Answer an official survey for Civ VI

[Eagle Pursuit]

I think the survey was primarily about Civ VI, but the last part would also help them cater to the fan base with other titles.

I appreciate being able to give feedback.

Also $25-35/month is a bit steep for any content. At that point I'm picking and choosing rather than buying it all.

 

[Leucarum]

Looks like 6 may be here for the long haul! Sounds like they are considering moving closer to paradox's endless DLC model which would definitely be contentious

Not one option on fixing or improving current design

One of the package selection questions was for something like "tweaks/fixes" but it was a blink-and-you-missed-it kind of thing. Hopefully that means they take it as a given rather than it's not on their priority list...

 

[CivLuvah]

When many game developers today feel alienating (from a consumer perspective) when it comes to figuring out what their customers want, I think what they're doing here is exceptional. I love how they're really interacting with the fan community!

Looks like 6 may be here for the long haul! Sounds like they are considering moving closer to paradox's endless DLC model which would definitely be content

Considering how expensive Paradox is selling its DLC compared to many of the options they give in this survey, I would actually be okay with multiple DLC. Even though at first I would balk at the idea because Paradox is the prime example of that selling strategy.

 

[sonicmyst]

From what I see in this survey, the devs are carefully looking at balance between price and content.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Some were easy to bypass for me like multiplayer.
I got stuck on the first one wondering do I want more maps or alt leaders?
I chose maps because we need an Americas and Mediterranean World Map/TSL.

Edit: Forgot to mention does this confirm that more content is on it's way?

 

[krokobone]

I appreciate that the devs are actually hearing out the community. Hopefully this survey is a sign of ongoing support for the game.

 

[ghost88]

Not a bad survey, but I was forced to rate aspects of the game I care nothing about and would not pay extra for.
Mainly I would like more Civ pacts like the Australia DLC and for the moder community to get the tools they need to actually improve the game.

My personal wish would be for a Map/scenario Editor as user friendly as Civ3s was. As an old fart who can't type and went to schools that weren't teaching computer skills, C3 allowed me to have my maps and game setup my way.

Lastly I would like Firaxis to include maps larger maps than the small ones the have in the game so far. I know their excuse is but many people can't play larger maps because their devices can't handle them. This would not be a problem if they where to warn people (like GalCiv3 does) that you need X amount of ram to play them. I realize that some people would still complain but, these people will whine regardless.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Someone may correct me, but I think this is the first such attempt to collect Customer Feedback from a committed fan base in the history of the Civ franchise. At least, since I started playing with the Civ 2 for Mac back in the 1990s, I don't remember any similar (or any, period) survey being distributed.

Not one option on fixing or improving current design

I noticed that, too - I sincerely hope that doesn't mean that they think the current design is a finished and perfect product: that would imply that they haven't been paying attention to any of us! I suspect it means that they think that 'tweaks' to the current design can be accomplished by Patches rather than DLCs/Expansions, which seemed to be the focus of their survey.

I hope everyone has put customization at the top of the list.

Geez, sorry. I had to put Historical Accuracy/Historicity at the top of every list in which it appeared. I may be the only one taking the survey who did that, but I have to stay True To My Roots.

Customization was never below third place, though: I love what the Mod Community has been able to do with the game, even with all the obstacles . . .

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I feel like I remember past surveys, although not any so specific about DLC.

If I recall correctly, there was one before Civ VI that referenced BE quite a bit.

 

[Gedemon]

Not one option on fixing or improving current design

There was "Updates/balances/fixes" proposed twice in the bundles, sounded close enough, and I've chosen those each time.

Geez, sorry. I had to put Historical Accuracy/Historicity at the top of every list in which it appeared. I may be the only one taking the survey who did that, but I have to stay True To My Roots.

Customization was never below third place, though: I love what the Mod Community has been able to do with the game, even with all the obstacles . . .

I perfectly understand, if "Customization" hadn't been an option, "Historical Accuracy" would have been at the top of the list followed by "Replayability".

But the moment "Customization" is in, as a modder, it's a no-brainer for me: with fully open customization I can arrange every other elements to my liking (except the graphics as I'm no artist, and adding multiplayer if it was not already in)

emphasize on "fully open", of course...

 

[Vandal Thorne]

I wish they had asked about adding a prehistoric era to the game. That feature would have trumped everything else for me.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

Customization == Replayability ... no brainer for me. It must be pursued by any serious developpers out there if they ever want to gain solid & stable customers/community.

In terms of feedback (be it directed at/by 2K or Firaxis -- along with whatever decisions involved!) ... i appreciate the survey style & how the results might improve our interactive contacts with the right people. Aside from actual gameplay "elements" beyond design and/or package values (formal or implied within "some" optimal business model as it evolves), the whole idea of a fully balanced pipeline between **US** and **THEM** can only lead to further product enhancements and more.

The Civilization franchise has to be at the edge of spectacular innovations like that -- we will all benefit from such feedback loops for sure. Then, we'll just have to follow (and encourage with our wallets) the Leader of the pack within present day Gaming Industry.

 

[cvb]

Not one option on fixing or improving current design

There was "Updates/balances/fixes" proposed twice in the bundles, sounded close enough, and I've chosen those each time.

I suppose, this block of choices is dynamically generated being based on the given answers so far ... I had to choose between
New Scenarios & Updates/balances/fixes WEEKLY and
New Maps & Updates/balances/fixes HALF ANNUALLY

AI @ work

 

[kaspergm]

I hope everyone has put customization at the top of the list.

It went #1 or #2, I don't recall which, it was a toss between that one and replayability.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I perfectly understand, if "Customization" hadn't been an option, "Historical Accuracy" would have been at the top of the list followed by "Replayability".

Would be lying if I didn't put "Amount of Content" first but "Customization" and "Historical Accuracy" were right behind.
If we had enough content and historical accuracy I wouldn't need to customize the game.

 

[cosmicmangobear]

New Civ VI / future Firaxis content basically confirmed. Thank Sid, this is exactly what I needed today!

 

[smvalentine]

Whatever they do, I hope they won't release things that break mods in more than trivial ways more often than quarterly or semiannually. The recent patches have been great, but mods like CQUI have not been able to keep up. More release of Information needed by modders would really help. Or of course integrating the more popular UI mods into the official game, like they finally did with map pins for districts and wonders.

 

[WillowBrook]

Edit: Forgot to mention does this confirm that more content is on it's way?

Not 100%, but pretty close. They wouldn't go to the trouble of designing this survey if they weren't at least planning on making more content.

 

[Sostratus]

The only risk with their ranking survey is it is hard to tease out how monotonic some of these variables are. For example, I'm sure most people would really value a new map or scenario. But most people also wouldn't be too please if they came out with 10 packs of just maps. Many of these variables are a case of "having enough" - people want enough historical accuracy but don't want to play dark ages farmstead simulator; people want new units but not hundreds of them; etc.

Whereas replayability generally scales up forever, but if the game is already really replayable, it might not rank the highest, even though adding more replay could be enormous for the fans. (It's also hard to sell replayability up front, since it's a bit emergent.)

I filled it out, I am happy they are looking at what people want and what kind of gamers we are. Much better than hiring a research firm to tell them what the big trends are when we'll do it for free!

 

[Banazir864]

What I found odd is that the last few questions were genre-based. Was this some attempt to profile their audience, or are they seriously considering a sci-fi, fantasy, mythology, or horror game mode (I remember well the sci-fi and fantasy game modes for Civ II)?