Where is everyone?

[canadamufc]

This place was very active during NFP... less during the Leader Pass but that was watered down from the start. Everyone will be back for Civ VII.

 

[Daniel Boone]

It’s always like this, when the LP was announced the forums were very active, same with NFP. There just isn’t much to talk about right now.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Discord happened.

Also there is a point when for an older game everything is discussed. Then you have either an AAR/shadow game or an MP scene to keep interest or they simply won't be much going on. The MP communities for Civ4/5/6 are elsewhere and the story/AAR stuff in on Youtube nowadays.

I vastly prefer the forum to discord, as that place is just a mess for finding information, and is a real echo chamber when it comes to dissenting opinions. Never have I seen a place that is so Orthodox on what they accept as official doctrine, and how quick they are at crucifying dissenters.

On topic:
Civ 6 has been out for too long, and is not really receiving new content anymore. Just waiting for civ 7 atm, while still playing civ 6 on the side in the meantime.

 

[Zegangani]

The difference between a mod and something firaxis does is that I have more confidence the AI will know how to play with something firaxis does.

This is what I mean by Players being hesitant towards mods just because they aren't official content. You see, this couldn't be further from the truth, bc in this right Forum People constantly complain about AI not knowing about how mechanics work and how to utilize them. The Mechanics that the AI mostly uses are the main ones, like moving units, declaring war, settling cities...etc. but it still has no idea on how to govern an Empire, like where to build cities and districts (adjacencies), using policies, pantheons even, just spams Wonders...etc. yet if you're using mods then it's the fault of them not of the base Game? Sorry, but I completely disagree.

In Fact, many Modders design their Mods around how the AI works and how it could utilize them, in other words, make mods that the AI would use. Which Firaxis doesn't do, because they design mechanics that would make the game more fun for the Player, with AI being just an afterthought, which is proven in all the mechanics and content we got in any DLC. Only the Base Game AI is actually good. The AI in Civ6 still doesn't know how to maintain its military (gold and resource maintenance), uses civilian units to explore and leaving them un-escorted, Firaxis designed loyalty that works more in favor of the human player at the cost of AI constantly losing Cities bc it doesn't know how to keep them loyal, Major Civs AI still struggling with Barbarians...etc.

And just to prove my point even more, Firaxis even steals Fixes from the Modding Community. You remember the Issue where the AI wouldn't improve Luxuries when M&C Mode was enabled? Infixo made a fix to that in a mod (and it works very good, made Monopolies very competitive), and Firaxis blatantly copies the code without even crediting Infixo, which is a low move from Firaxis (the not-crediting part, not the stealing) ngl.

You mention AI not knowing how to use the GP from your mod, but ignore the fact that the AI can't do that with even the official Great People, which it often leaves unused and uses to explore the map. Why is that an Issue inherent to Mods?

Sorry, but that's a weak claim. There are many Mods out there that the AI knows how to use, and some Modders even code the AI to use them if it can't do it on its own. Besides, most Mods don't add new mechanics, but just add more of the same things already in the Game, like Buildings, Units, Wonders, Civs...etc. And if AI doesn't know how to use those mods then it's because it doesn't know how to use them in the Vanilla Game in the first place.

Anyway, you missed my Point, which isn't to make a difference between official and modded content, but to start Discussions around Modded Civ6, how mods could improve and even fix the Game (I'm sure that 99% of the Issues of the Game could be solved by mods, if people would care to encourage and support modders), providing Feedback to the Authors so that they can make the Mods better, including making the AI better at utilizing them...etc. My Point is that Civ6 is Dead for people who don't use Mods, bc it's very unlikely that it will receive any patch let alone a DLC of some sort. But For People who are open to Modding, there'll always be stuff to discuss, to try out, and even the possibility to customize the Game how they want it. IMHO, if you're not using mods at this point of the Game (like past its live support time), then you're simply missing out on the game's biggest potential.

