Time for a new spin-off?

[LaRate]

Following the latest developments in both the creation of Civilization 5 (or its surrounding business plan) and Fireaxis as a developer one kind of wonders if we are looking at history repeating here.

We all heard the news of Fireaxis developers getting fired. And we're just beginning to suspect were Civ5 could be heading on Steam rails. Now I perfectly understand that Steam is not a bad thing per se. It's like a car - you can use it to deliver food to homeless people or you can run down baby kittens while laughing maliciously.

However, the first DLC stuff is at least inofficially announced and there will not be one release version of Civ but at least two (the "Babylon issue"). Now one wonders how DLC and Modding will be compatible, two obviously competitive concepts. For me this contradiction smells like a Devs vs. Publisher thing, the layoffs might be 2K putting its foot down on who's boss (highly speculative, I know).

Now if we look at history, MicroProse originally found by Sid Meyer, bought by Spectrum Holobyte and later consolidated under the first name started some "personnel restructuring" *cough* in 1996 which resulted in Sid and his buddies to leave and found Firaxis to have a clean slate.

Now we see layoffs again, and we kinda suspect Civ5 might turn out to be a milking cow for 2K that could be a bitter pill to swallow for all the fans of the franchise. And one starts to think.. maybe it's time to found a new Dev studio and start from scratch.

What do you think?

 

[Thyrwyn]

What you mean "we", kemo sabe? I got no worries.

 

[Commander Bello]

Now we see layoffs again, and we kinda suspect Civ5 might turn out to be a milking cow for 2K that could be a bitter pill to swallow for all the fans of the franchise. And one starts to think.. maybe it's time to found a new Dev studio and start from scratch.

What do you think?

I agree with your analysis - well, with most of it.

I don't know if a new Sid Meier Company would help, though.
In the past interviews I've read he was always indicating that games should be "accessible" - which in my books translates to "be easy and quick".

I agree though that Firaxis/2k at the moment are opening the door for competition, as the developers on the one hand have chosen to drop some ideas (religion, espionage) and the publishers are doing their best to slap the customer in his face, multiple times.

 

[Tee Kay]

Calling the CivFanatics Modding Community...

 

[ColdFever]

the publishers are doing their best to slap the customer in his face

Even if 2K currently is "slapping" Firaxis with layoffs and us fans with a flood of Civ5 versions on top of a Steam DRM, the creative power of Firaxis, the Civilization franchise itself and the fanbase still look strong. I rather would see the weekest link of the chain in 2K (as it has been with Infogrames/Atari before).

Judging by the damaged Civ5 presales (by confusing fans with too many versions and not a single complete one) and all the other losses 2K currently is heaping up, I would not be surprised if the Civilization franchise (and probably Firaxis) one day would find a new owner ... However, judging by the publishers who could be interested (EA, Ubisoft) I still would vote for 2K as the "smallest evil". Perhaps 2K should rather layoff their current Civ5 marketing strategists instead of Firaxis devs...

Calling the CivFanatics Modding Community...

I did months of modding for Civ4, but based on the Civ5 version mess and the Civ5 DRM/DLC commercialization, I doubt that I will do much Civ5 modding. Civ4 has been incredibly open, welcoming and inspiring, while Civ5 so far looks rather DRM-tight, complicated and DLC marketing oriented. Civilization always sold great because the devs listened to the fans, but this time marketing seems not to aim at heart of the fans anymore, rather at their wallet.

 

[Provost Martin]

I honestly think that some of you are taking this a tad too far. The Civilization series needed a fresh new start. Civ4 was IMHO kind of bloated in its feature list. By removing a couple of them and reinventing some old ones maybe we can get a game that appeals to more people and at the same time recaptures some of that old Civ feel. A fun game that offers a new game experience each time you play. I missed that to a certain degree in Civ4. Especially religion hampered the game.

