraud against others, and themselves.
As is what some people care or mind about their civil rights irrelevant in concern to those rights being trampled or not.

I was just explaining what people thought.
If there was a fraud, then sue them! What's the point of crying "don't buy, they have poor release quality"? I've explained you that 99% of the people don't care, so you're just wasting your time. You will not convince any significant part of the market that way. If you think you have a case, take it to court, that's what lawyers are for, and you'll have a much easier case of convincing both other people not to buy and the developers to behave differently.

 

[Aristos]

I was just explaining what people thought.
If there was a fraud, then sue them! What's the point of crying "don't buy, they have poor release quality"? I've explained you that 99% of the people don't care, so you're just wasting your time. You will not convince any significant part of the market that way. If you think you have a case, take it to court, that's what lawyers are for, and you'll have a much easier case of convincing both other people not to buy and the developers to behave differently.

I see your point, but I still think you may be wrong in your line of thinking. The market as a whole, when it is free, is far more powerful than any court in the world, as history shows. By the way, I don't see anyone crying here, so please measure your words.

Some here are trying to make the point that we, as the main component of the market, have the power to direct it however we want as a group (the consumers). Whatever we see happening is, in the end, the result of what the group decided to do as a general direction; nothing more, nothing less.

In the end, it is pretty clear that we, as a group of customers, get exactly what we deserve. Nothing more, nothing less. Some of us are non-conformists, and disagree with that end result, although there is only so much we can do. What you lightly call "crying" is among the few things we can try to, let's say, "rectify" the general direction.

Can we succeed? I doubt it. But well, maybe in the long term people still have the capability to learn from past mistakes, right? Maybe. Hopefully.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I was just explaining what people thought.
If there was a fraud, then sue them! What's the point of crying "don't buy, they have poor release quality"? I've explained you that 99% of the people don't care, so you're just wasting your time. You will not convince any significant part of the market that way. If you think you have a case, take it to court, that's what lawyers are for, and you'll have a much easier case of convincing both other people not to buy and the developers to behave differently.

1. In contrast to Paradox (advertising cross-platform MP, which it has not provided in 2 years), Firaxis/2k actually made an effort to make MP at least technically function under some circumstances, which would damage the case as of years ago.

2. Let's say they didn't. Their pockets are still deeper, so a simple "is this actually available as a service as advertised" could turn into quite the fight. Someone pressing litigation in such circumstances needs the means to break the stalling and win.

Regardless, the points made here against pre-ordering have every bit as much legitimacy, and more rational backing, than what's being quoted. Those of us levying a legit case against the game's release trend don't need to say that people in disagreement are "crying" over us doing so. I suspect that such was said in lieu of possessing an actual answer for the points brought forth, but we shall see .

 

[LDiCesare]

You may convince people not to preorder if you appeal to what matters to them. MP just does not.
I don't care for the game being buggy either. I care for it being not immersive or gamey.
So overall, some may not buy the game for lack of MP, some because it's buggy, some because it's not immersive. I'm not sure that the firm doing the game will hear that as one message or that the game industry will change its behavior in any way because the signals they'll get will not be clear. What to change? Less bugs? I honestly don't care. Working MP? Neither. How do they gather stats about what people want in order to buy the game?