 

[Gorbles]

And just to prove my point even more, Firaxis even steals Fixes from the Modding Community. You remember the Issue where the AI wouldn't improve Luxuries when M&C Mode was enabled? Infixo made a fix to that in a mod (and it works very good, made Monopolies very competitive), and Firaxis blatantly copies the code without even crediting Infixo, which is a low move from Firaxis (the not-crediting part, not the stealing) ngl.

I don't mean to start a Thing here, but Firaxis owns the code. It's theirs, including any modifications. Modders cannot copyright or claim it for themselves. So calling it "stealing" seems to be some kind of stretch designed to generate a bit of drama. I understand the not-crediting thing, but that's separate to the claim of theft (of Firaxis' own property).

If somebody at work "nicks" a piece of code I wrote for their own work, it's all IP owned by the company. I have no say in it. Can it be considered a low blow, especially if they pass it off as their own? Sure. But that's a corporate environment where work is pay. Here we have a developer claiming community fixes to improve the product we all share. The only cost is the hours involved at the developer side - surely you want them to maximise that?

 

[Zegangani]

I don't mean to start a Thing here, but Firaxis owns the code. It's theirs, including any modifications. Modders cannot copyright or claim it for themselves. So calling it "stealing" seems to be some kind of stretch designed to generate a bit of drama. I understand the not-crediting thing, but that's separate to the claim of theft (of Firaxis' own property).

If somebody at work "nicks" a piece of code I wrote for their own work, it's all IP owned by the company. I have no say in it. Can it be considered a low blow, especially if they pass it off as their own? Sure. But that's a corporate environment where work is pay. Here we have a developer claiming community fixes to improve the product we all share. The only cost is the hours involved at the developer side - surely you want them to maximise that?

I think everyone here understands that, and I think it was also clear from my wording that I didn't mean "stealing" in the literal meaning of it, bc I didn't concentrate on that bit but on the crediting part, and My Point was about Firaxis not fixing their own code and relying on a Modder's fix, to prove my point of AI struggling with Vanilla Content and not just Mods, which actually in part fix the AI.

Still, even though it's not stealing in the legal sense, and 2K/Firaxis can even use Mods or content from them to drive sales without even permission from the Authors and without compensating them, but in my Eyes it would still be that: stealing. Which is why I used that Word, not bc I think it's legal theft. It's a bad Industry move to enforce such Terms of use, where if a Modder that made an overhaul mod of a custom fantasy world, that's free to use, doesn't have the ownership of that world itself (yea, no wonder you don't see much overhaul mods nowadays), let alone the code. But I digress.

And to clarify, I have nothing against Firaxis re-using code or even content from Mods (if it's patched into the base game, and not behind a pay-wall that is), but I disregard it if the original Authors don't get properly credited, that's the least they can do for Modders that help do the Devs' work (which in my Opinion is the fault of the Publisher, not the Devs, which I believe do care about such stuff).

Also, I'm sure whoever used that code has done it in good faith, like to make that fix accessible for most players (including console), but that bit of code had to pass through QA and get the Go from 2K or a Firaxis responsible, and it was on them to provide the Crediting (like even a mention in an Update Video, or at least a comment in the Code itself) or ignore it. And that's who I blame, not the Devs themselves.

The only cost is the hours involved at the developer side - surely you want them to maximise that?

What would be the cost of 2K/Firaxis adding 1 short text line in the Patch Notes crediting the Modder that helped with a particular Code? And to answer your Question, if more development time meant more Monthly Challenges, then No, I wouldn't want them to spend precious dev time on a challenge that barely some people play and only for 1 run to get a Badge. I'd rather have them spend that time on actual patching and polishing the Game (which what the Code from Infixo does), or actual Game Content that add replayability (which now you can only get from Mods).
If Firaxis wants to maximize its dev time it should strive to work more and directly with Modders (like by allowing Infixo or other modders access to the AI code to improve it - or for making Cosmetic Patches/DLCs like how it's done in Crusader Kings 3), at which point we would get a much better Game for sure.

 

[civac]

Regarding the AI vs mods thing, afaik Firaxis hired a modder who did Civ4 AI code for their BTS expansion (not 100% positive). Similarly, the Civ5 Vox Populi AI is said to be very strong. So from prior experience, releasing the part of the source code for the modders is the way to get the AI to a competent level.

