Anyone else feeling discouraged?

[Kupe Navigator]

Kwami, you got your answers. Either digest it or don't, let's leave it at that.

reg the Company/Game I sent you a PM.

Just accept the truth and stop degreading people who enjoy the game.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: There is a limit on how much negativity and nastiness will be tolerated. As CivFanatics, we ought to be posting in Ideas and Suggestions and in the Bug Report forum to address our issues in a positive way. Fighting over whose position is right only adds to the negativity. Last warning, be civil please.

 

[Socrates99]

Man, this thread's really devolved quickly...

I dont think bug fixing patches are done. That idea is pure speculation based on a few cherry picked phrases. April was probably the last time they'll add units or revamp civs but I doubt it's a done deal. I could maybe see walking away from a moddable PC game but there's some pretty big bugs that people on consoles can't fix on their own.

It's only been 2 months and people are getting all hyperbolic.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Man, this thread's really devolved quickly...

I dont think bug fixing patches are done. That idea is pure speculation based on a few cherry picked phrases. April was probably the last time they'll add units or revamp civs but I doubt it's a done deal. I could maybe see walking away from a moddable PC game but there's some pretty big bugs that people on consoles can't fix on their own.

It's only been 2 months and people are getting all hyperbolic.

it would've helped if Fraxis have left a twit saying "hey guys we will be fixing bugs soon, so stay tunned!"

 

[Socrates99]

it would've helped if Fraxis have left a twit saying "hey guys we will be fixing bugs soon, so stay tunned!"

They are often frustratingly quiet about that.

 

[steelaway]

I'm very discouraged by the lack of communication from FXS. I wish we got something, say, biweekly, regarding patches/small updates... would really help bring the devs closer to the community.

My other issue is the lack of polish. I keep getting "unassigned governor" notifications right after assigning a governor... not a big issue outside of being one extra click, but it feels cheap.

However, I'm not going to spew vitriol over any of it. I still enjoy the game and play roughly one game a week (though this may come down to the fact that I've been playing Civ VI for just under a year, as opposed to many on here who have been at it since launch).

 

[Aristos]

it would've helped if Fraxis have left a twit saying "hey guys we will be fixing bugs soon, so stay tunned!"

In this we agree. It would have helped a lot. But the other side of the coin is also true: given that they did not do something as simple, it is only logical to assume that it's done.

Also, having a little experience with their timings after such a long time with the franchise, I can safely bet you on the following: yes, Civ 6 is done, no more relevant fixes. Yes, Civ 7 is in production for at least a year now, if not more, and NFP has been its main funding source. Yes, Anton is the lead designer.

I have been right in the last two iterations with similar bets, so odds are... you know.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

But the other side of the coin is also true: given that they did not do something as simple, it is only logical to assume that it's done.

since when did they ever communicated well with fans? Did they post a twitt saying "hey guys we have another feature comming to civ 6" before big announcement of NFP? I do believe we thought civ 6 was done before NFP- that Gathering Storm was final nail in the coffin.

 

[Aristos]

since when did they ever communicated well with fans? Did they post a twitt saying "hey guys we have another feature comming to civ 6" before big announcement of NFP? I do believe we thought civ 6 was done before NFP- that Gathering Storm was final nail in the coffin.

As a matter of fact, they did.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

As a matter of fact, they did.

when? give me a link to the twitt.

As a matter of fact, they did.

they didn't first mention of NFP was on May 2020... and NFP was released on May 2020.

 

[Zegangani]

Civ VI isn't a bad Game, that's for sure. Actually it's a pretty neat Game considering how much Time we have put into it and how it keeps us engaged dispite its flaws. But that's not the Topic.

The Topic is, why the Game didn't even get close to its Potential? why are there so many obvious Bugs/Issue that are ignored? and will this be the same case in the next Iterations?

Vanilla Civ VI on release was a really solid Game, with many Bugs, but that's not unusual at releases. It got some decent small DLCs, but RnF didn't improve the Game as much as expected from an Expansion, whereas GS was a great XP (including RnF Mechanisms in the XP2 was a good choice from the Devs), but same as with RnF, the New Mechanisms never got properly connected with the Base Game Mechanisms. Which makes them feel just like something that's ... there. But that's not surprising since a lot of base game mechanics aren't interconnected with each other. The Game is still fun though, but not what a lot of us expect from a Game that evolved from many iterations, which gets me to the next Point:

Civilization is a Franchise that started over 20 Years ago, with Civ 1 succeeding even because it had a very small niche customer base. And looking back at all the Iterations, one expects that the latest Iteration to be the best one of the Franchise, because: 1) better Computer Technology with time that can improve the performance/complexity/appearance of a Game (including AI), 2) improving upon previous iterations, and 3) a Fan base that's already established to get Feedback from (be it Ideas, Opinions or Bug Reports).

