1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

All Quiet on the Civ Front

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Duuk, Jun 6, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Forster

    Forster Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Messages:
    435
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Columbus, GA
    I am a Paradox fan too, love Hearts of Iron IV. I like both companies games. I just don't understand the hostility shown for other companies, although I will admit there are some bad ones. If you like yours, fine, don't belittle the other guy''s.
     
  2. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,940
    Gender:
    Male
    Civ 7 might end up being, in all but name, something close to Expansion 3 for Civ 6.

    I would assume that a big part of the production cost of Civ 6 was re-designing the underlying engine. They may not do that this time. They might build Civ 7 on the same engine - possibly incorporating a somewhat different approach to how the AI functions, but with most game functions running the same way they do in Civ 6.

    That would allow them to release a vanilla version that isn't missing any features of it's predecessor game. Civ 7 may end up being sold as a "bigger & better" version of Civ 6. That would give them an addressable market of everybody, rather than just the owners of Civ 6, while getting even more longevity from their current code investment.
     
    acluewithout likes this.
  3. Duuk

    Duuk Doom-Sayer Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,954
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Detroit, Michigan, USA
    I avoid Steam reviews. Like a lot of threads on here, a lot of people seem to think that if they howl at the moon long enough that publishers will stop making DLC and xpacs and just suddenly decide to make marquis, AAA-caliber games that take hundreds of millions of dollars of production and design work, make them entirely bug free on launch day, get Hollywood A-listers to do the voice work, and charge $19.99 for them. That ship has sailed, DLC is a fact of life and no matter how much people want to bark at it, it's going to continue. Should we howl at the obvious abusers like the latest Star Wars Battlefront where it was painfully obvious that pay-to-do-anything was the model? Yes. But paying $10 every few months to add on some new features and expand the game isn't too much to ask to fund continued development of games, and the constant negative bombardment on Steam reviews *because of that issue only* makes the Steam review process worthless.

    It makes it impossible sometimes to figure out "is this an actual terrible game" or "are these people just howling because it's a good game they don't want to pay extra for".
     
    nzcamel, Kjimmet, bbbt and 11 others like this.
  4. Duuk

    Duuk Doom-Sayer Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,954
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Detroit, Michigan, USA
    Secondary note, which is a separate thought:

    I honestly think one of the problems in the industry right now is that there is a weird disconnect in thinking and financing in the game industry that nobody (and I mean literally nobody), not gamers, executives, developers, nobody, can wrap their brains around: how to fund games.

    The "original" model (80s / 90s) was treating it like a board game. You pay production costs, you ship the product, put it on the shelf, slap a price tag on it, done.

    But that doesn't really work, because you're expected to support it with patches, so that model fell apart because your "production costs" aren't really a fixed cost.

    Then you had MMOs, which had a subscription model, which worked well for a while. Then as that model sort of died/hybridized you had the f2p MMO with in-game purchases.

    Now you have DLCs and xpacs. So you mix all of these models and nobody really knows how a "game" should be priced. For example, look at how many shooter-type games have "Season Pass" programs for all of their DLC. That, to me, sounds suspiciously like an MMO pricing model. Mentally, since CK2 I've switched to thinking of Paradox's (in-house) games as MMO style pricing. You buy a $10-20 dlc every few months, the game keeps expanding, etc.

    But what kind of model did Civ6 design with? Personally, if I had been on the design team, I would have leaned toward the MMO-style because of the ability to add a new civilization, map pack, or scenario every month or two, but Take2 doesn't seem interested in that model (which is weird, since EA milks The Sims like a top notch dairy cow).

    Civ6 seems to "want" to be more of an old school "board game" style release, with a couple of cute mini-expansion DLC packs, but nothing outrageous (and none after the first full expansion), and there will probably be 1 more expansion, MAYBE 2 more, and then a few patches and it will get put on a shelf. I find it very interesting that a series that is BEGGING for commercial exploitation, in a market that VERY MUCH skews to an older demographic which likely has more disposable income, isn't being exploited.