And as a consumer I like to have some options. Maybe I don't want some civs, or perhaps I deem some scenarios/maps unnecessary. Fine, then I don't have to buy them. DLCs is a very cool way of solving that. Plus I'm pretty sure we'll get some collection packs that includes previously released DLCs after a while for a cheaper penny. Keeping the game fresh with a constant stream of content will help the game's longevity. The only thing I'm worried about is how they will solve modding, since that can get tricky with so many setups.

 

[arstal]

They'll just gimp the modding to sell more DLC.

2K is more interested in cooked goose then goose eggs.

 

[ColdFever]

Especially religion hampered the game.

Perhaps your Civ4 games, certainly not mine.

And as a consumer I like to have some options.

Me too. Especially having the option of buying a COMPLETE product. However, for Civ5 not even a luxurious Collectors Edition is offering this. So far it looks like I only have the "option" of buying at least 2 different copies to receive a complete Civ5.

Keeping the game fresh with a constant stream of content will help the game's longevity.

I agree. In the past we had ADDONS for this. However, 2K may now may think DLC pays better. Of course 10$ per Civ-DLC sounds better to the publisher than 30$ for an addon with 8 Civs...

You noticed that the Mongols (announced in several previews) suddenly have vanished from Civ5's feature list? Lets see, Civ5 will be released in September, so I guess in December we already could see some XMAS DLC for Civ5, like: Lets have fun with Genghis Khan under the Christmas Three - So play the Mongols DLC for only 10$... And the Vikings for another 10$... Isn't it that great for the customer? Options, Options, Options!

 

[Provost Martin]

Of course in my Civ games...

And we do get a complete game. It's not features that we'll see in DLCs, I can almost promise you that. It's extra civs, and perhaps maps and scenarios. Maybe even some kind of special unit. Extra content. If you don't want it don't buy it. It won't affect your game much.

I'm sure you'll still get add ons.

And yes, I think that's great. As you say, options, options, options. As a consumer I want that.

 

[Dale]

Calling the CivFanatics Modding Community...

You rang?

 

[ColdFever]

we do get a complete game...It's not features that we'll see in DLCs... It's extra civs, and perhaps maps and scenarios.

It looks like we have different opinions about the word "complete". If 2K requires us fans to buy two different copies to play the Babylonians (Deluxe Edition) and to receive an Artbook (Special Edition), this means each version is not complete, as fans would expect a true Collectors Edition to be:

"To be complete is to be in the state of requiring nothing else to be added."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete

Would you at least complain, if 2K would not only remove the Mongols (we already saw in spring previews) and the Babylonians from the Civ5 feature list, but also reduce the number of Civs from 18 to 2? If you do not regard Civs as features, then 2 Civs probably should be enough for your games...

 

[AlpsStranger]

and to receive an Artbook (Special Edition),

Come on man, the Optimus Prime underwear and lunchbox combo isn't part of the game itself The Steam Babylon edition is, at least the game itself, 100% complete. Unless I am mistaken anyhow.

 

[Commander Bello]

And we do get a complete game. It's not features that we'll see in DLCs, I can almost promise you that. It's extra civs, and perhaps maps and scenarios. Maybe even some kind of special unit. Extra content. If you don't want it don't buy it. It won't affect your game much.

I'm sure you'll still get add ons.

You see, after all what we know, a civilization in Civ5 will have a combination of UU's and UB's. Each of them will give the player something which no other civilization can provide in the same manner.
Therefore, any civilization will allow you to play in a certain way, which is unique.

Such things in my book are features.

And anything which is available by one way or the other at the date of release contributes to the 'complete package' - yet, it is not available except for buying 2 different versions of the game.

And now about the addons.
Many people assume that previous DLC will be put in and made available later by the addons.
And it seems to be very likely that the addons will provide something in addition to that previous DLC.

Now let us assume that there will have been 5 DLC's when the first addon will be released. Of these five DLC's you've bought three - which you will get again when buying the addon. Which in turn means that you will literally pay double for certain items.

And yes, I think that's great. As you say, options, options, options. As a consumer I want that.