But despite that, People are constantly saying that they find previous iteration are better (especially Civ IV). And FXS Philosophy of "keep a 1/3, change a 1/3 and drop the rest" is the exact reason for that IMO. I'm not saying that the Game should be the same as a previous titles but with more features, but droping good mechanisms that could just be improved, just because of a Philosophy that has worked for the first titles, is a waste (eg, Civ V's Social Policies or Civ IV's Vassalization mechanisms). It's good and essential for a Game to introduce new Features, and the Civ Franchise has constantly delivered great new content, but dropping good features just for the sake of introducing new ones is not a good approach.
And that's why Civ VI was received very positively by the Fans at release (lots of Civ V features that got improved), but the Expansions not so much (GS's mechanisms are good but not properly integrated into the Game (and we still suffer from the Disasters, that are maybe the reason of all the Asset/Map size limits!!)).

The Developpement Philosophy that I think Firaxis should follow instead, is: Keep everything that works great and maybe change them a bit based on the new features (Alt Leaders, Unique Abilities, Natural/World Wonders...), improve the things that are good ideas/concept that could be (much) better (Citizens, Amenities, Loyalty, Eurikas/Inspirations, Governments ...), rethink and redesign everything that isn't good or cannot be improved directly (Civics Tree, World Congress, Diplomacy ...) and drop everything that didn't work. And in regard to new content: make sure that they are well designed and interconnected with some of existing content (great Job from the Devs when they made some Districts Unique to some Civs).

That never worked for any of game companies. Look at pokemon. They are not listening to hard core gamers and are keen on making game lite and accessible to casual gamers-even removing Battle Frontiers.
Look at how well civ 6 has sold.
In the end it all comes down to $$$$. Especially in capitalist society.

That's not always true.

As an example, look at Eric Barone who got so dissapointed from how badly "Harvest Moon" (a game that he liked to play) evolved (similar to the Pokemon Games), that he decided to make its own version of the Game. 4.5 years later he released "Stardew Valley" (2016, the same year Civ VI got released) and on january 2020 the game sold over 10 Million Copies, whereas Civ VI sold ONLY 5.5 Million Copies as on August 2019. Nearly double the amount of a Game that's developed by a TEAM of professional Devs with many Years of Game developpement experience and from a Studio that has released many iterations of the same Game (I'm not speeking low of the Civ Devs here. I know a lot of them, if not all, want to make the dream Civ Game we all want to play, but the higher-ups might have another Vision) !! A game made by ONE SINGLE PERSON!! And the Game is still being a hit, and Eric is regularly updating the Game, fixes Bugs (without having to make purchasable DLCs in order to fund the BugFixes), and adds new features FOR FREE. and he makes sure that the game is modding friendly.

Why? because he made it with love, carefully, took his time, and was constantly in touch with his community.

I know it's a different Game, and not comparable to Civ's 4X genre that needs a good AI and complex Strategies, but nevertheless, I'm sure the Amount of resources that FXS has spent in the Game could have easily made a much greater game than Civ VI.

But tbh, I don't think the Franchise will ever make the game we all want to play. why? because Stardew valley was a one title hit. a Second iteration of it wouldn't be half as much as successful (that's why Eric is now also working on another Game). And look at Henry Ford who made robust Cars that should last for a living, and then General Motors suddenly closed its Automobile factories, because they made Cars for everyone who could afford it. Till they brought the same cars to the market but with different Colours, so they can still produce and make money. Yeah, that's the same Strategy that's used by fashion companies: every Year/Season there is a new Style to make more money from.

And that's why I think Civ will always inroduce different games, but similar enough to recognize it as a CIV Game. (something I neither like nor dislike tbh)

 

[adrifranchise]

You guys don't make any sense. Somehow, "casual players" (however arbitrarily you're defining that term) aren't worthy of having games made for them

I think there needs to be a medium. Obviously the bigger demographic base is the "casual" player in which I would describe as a more relaxed gameplay ie focusing on city building with minimal setbacks and/or distractions. The poor AI proves to be no real threat outside of the insane bonuses they receive on higher difficulties and all that does is just prolong the inevitable snowball.