    Anyway. Just my spitballing.
     
  5. ChocolateShake

    ChocolateShake Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2016
    Messages:
    525
    Gender:
    Male
    I do wonder why there isn't a mechanism to frequently release civ DLCs, natural wonders, etc. I'd be happy to see tons of civs released as part of DLC. It is kind of odd that that aspect isn't being exploited, though it could be that they're concerned about negativity surrounding DLC pricing. Paradox games kind of scare me off due to the extremely high entry price towards feeling like you're playing a complete game when you jump in late. You even have to do research to figure out which are essential and which aren't, I think once a game gets to that point there are too many.
     
    acluewithout likes this.
  6. Benzombie

    Benzombie Warlord

    Joined:
    May 18, 2017
    Messages:
    157
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    American Civilization
    Oh, well sorry about claiming that. I want Civ 6 to be fleshed out too, I just don't know if individual DLC is the way though.
     
    acluewithout likes this.
  7. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,635
    Location:
    France
    While we're talking about what's coming next, I still remember this interview from august 2016, and when I read "We are going to be talking in more detail about modding further down the road", I'm wondering how much longer "further down the road" means compared to a classical video game's development soon™ ?
     
  8. King of Prussia

    King of Prussia Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    276
    I am not expecting news for a long time regarding Civ 6.

    i do hear there is an Xcom expansion coming out. As someone who loves Xcom 2, i am looking forward to hearing about it at E3. Lets hope it is as good as WotC.

    as for a DLC model. No, i can't say i like paradoxs model. I don't feel like getting into it, as i have done so way more times than i want to. I do wish it didn't take 3-6 months for a patch.

    I do wish other companies were as open as paradox is in terms of communication and interaction. Having to pull teeth to get a basic response/interaction can be frustrating.
     
  9. graffen69

    graffen69 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2015
    Messages:
    32
    I see tons of ways Civ7 could improve over Civ6 but that's another thread on it´s own.

    To answer the OP yes the silence has been bothering me but I stay hopeful that it means they are hard at work.
    Leandrombraz´s (did I spell that right?) respond gave me further hope that´s exactly whats happening.
     
  10. acluewithout

    acluewithout Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,426
    No snark intended at all, but, really? How?

    I agree there is a lot which could be tweaked, and a few areas where the game could be expanded, but what parts of the game actually need a complete do-over?

    Or do you mean there needs to be so many “tweaks” or “expansions” that it would be cleaner to start again (again)?

    I don’t see there is any need to re-do Civ. The basic mechanics are really, really solid. At best, there are a few mechanics where FXS could have had a different approach (see the thread about population), but mostly I don’t think these other approaches are better, just different.

    Seriously. If England stopped sucking, a few other issues got sorted (anti cav, military tactics), and a few areas got expanded and or consolidated (colonialism, industrial revolution, governance), then I can’t see why I would ever spend money on a new version. What “else” could it offer me?

    The only thing that could be “redone” is perhaps the graphics, which I like, but which I get others aren’t a fan of.

    [edit: remove unintended snark.]
     
  11. Equilin

    Equilin King

    Joined:
    May 8, 2017
    Messages:
    605
    Gender:
    Male
    I think it's ok. Civ model let me do a massive 1000 turn Ynamp game without worrying about upcoming update. I mean my first game in EU4 hasn't passed the first hundred years yet and new patch and dlc comes up and it's dead.

    On Civ7 I think they will re-do a lot of things in a new view so it won't be a "better Civ6", as per usual civ tradition.
     
  12. Duuk

    Duuk Doom-Sayer Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,954
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Detroit, Michigan, USA
    Honestly, in my not at all humble opinion, Civ6 is probably the "best" Civ iteration in a long, long time, if not the pinnacle of the series. Any real criticism of it is going to be based on person preferences rather than hard gameplay fails (with some obvious exceptions like air power).

