Discussion in 'CivBE - General Discussions' started by kingsbury, Dec 28, 2014.
I wish Civ games tracked quitters. That would be a great feature.
While we are at RPG elements in non-RPG games, one that did creeped in Civ5 and BtE are social policies/virtues.
Essentially, you level up your government based on skill tree.
What I do not like regarding it, is that is just evolving government system, completely unlike the styles used in previous Civ games, where government switches were "revolutionary" (no pun intended) and more in flavor with historical aspect of the game.
Also, in Civ5, the names of social policies and their flavor had no any impact or relevance, since everything was jumbled up, due to leveling nature of the system, where any kind of social policy is compatible with every other.
I liked Civ4 civics more, and similar system used in SM:AC.
Although I agree with your criticism of policies, "leveling up" of that sort isn't new to Civ. Technology levels up in the same way.
And of course units actually level up with XP due to combat.
Achievements are really just a modern way of playing into the same psychology as early arcade games' high score tables ... and the score table was a big part of the early Civ games. It's neglected now, not least because the games now give the highest score by default when it was a genuine challenge to reach this rank in the early games, but then as you say achievements can be neglected as well.
I don't think achievements have anything much to do with your core complaint, which is the multiplayer phenomenon of 'grinding'. Grinding makes no sense in single-player games, or finite worlds like Civilization or other strategy games where the game has a definite end point.
What is locked in WoW behind achievements ?
- Garrison upgrades. For example, you need to use the Barn building 150 times before you can upgrade it to the highest level. Here, it is completely irrelevant that it is an "achievement", since it's just a gated upgrade to prevent people from instantly getting the maximal upgrades on stuff.
- Certain prestige items. Mounts, pets. Not relevant since they have no impact on the game.
Point being: achievements have no impact on gameplay in WoW. Or Diablo. Or Starcraft. Or Civ.
I don't mind achievements, but I do mind all those RPG elements developers are tacking on to games now. Publishers and developers know that progression, leveling, and unlocks keep players in the game longer. That makes them more likely to buy DLC and to buy sequels to the game. The reason I hate these types of games is because I like to play lots of games each year. I don't want to be tied down spending all my time in one game. In fact, when I used to play those games, I always felt like I had to keep playing or else the earlier hours I spent on the game would be wasted. I avoid that now.
Civ games are my kind of game. I love how I can play a game for a few days or week, then move on to another game, then sometime later come back for another Civ game. On top of that, I can start and stop at almost any moment by saving and loading. The older I get, the fewer large blocks of time I have. It's nice to have a game I can easily get away from if family wants me to go out somewhere.
Hah, yes, let's turn this game into dota 2, which actually tracks quitters and bad players and puts them in low priority. You could take it as sarcasm in that the idea would never be implemented by Firaxis (they would see it as an unnecessary burden which would mean additional costs for potentially nothing in return) or not in that the idea could actually help filter the quitters from the non-quitters to promote better MP gameplay. The 2 ways to resolve quitters without such a system are a) joining a "no-quitter" civ group that creates a list of quitters or b) arrange private games and ensure each person has enough time for a long game.
As for achievements, I don't mind going for them as they do encourage you to try out various things in the game, but as previously stated I also hate the grinding achievements and the "forced to play wrongly" achievements.
One thing that civ has always done better than other strategy games is keep that element of fun and intuitive gameplay by avoiding the "spreadsheet management" approach. By that, I mean the games with tables full of sliders that give the player an overload of information to manage.
Let me clarify my original point: I enjoy games that involve leveling or unlocking things as most RPGs do. I also enjoy playing games that are not centered around leveling/gearing a character over a period of time, like strategy games and FPS. What decreases my enjoyment of games like FPS is when they start having "RPG light" features that focus on you gathering points or whatever that affect gameplay. I used to like when games felt different in that you could spend a few hours leveling up some character in an RPG, then play a few quick games in an FPS and have it be a break from the whole leveling grind/stat tracking thing.
A good analogy would be that I like BBQ sauce and marinara sauce. What I don't like is having them mixed together in some weird combination. Why can't I just enjoy them separately? They don't start adding rules in baseball from football or visa versa because that would ruin either game. You can't be everything to everyone and I think people lose sight of what makes things unique and enjoyable when they try to do too much.
Separate names with a comma.