 

[Gorbles]

I think everyone here understands that, and I think it was also clear from my wording that I didn't mean "stealing" in the literal meaning of it, bc I didn't concentrate on that bit but on the crediting part, and My Point was about Firaxis not fixing their own code and relying on a Modder's fix, to prove my point of AI struggling with Vanilla Content and not just Mods, which actually in part fix the AI.

I'd normally ask what you mean by "stealing" then, because you still think it's theft in some fashion, but this is increasingly off-topic and I'm happy to agree to disagree.

Game systems always suffer. Often it's AI. This is because, a) AI is hard, and b) developers work to schedules we have no idea about. Modders can take their free time, the base code the developers have made, and the tools the developers have made, and make improvements. Modding is ace. But you can't compare it to development.

In my mind, in that regard, relying on the work of modders is good. I wish they'd do more of it, and credit the modders to boot. I certainly wouldn't dissuade it by trying to frame it in any way, however remotely, as theft.

What would be the cost of 2K/Firaxis adding 1 short text line in the Patch Notes crediting the Modder that helped with a particular Code? And to answer your Question, if more development time meant more Monthly Challenges, then No, I wouldn't want them to spend precious dev time on a challenge that barely some people play and only for 1 run to get a Badge. I'd rather have them spend that time on actual patching and polishing the Game (which what the Code from Infixo does), or actual Game Content that add replayability (which now you can only get from Mods).

What you want the developers to work on is not what I want the developers to work on. Magnify that by a million and that's why "the developers do what the developers want to do" is often the only viable business decision.

Be informed by the community, but don't be driven by it.

I don't really care about the challenges but a) it's obvious they're trying something and b) VI still got updated prior to them with actual bugfixes. More is always better, but the resource required to fix bugs is never the same as the resource required to implement something like that.

As for the cost, I couldn't begin to guess. Paperwork is a pain. You'd need to note where the fix came from, send it to whatever team does patch notes, maybe vet it with legal, maybe offer to reach out to the modder in question in case they don't want the attention (this happens, however rarely). Everything a business does is inefficient in a way, and sometimes its just plain old inefficient. But at other times it's because red tape demands it.

Or maybe it was a genuine oversight and the critique leveled at Firaxis will inspire them to do better next time. I'm hoping so.

I just like blathering on about the differences between modding and professional development

If Firaxis wants to maximize its dev time it should strive to work more and directly with Modders (like by allowing Infixo or other modders access to the AI code to improve it - or for making Cosmetic Patches/DLCs like how it's done in Crusader Kings 3), at which point we would get a much better Game for sure.

This would require legal contracts, which is exactly why it doesn't happen (guessing, obviously, but an educated one).

Fixing a line of code is easy, and paradoxically, that's how things don't get fixed. They get forgotten about as higher priority things are targeted. Opening up channels for modders to work more closely with the devs would be fantastic, but it'd cost the devs money and time. They're already short on both (side note: the whole industry is). That's not how you improve the game. That only works if more resource was invested into the game to begin with, and if that wasn't the case we probably wouldn't be having this discussion!

 

[planetfall]

It sure would be nice if they would drop hints about how long before we start seeing civ7. I'm afraid the priority is very very low. Even with tweaking, the game is starting to age fast. I rarely bother to finish won games as it's too tedious and boring.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

It sure would be nice if they would drop hints about how long before we start seeing civ7. I'm afraid the priority is very very low. Even with tweaking, the game is starting to age fast. I rarely bother to finish won games as it's too tedious and boring.

It's not typical for Firaxis to tease things before the marketing push starts. They play their cards close to their vest.

 

[MrRadar]

I rarely bother to finish won games as it's too tedious and boring.

That might be the answer to your question.
At this point I don't even start games, as now I finally have strong enough memories of what awaits me in the second half of them.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I think the bloom is off the rose for some people for civ 6 which is perfectly natural after being out so long.

This is what I mean by Players being hesitant towards mods just because they aren't official content.