    If I could tweak 1 or two things (like changing 1 unit per tile to 1 "unit type" per tile like melee/ranged/flanker to allow for true "army" feels) and reducing the durability and costs of units so it would actually feel like wars had ramp ups and consequences, Civ6 might actually be near-perfect for me.

    I get the feeling that they're realizing that, which is why they're changing up their DLC a bit. They used to do "base" DLC was like 10 bucks, unit pack 5 bucks, portrait pack 5 bucks. Now they're just doing the DLC is 20 bucks and calling it good. I suspect (based on some of the recent sales they've done) that for the next round of games that we'll also see "bundles" more frequently of the older DLC packaged into a "starter pack" to reduce the "holy hell this game costs $500!" shock value.

    Kind of like how World of Warcraft eventually started including the older expansions in the base game.

    Wouldn't shock me if they started doing that, honestly.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 7, 2018
    ChocolateShake and acluewithout like this.
  13. RohirrimElf

    RohirrimElf Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,255
    OP
    There is no need to worry. R&F released very recently so it would be natural to work on the next expansion quietly. Just because we do not see anything happening does not mean firaxis is not working on it at full speed. The spring patch shows firaxis wanted the game in a good state so they could develop something that requires time. Like expansion.

    Another reason why we dont hear anything is because xcom 2 would generate a lot of attention if the next big thing they are working on is a expansion. I could see the announcement for this happening in one month. They are working on it for quite some time.

    Just a piece of advise about civ news on twitter/facebook. It is not worth watching 80% of the time. Its just to keep the community warm. Firaxis could bring out something exciting when you would least expect it. But it is best to keep occupied with other things most of your free time. I do this by playing and reading about paradox games. Next to playing civ5/6 off course
     
  14. legalizefreedom

    legalizefreedom Inefficiency Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    632
    Location:
    Texas
    That is not entirely true. I agree there are a disproportionate number of reviews (of any kind) that are from people who are unhappy, but there are plenty of games with great review ratings on steam.

    Sometimes it has less to do with the game and more about how the development is being handled. I couldn't believe BE got so much hate (and hate breeds), but that certainly contributed to it not being finished. Lots of shortcuts, no TLC... in short not putting enough effort into the games development is what is hurting this dev.

    People get passionate about it because they are making the game we want to play, they are just half-assing it... and these games deserve better.
     
    MetalmindStats likes this.
  15. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,940
    Gender:
    Male
    The demographics of the Civ player base is an interesting question. This forum skews older than the average video game player, but is that true for the overall Civ market?

    Much of the disconnect between my expectations and the game that has been delivered is, potentially, a generational thing. The development team is much younger than me, and what interests them most is clearly not the aspects of Civ that most interest me.

    So, are they missing an opportunity by not creating a game that better caters to people like me, or are they doing the right thing and creating a game that appeals to the broader and younger audience of video game players?

    All I know for sure is that I, personally, would happily pay 10x what I've paid for Civ 6 for a game that goes back to the original core principals of Civ 1, and updates it to take advantage of modern game design principles and current computing power to deliver a game that is truly intended to mimic the rise of civilization from the dawn of history. And then the lightning bolt wielding Apostles and Warlond Thrones can go off into the next edition of Heroes of Might & Magic or some more appropriate vehicle for those mechanics.


    For me, the main issue is a lack of integration. Too many insufficiently connected systems. I trade with other leaders directly on a trade screen and the exchange of these goods happen in cyberspace, but I also have a trade system on the map with caravans going back and forth. A trade system that makes absolutely zero sense in Civ 6, by the way, as it dropped any pretense of accurately representing the benefit of trade between distant peoples. I could list off a whole bunch of stuff like this. Tourism has no impact on your economy, cultural influence has no impact on the relationship between your civilizations, "gold" has nothing to do with your tax policies but is instead something produced separate from the underlying economic production of your population, science is divorced from the amount of interaction you have with other civs, the size of your standing army has no impact on the size or productivity of your labour force, etc etc etc. The disjointed and independent systems used by Civ 6 feel like they've each been created in a vacuum and then cobbled together, rather than being designed to work together.


