Information Drought?

to my point there is two probably reasons to explain this black out:

- venice and shoshone Hint wasn't expect and moved the last part of the firaxis communication
- they increase the customer's desire by this way, in order to be sure of doing really good sales during the first weeks.
 
It's the Civil War scenario. It says it right in the title. And we've seen the map for it. The Shoshone are not involved in the war, and especially not in the part of the war fought in Virginia.
 
yeah I Know

But I doubt they just gonna talk about civil war scenario: two civ aren't presented, they're late.
 
I think they will stick to the topic. They tend to do that. If they do anything revealing during the livestream, it will be a hint tacked on right at the end.
 
It is incredible to me that if Antarctic is the 43rd civ, people will not buy the expansion pack. And that they have to know that it will be Antarctic before they buy else we'll be buying it blindly.
 
It is incredible to me that if Antarctic is the 43rd civ, people will not buy the expansion pack. And that they have to know that it will be Antarctic before they buy else we'll be buying it blindly.

They may say it, they may even believe it. But they will buy it anyway.
 
Ugh, the Civil War scenario? Really?
WHY, Firaxis, would you choose to show us the most boring of the two scenarios, and the one that WE'VE ALREADY SEEN?!

:( I don't even LIKE scenarios, and the civil war one seems the most boring one until date - this is really disappointing...
 
Maybe they want to show us that we are wrong in thinking it boring, but I doubt it. The African one looks way more interesting. I think they aren't showing much of that due to Venice being used for Belgium.
 
Besides, wouldn't reviews here the day of release as well as maddjinn's introductory LPs be more informational and accurate compared to prepared marketing hype? I don't ever pre-order games but any expansions, dlc, etc for civ5 would be an automatic purchase, whenever I get around to it. But I do look to the new strategies and will be very interested in some of the first attempts at such, not to mention anything that MadDjinn teaches us.
 
By the way, I haven't had much time to play scenarios but that was all I played in civ2 for 6 years. I did play the conquest one that came with Spain and loved that one, so I look forward to the civil war one since I have a high interest in that. But I don't need to see anything now about it. Still waiting for a ww2 one from the developers though...
 
Why couldn't they have an Indian Ocean Trade scenario? Better than some minor war in a country of only regional importance (at the time, and yes I know I'm understating). :(
 
Why couldn't they have an Indian Ocean Trade scenario? Better than some minor war in a country of only regional importance (at the time, and yes I know I'm understating). :(

It wasn't a "minor war" in the country itself by any means. On the contrary, it was of tremendous significance and has done much to shape the subsequent history of the country. I would also argue that making scenarios about countries of regional importance isn't bad in and of itself. Certainly Japan in the 1500s wasn't important to anyone but Japan and a handful of traders, but I doubt many would complain that a Sengoku Jidai scenario was merely "some minor war in a country of only regional importance".

That said, I didn't want an American Civil War scenario, either. Even an American Revolutionary War scenario would have been more compelling (to me) and would involve more powers. But then, any war or historical era will be uninteresting to somebody. No scenario will make everyone happy. There will be people who will love the Civil War scenario; I don't have to be one of them.
 
That said, I didn't want an American Civil War scenario, either. Even an American Revolutionary War scenario would have been more compelling (to me) and would involve more powers. But then, any war or historical era will be uninteresting to somebody. No scenario will make everyone happy. There will be people who will love the Civil War scenario; I don't have to be one of them.[/QUOTE]


so am I. American civil war is boring for many reason beyond the history who's not so exciting.

- there is two camp, I Love plurality.
- it's very closed in a very little historic period.
- It doesn't present any interest of gaming, neither any challenge, except the militaristic ( as many scenarios) conquest . I won't play It.

and what else. Looking after the civ facebook information of today, a sid meier's itw who doesn't add some news and the livestream of civil war, I just have this impression that Civ won't announce anything else; they just want to keep our attention alive for several week.
 
I hardly ever play scenarios, although I feel like I might give scramble for Africa a spin as morocco or Portugal.
 
Minor importance? The American Civil War? It may have been a "regional conflict," but it was one of the first Industrial wars in which we saw how the application of the Industrial Revolution to weaponry could yield unfathomable destructive and deadly results. It was a major stepping stone to the creation of the modern America, one of the most significant countries in the history of the world, if not the most significant. It was America's deadliest conflict and very nearly did bring in several European powers, some of which were involved in a secretive manner, such Britain, if not for the timely Union victories at Vicksburg and Gettysburg, as well as the Emancipation Proclamation. In a scenario, you're playing out a what if, so it would be a nice idea to include the possibility of British, French, Spanish or Mexican involvement, although it does not appear that that will happen. Still, you have numerous Native American tribes and what many people acknowledge as a fascinating conflict, even if your personal tastes differ. The scenario may end up being boring, but there is certainly the potential to make it great. Whether or not that potential was reached, we'll see in a couple weeks.
 
Is it just me or is it insane that we've got two weeks to release and they still haven't formally revealed the last two civs? (Thank God for that leak or we would've murdered each other over Menzies' color theory.) It's insane that we're getting a scenario playthrough this week instead of Venice, the Shoshone, or even just details about changes to the existing civs. I'm really disappointed by this.
 
Ugh, the Civil War scenario? Really?
WHY, Firaxis, would you choose to show us the most boring of the two scenarios, and the one that WE'VE ALREADY SEEN?!

:( I don't even LIKE scenarios, and the civil war one seems the most boring one until date - this is really disappointing...

I don't think people should be allowed to complain in thread about lack of new info that there's going to be new info. :p
 
So Venice and the Shoshone feature next week?
 
I don't think people should be allowed to complain in thread about lack of new info that there's going to be new info. :p

Is this new info though? :lol:
We've seen the Civil War scenario, we've seen people play it - and unless they throw us a big curve ball at us, this is an extremely simplistic scenario with nothing more to it.
Heck, most things are disabled in the scenario, making it a pure war one. :p There isn't really, from what I can tell, much to this than "defeat the bad guys in 50 turns! GO GO GO!".

It would be like having a live stream showing us Brazil again - we've already seen Brazil, showing it again does not constitute as "new info".

I'm still holding out to see if they give us anything at the end or something - they like to give hints at the end of live events! :lol:
 
Top Bottom