4,99$ For Babylon

[TheMarshmallowBear]

At the same time SimonL majority of the new games all suffer from one thing "Bugs" The Sims 3, Civ 5, New Vegas, all came with serious bugs (such as that are obviously noticable and ruin some type of fun game)

 

[Rub'Rum]

(I hope my sarcasm was clear)

 

[Yarb]

Stop whining. 4,99$ isn't expensive for a DLC. It's even on the cheap side when you compare that to most other DLC of other games. Starbucks sell coffee cups that are more expensive...

$5 for 1 Civ?... Keep Whining, that is absurd... Compared to a lot of DLC this is like a thimble full of coffe for $5

Yarb

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

(I hope my sarcasm was clear)

It's hard to make a clear sarcasm here. That wasn't sarcastic...

 

[winthrowe]

It's hard to make a clear sarcasm here. That wasn't sarcastic...

<sarcasm>The only way to be unclear about sarcasm is to use those unnecessary tags.</sarcasm>

 

[Danei]

To quote Leonard Nimoy who was quoting somebody else,

Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it.

:3

 

[PieceOfMind]

There's no such thing as sarcasm on the internet - just people who are wrong.

 

[thbrown81]

Civ V DLC Price: "Cheaper than other DLC":: Prison: "At least he didn't use a broom handle"

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

I know right! As companies are becoming richer and bigger, we're getting increasingly great games like Spore and The Sims 3! Some already great games are definitely getting better like how Modern Warfare 2, with its lack of dedicated servers and all kinds of awesome non-features, totally beats Modern Warfare 1 (CoD4).

EDIT: Tried to make the sarcasm clearer.

But you do know that Black Ops (not technically MW 3 but...) will bring back dedicated servers with more features than MW1 and 2 put together. I think Ifinity Ward have learned their lesson, and now Treyarch is correcting from that.

So hopefully if we do get another Civ game, they will give us more things that we lack from ciV, and maybe more or better things than cIV.

 

[Ighten]

But you do know that Black Ops (not technically MW 3 but...) will bring back dedicated servers with more features than MW1 and 2 put together. I think Ifinity Ward have learned their lesson, and now Treyarch is correcting from that.

So hopefully if we do get another Civ game, they will give us more things that we lack from ciV, and maybe more or better things than cIV.

Sadly, looking at things in the industry, I suspect that any new version of the game will almost certainly be heading for a simulataneous console release as well..

 

[Valkrionn]

Of course it will. Developing solely for the PC is seen as too risky; Only genres that do that reliably are MMOs and Strategy games.

 

[Guardian_PL]

Of course it will. Developing solely for the PC is seen as too risky; Only genres that do that reliably are MMOs and Strategy games.

http://www.thewitcher.com/ - EDIT especially for Piece Of Mind and those unaware to what genre "The Witcher" belongs - an RPG. And I'm sure if one would dig enough then would find more examples.

 

[Valkrionn]

http://www.thewitcher.com/

One example otherwise does not change the fact that the vast majority of developers have that mindset. It's just a statistical outlier.

Note that I had said "reliably", not "exclusively".

 

[PieceOfMind]

Also, as far as I can tell, 'The Witcher' is not a genre.



(EDIT)

http://www.thewitcher.com/ - EDIT especially for Piece Of Mind and those unaware to what genre "The Witcher" belongs - an RPG. And I'm sure if one would dig enough then would find more examples.

Ok, so you meant to say RPGs. Fair enough.

 

[Pangur Bán]

If we don't pay for the product they produce, we won't have Civ in the future. I'd send even more money their way, but $50 for a DLC seems like a reasonable amount since that is what I paid for the full game.

What argument could you possibly have against that???? The more money we give the better product they can make in the future!

Civilization 5 is only one of many ways the NASDAQ listed company Take-Two Interactive Software makes money. Increased profit is more likely to go to increased bonuses and dividend payments, and as extra capital to acquire new companies. You don't make your money by making games "better". The market for 100+ hour strategy fests is tiny compared with the market of short attention-spanned impulse-purchasers who won't play more than 20 hours. You make stupid but superficially clever games with fancy graphics, and advertise them well.

They may use your money to buy the names of other actual good games, in order to debase those games to make even more money. If they spend any more money on this game, it will undoutedly be mostly on graphics and advertising.

So no ... you're more likely to get a better game by not giving them money, making sure the money-men ruining the title don't get their arguments proven and bonuses paid, incentivizing the developers to retarget its original market.

 

[Guardian_PL]

Civilization 5 is only one of many ways the NASDAQ listed company Take-Two Interactive Software makes money. Increased profit is more likely to go to increased bonuses and dividend payments, and as extra capital to acquire new companies. You don't make your money by making games "better". The market for 100+ hour strategy fests is tiny compared with the market of short attention-spanned impulse-purchasers who won't play more than 20 hours. You make stupid but superficially clever games with fancy graphics, and advertise them well.

They may use your money to buy the names of other actual good games, in order to debase those games to make even more money. If they spend any more money on this game, it will undoutedly be mostly on graphics and advertising.

So no ... you're more likely to get a better game by not giving them money, making sure the money-men ruining the title don't get their arguments proven and bonuses paid, incentivizing the developers to retarget its original market.

Wow.

That is... Depressing

Eh, all there is to hope for are small developers making niche games for nerds like me, because they'll be unable to reach for the mass market...

 

[gilmore606]

Wow.

That is... Depressing

Eh, all there is to hope for are small developers making niche games for nerds like me, because they'll be unable to reach for the mass market...

You don't have to hope, there's already plenty of it. Check out Dwarf Fortress...a deeper game you will not find. Look at what happened with Minecraft. In a lot of ways, we're better off with this kind of thing than to be at the mercy of profit-seeking companies like Firaxis.

Now someone needs to develop a community-sourced free Civ style game...

 

[Iranon]

Dwarf Fortress is the most amazing thing I have ever played.

Still, I got plenty of enjoyment out of mainstream games and would prefer it if mass-marketable games were available without annoying marketing tricks, draconian licensing/DRM or the deliberate sacrifice of design elegance (to hype another feature, to conform to expected player biases, to provide rewards without challenge, to simulate more complexity than is actually there...)

 

[lschnarch]

Quite some time since I have read a thread with so much BS contained, I guess.

Valkrionn is bound by a NDA about Civ5 but has not problems to report directly from the board about Firaxis'/2K's business plans for the next years ("they AREN'T going to do this, they AREN'T going to do that").

Digital copies cannot sold cheaper because of the evil, greedy brick and mortar shops. Gladly, he announces them to have gone in the near future.
Which is great, since then games will become REALLY cheap. THEN digital distribution platforms finally will be allowed what they urged for since so long: to sell us CHEAP games.

No, there won't be so many DLC packs. But Mongolia was even not in the works (in which way this may ever be defined) until after releases.
Which means, a new Civ (including extensive playtesting and quality control, as we know by now - Khans from CS anybody?) can easily be done within a month, while at the same time the whole company if feverishly working on the urgently needed patches.
But no, they are not planning to sell (much?) more DLC.

DLC helps creating better games. If so, then the current state of Civ5 is due to missing DLC for Civ5 during development?
Or is it just another phrase from the marketing storybook: As of lately, we are following the "banana principle". Let it get ripe at the customer.

tl;dr:
Many phrases from 2K's marketing storybook "How to tell the customer that he's an idiot"

 

[Sock Bramson]

... bwuh?

I got as far as "banana" (i.e. the whole thread, but "shhhhh"), lost interest, gained appetite. Meh, at least I had a banana handy.