    Sure, that's absolutely true, personal preferences are what dictates who prefers what. Personally, I preferred it when Civ was a game where you were competing against other civs, rather than a Sim City clone, and where the other leaders were interesting characters with their own personality, as opposed to a disjointed collection of agendas divorced from how those leaders behave in game (would it really be that hard to code the leaders to act consistently with the agendas by which they judge the human player?). For me, Civ 6 is a great big hard gameplay fail on the "game" part of the play.
     
    historix69 and Gedemon like this.
  16. Eric Guimarães

    Eric Guimarães Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    86
    Gender:
    Male
    guys this is marketing strategy...
    By the time they hit us with Ottomans' first look and teasers about new wonders and the World Congress,you will see the genuine hype in the community...:crazyeye:
    It's natural to create suspense in the market economy.:coffee:
     
    Kjimmet, CivLuvah and Eagle Pursuit like this.
  17. Rambo919

    Rambo919 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    152
    I find it very useful, I specifically goto the negative comments to see all the problems the more official reviews gloss over.
     
  18. DWilson

    DWilson Where am I? What turn is it?

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI, USA
    In my experience, Steam reviews tend to the more useless side. The only thing they've been good for is highlighting strong games by non-major developers. Anything by major devs tends to rarely be redeemable. I'm sure there are legitimate reviews, but they get drowned out by nonsense. I remember all the negative reviews VI got for the Deluxe edition referring to actual DLC instead of full expansions, as just one among many examples. Mostly, they're trash.
     
    CivLuvah likes this.
  19. Duuk

    Duuk Doom-Sayer Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,954
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Detroit, Michigan, USA
    I do miss actual trade routes with actual trade goods and cultural pressures and things like that. Scientific drift and things would be amazing. A solid trade route expansion would be glorious.

    CIv6's next expansion: Trade, Culture, and Exploration. Civs included: Inca, Portugal, Isabella of Spain, Ottomans, Byzantines, Italy. Terra map, Disease and Health mechanics.

    I <3 it.
     
    Trav'ling Canuck likes this.
  20. graffen69

    graffen69 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2015
    Messages:
    32
    I made this post couple months back (pre-R&F expansion) which ultimately pointed out 65 things that could be improved in that version of the game. I also had some controversial ideas for a new version but I stopped updating partly because the lack of dev response but mostly because that amount of text is frankly just too much.

    But yes most of it is as you say suggestions on improvements of that version, many of which are pure tweaks, but a few are suggested for Civ7.

    I also rather like the graphics of Civ6 and I feel it is by far the best version in the series. But the 2 biggest changes I would like to see for Civ 7 are (in no particular order) Capitals not always building faster. This feels like a relic of the past and I´m a bit surprised it´s still in the game considering how important surroundings are in Civ6. Maybe units could be tied to districts making build time completely different depending on what you focus on in each city?

    The other was something "Pixelripper" brought up in that thread when we discussed wonders (and actually might be better suited for Civ 7). The idea was that in order to build Wonders you would need blueprints; that way multiple of the same wonders couldn’t be built at the same time and you could actually sell/trade blueprints if you didn’t have the requirement needed (desert for Petra/Pyramids for example). Above all it would get rid of the “Civ X beat you to a wonder by X turns” which always felt frustrating and I thought this was a brilliant idea. You could then potentially also steal Blueprints further opening up Spying (although I feel spying currently seems to be of any use to one Civ only; France).


    Anyways I don´t want to hijack this thread with an off topic and I´m hoping the silence on the Civ6 front means they are hard at work at Firaxis on something exciting. Patch, DLC or Expansion it´s all the same to me – I love Civ6 and anything new on the horizon gets me going. :thumbsup:
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2018
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page