Options, for which you will have to pay much more than previously when there were 'just' addons.

The publisher currently tries to change customs and habits, and I have to admit to be baffled how people are even applauding to this.
These changes are not to our benefit, but solely to the benefit of the publisher.

 

[Thyrwyn]

2 civs would not be complete, since (we can assume) that would not be enough for typical gameplay. If Babylon did not exist as a civ at all would the standard edition civ V be complete? Yes.

Can the standard edition be played - as is - without Babylon? Yes. Does it require Babylon in order to run? No. Therefore, it is in the state of requiring nothing else to be added; therefore, the standard edition is complete. Other editions come with something extra - which is why it is called "extra"

 

[AlpsStranger]

The publisher currently tries to change customs and habits, and I have to admit to be baffled how people are even applauding to this.
These changes are not to our benefit, but solely to the benefit of the publisher.

I know why I don't mind. PC Gaming is, well, not exactly in trouble but it isn't thriving either. The prospect of the PC being some kind of cash cow is relieving, not frightening. We should be lucky enough to have DLC sell like hotcakes. I am thinking that most PC Gamers are unaware of the surprisingly thin ice that has been beneath them since about 2002.

 

[Commander Bello]

If Babylon did not exist as a civ at all would the standard edition civ V be complete? Yes.

I agree. Wholeheartedly I agree.

Wait a second... Babylon does exist, doesn't it?
It will be available at release date, won't it?
The complete list of civilizations available at release date includes Babylon...

But in many versions of the game Babylon will have been left out - intentionally have been left out.
I call this "incomplete".

 

[ColdFever]

The Steam Babylon edition is, at least the game itself, 100% complete. Unless I am mistaken anyhow.

That's also what I thought - until this weekend:

While the Steam "Digital Deluxe Edition" does not contain the Artbook of the "Special Edition", not even in digital form, it contains the game "plus" Babylon.

But now D2D not only announced it's basically identical "Digital Deluxe Edition" version, on top of it D2D promises additional "FREE Premium DLC" of "The first DOUBLE Civilization and Scenario Pack". This could mean the D2D could come with even more Civs, for example the Mongols...

So this is what we have:

• We do not have any *complete* Collector's Editions with all content that hardcore fans can buy safely
• We have several versions with different content
• We have versions with unknown content
• We have massive confusion
• We have a damaged presales market, because confused people now rather decide to wait for the release to learn about the best available version
• We expect more extra DLC of more Civs soon, dividing the community of owners and non-owners even more
• We have more arguments here about marketing recently than about the game itself

Sorry, but this situation does not appear healthy to me.

 

[Tee Kay]

^ Well put.

 

[Jmyrm]

They did the same thing to total war - charging customers for "unit packs" when previously modders just reskinned and put them in anyways. I feel no need to pay for more civs when the community provided all the new content with mods to begin with. And seeing how much the mod community has been talked up by the devs (being able to dwnld them from the main page etc...) I would be incredibly disheartened if I had to actually buy any DLC.

match the quality of the DLC with the quality of the modding community - then decide who you would rather support for the added effort. Nothing has been released yet, and I wont prejudge what comes down the pipe - but if I'm going to dish out what I saved up, it would have been to the modders, at least as far as experience with this sort of DLC thing goes.

Jmyrm

 

[LaRate]

I don't know if a new Sid Meier Company would help, though.
In the past interviews I've read he was always indicating that games should be "accessible" - which in my books translates to "be easy and quick".

Well maybe not a Sid Meier company as such - he wasn't lead designer of any Civ game except the first - but I imagine him being a good influence to the games. If he is the "accessibility guy", maybe he has acted as a counterpart to some feature-maniacs, maybe not.

Well I suppose ColdFever pointed to the crux of the matter - that of available publishers... especially in the role of investors for that money-burning process that is game development today. Back in the days of Civ1, two people (in that case Sid Meier and Bruce Shelley) could develop such a game more or less single-handedly.