For Civ 7 I'm going to suggest to the Civfanatics that there should be an "official" Civfanatics mod. The mod would just have a dependency section on other mods and no real code. If everyone were playing the same game I think that would generate more discussion on mods.

 

[Zegangani]

I'd normally ask what you mean by "stealing" then

Don't read too much into it. It's just my way of voicing my disagreement with how Publishers can do whatever they want with any work on the Game by Fans, without the latter having any right or possibility to do anything against it. It's not targeted to Firaxis or 2K specifically, but against the Game Industry in general. I know it won't amount to much or anything at all, but I'm also not happy to abide to any Terms of Use made up by greedy Publishers, who are making the Terms more and more absurd. The least I can do is voice my Opinion about it. You may be accepting all of that as the Publishers' Right to enforce any Terms they can come up with, since they own the Studio/Game in the 1st place, but that's not how it used to be and not how it should be either. Ofc they have their Rights, and Terms of use need to be set to keep them from trouble or exploit, but there should be limits on how far they can push their Terms, that's all I'm saying.

Anyway, I already stated that I don't have anything against Firaxis freely using code and content made by the Community*, not even having to ask for permission, but Credit is were Credit is due. And Infixo's Fix wasn't a small thing to just scroll over. It's a pretty important and needed fix. The least they can do is credit the "Civ/Modding Community", just like how some Paradox Studios do (even for things like balancing IIRC, and regularly).

*In fact, I'd welcome it if Firaxis would work more with Modders, be it directly (by hiring or commissioning them for example) or indirectly (including their work into the Game, but also crediting them for that work).

As for the cost, I couldn't begin to guess. Paperwork is a pain. You'd need to note where the fix came from, send it to whatever team does patch notes, maybe vet it with legal, maybe offer to reach out to the modder in question in case they don't want the attention (this happens, however rarely). Everything a business does is inefficient in a way, and sometimes its just plain old inefficient. But at other times it's because red tape demands it.

The Patch Notes of Bug Fixes and Updates from the Leader Pass were very lacking tbh. IIRC there were many fixes they didn't even note in the Patch Notes, so you might be right with this, even though I don't agree with the part of reaching out to Modders, bc most Modders use pseudonyms anyway, and not their IRL Names, besides, just like I said above, they can just say something along the lines of "Used a Fix made by the Community", which what some Studios do.

Be informed by the community, but don't be driven by it.

Reading Ideas by People on Reddit, I couldn't agree more on this lol
But you're also gearing what I said to something that I didn't mean or wasn't my Intention (Although, that's how I feel about this whole conversation, so I will end it with this Post.). You asked for my Opinion, I answered to that. Requesting/Demanding Firaxis to abide to what I want was never something I invoked.

This would require legal contracts, which is exactly why it doesn't happen (guessing, obviously, but an educated one).

It's exactly what's happening in Crusader Kings 3, and it works and Fans are happy with it, so I don't see any Problems there if it already works fine in a Game still in development. But again, you're pushing this way far from my intended Point, which is to drive people here to talk more about Civ6 Mods now that there isn't much to talk about the vanilla Game, and not about Modding vs developing, which seems to be what you like discussing (and you're free to do that, maybe a welcoming new discussion on this Forum even, but let's not drag it along my Initial Point please).

For Civ 7 I'm going to suggest to the Civfanatics that there should be an "official" Civfanatics mod. The mod would just have a dependency section on other mods and no real code. If everyone were playing the same game I think that would generate more discussion on mods.

I'm not sure if you meant this seriously, but I'm sure it would work, at least for most People. The other good thing (theoretically) about Official Mods would be that Console Players would finally be able to use Mods. On the other Hand, the, official, monthly Challenges aren't even available to them, so maybe not.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I'm not sure if you meant this seriously, but I'm sure it would work, at least for most People. The other good thing (theoretically) about Official Mods would be that Console Players would finally be able to use Mods. On the other Hand, the, official, monthly Challenges aren't even available to them, so maybe not.

To clarify I was thinking it would be a mod (which would just contain dependancies on other mods) created by and maintained by the civfanatics moderator team (or someone they designate), not Firaxis. As you were saying earlier there are mods that fix some of the common complaints. People could nominate mods to be included and votes and discussion could follow. This might be more work than mods want to take on.

 

[pokiehl]

To clarify I was thinking it would be a mod (which would just contain dependancies on other mods) created by and maintained by the civfanatics moderator team (or someone they designate), not Firaxis. As you were saying earlier there are mods that fix some of the common complaints. People could nominate mods to be included and votes and discussion could follow. This might be more work than mods want to take on.

Most people here don’t want to play with mods period. Mod users are a small minority of players. For those of us who do use or make mods, our tastes vary wildly.

Design by committee rarely works, and “community patches” are largely limited to bug fixes. Mods that go beyond bug fixes and are called “community patches” are largely self-designated as such.

 

[HktkNban]

It should be noted that modded content always tends to be overvalued compared to official content.

To get official content, you have to pay for it. Therefore, people think:
"We paid for this content. Therefore, we have a legitimate right to complain about this content."

On the other hand, modded content is basically available for free. Therefore, people think:
"This content is provided free of charge by kind permission of the modder. Therefore, we must thank and admire the modder and should never complain."

Thus, modders are often under the illusion that
"My mods are more admired than the official content. Thus, I am more competent than the developers and can improve the game for the better!"

 

[PiR]

My Question is: But Why?

In my case I believe I could expand the life/usage of a game with mods, but

• The game is published by a single entity making choices that I sometimes disagree with, but globally address most people
  • The feature is not a niche, it's more likely to satisfy me.
  • The feature has bugs but rarely (it happens) completely game-breaking bugs.
  • If there are bugs, I should be able to expect a timely fix (untrue for Civ VI, but used to be).
• The time to research what I would enjoy is too great.
  • There is so much diversity in mods that I don't know where to start. So I sort by popularity and I follow the mass. Or recommandation of someone I know, but it's less often.
  • I don't have time to try them all. I've been disappointed many times and had to uninstall many because of instability or disinterest or conflicts with other features.

=> counter examples are mods where I know the author, I know I'm going to enjoy it and I just go in. Of course a mod author will be less renowned than 2K/Firaxis and will not have the same advantage.
Civ IV BTS shipped in some great mods, I think this was one of the best ideas, officially endorsing them. To have them included on the DVD gave me complete trust to try them at that time and pushed towards trying more and made me discover this forum.

 

[vorlon_mi]

What @The_goggles_do_nothing suggested is not unprecedented, but we have a varied history.

• For Civ3, many of the expert players in those forums recommend the Flintlock patch and mod. It is not mandatory; I'm not sure if players who use it may submit games to the Civ3 HOF.
• For Civ4, a set of mods known as BUFFY have become recognized as widely accepted in their recommendation for best practices. All of the expert players in the Civ4 forums recommend it, use it, and it does not affect submissions to the HOF.
• For Civ5, a community patch set and a mod known as Vox Populi is very widely used. I can't say for certain, as I don't play Civ5 as much now, but I believe the mod and patch set were developed outside of CivFanatics. We do have a separate subforum in Civ5/Creation&Customization for discussions on this mod. I would hesitate to call it a "CivFanatics mod."

Overall, we (meaning various modders who are part of CivFanatics) *could* develop something like BUFFY for Civ7. Indeed, given the time that Civ6 has been on the market, the CivFanatics community might recommend a set of mods that work well together and recommend a "BUFFY" like set of mods for Civ6. It would likely have a different name.

Trivia: The 3rd expansion for Civ4 was called "Beyond the Sword" or BTS; this was well before the K-pop band formed. A very popular mod was first called "BUG", for Beyond the sword Unaltered Gameplay. It did not change rules, but made the UI much clearer and easier to navigate. Successors to BUG were BAT and BULL, which updated the graphical appearance of terrains. The CivFanatics community combined the best parts into BUFFY.

 

[Sherlock]

I'm playing Age of Empires and Caesar 3 Augustus mod.

And waiting for Millenia and 7.

 

[GIO888]

Just where the goodness gracious IS Civ VII, that's why!