Not saying that FXS needs to focus on the hardcore gamers but it could be as simple as releasing the source code for modders to work on the AI to a satisfactory level that can appeal to those looking for actual strategy. The modding community such as infixo and gedemon can really shift the game into something that can make the disappointed minority can enjoy all while it remaining optional and keeping the base game for everyone else

 

[aieeegrunt]

I think there needs to be a medium. Obviously the bigger demographic base is the "casual" player in which I would describe as a more relaxed gameplay ie focusing on city building with minimal setbacks and/or distractions. The poor AI proves to be no real threat outside of the insane bonuses they receive on higher difficulties and all that does is just prolong the inevitable snowball.

Not saying that FXS needs to focus on the hardcore gamers but it could be as simple as releasing the source code for modders to work on the AI to a satisfactory level that can appeal to those looking for actual strategy. The modding community such as infixo and gedemon can really shift the game into something that can make the disappointed minority can enjoy all while it remaining optional and keeping the base game for everyone else

A solid base game with difficulty levels accomodates both casuals and 7eets.

You need that solid base first though

 

[Kwami]

As an example, look at Eric Barone who got so dissapointed from how badly "Harvest Moon" (a game that he liked to play) evolved (similar to the Pokemon Games), that he decided to make its own version of the Game. 4.5 years later he released "Stardew Valley" (2016, the same year Civ VI got released) and on january 2020 the game sold over 10 Million Copies, whereas Civ VI sold ONLY 5.5 Million Copies as on August 2019. Nearly double the amount of a Game that's developed by a TEAM of professional Devs with many Years of Game developpement experience and from a Studio that has released many iterations of the same Game (I'm not speeking low of the Civ Devs here. I know a lot of them, if not all, want to make the dream Civ Game we all want to play, but the higher-ups might have another Vision) !! A game made by ONE SINGLE PERSON!! And the Game is still being a hit, and Eric is regularly updating the Game, fixes Bugs (without having to make purchasable DLCs in order to fund the BugFixes), and adds new features FOR FREE. and he makes sure that the game is modding friendly.

Why? because he made it with love, carefully, took his time, and was constantly in touch with his community.

I know it's a different Game, and not comparable to Civ's 4X genre that needs a good AI and complex Strategies, but nevertheless, I'm sure the Amount of resources that FXS has spent in the Game could have easily made a much greater game than Civ VI.

I'm not here to knock Eric of SV. It's a great game. But, a few points of clarification.

1. That 5.5M figure is very out of date. The latest released number is 11M+, but we don't know the exact count.
2. For both games, porting them to mobile and consoles significantly increased sales. But you'll never get amazing AI or anything on a Nintendo Switch or an iPhone.
3. He hired help for some of the updates and especially for the multiplayer functionality.
4. I'm not sure if the numbers are comparable anyway, since the games exist in two very different genres and appeal to very different audiences.

But with all of that said, I think you're kind of right. One guy more or less made an awesome game that's better than a lot of AAA games because he cared more about the game than the money. I'm sure that the developers at Firaxis do, too, but they don't always get to make decisions about funding and timelines, unfortunately. I'd imagine that 2K and Take-Two have a lot to say about those sorts of things.

Hey, maybe some folks from Firaxis will start their own studio some day and reinvent the historical 4X genre. That's what some folks from Ubisoft did when they founded Amplitude. It's really too bad that they later sold out to SEGA.

 

[universecreep]

It's not about being bored, it's about being disappointed by the end result, fearing it will be worst in the future for the franchise, and trying to steer it back to something it was by letting Firaxis know that some of us are not satisfied by the development cycle of civ6.

Yes. This kinda describes my feelings.

Civ 6 has so many features but many poorly implemented that the AI cannot use or are just not that enjoyable (diplomacy, world congress, religious victory). Had the devs focused on really polishing these (and others) rather than adding feature after feature, VI would have been great. Right now it's only a good Civ game.

That being said, after playing Humankind, Civ Vi with all it's warts is still a big step above that game in polish/UI functionality. However, Humankind is at the beginning of its development cycle. It can only get better. Firaxis may have some worrying to do.

 

[youngsteve]

That being said, after playing Humankind, Civ Vi with all it's warts is still a big step above that game in polish/UI functionality. However, Humankind is at the beginning of its development cycle. It can only get better. Firaxis may have some worrying to do.

I have read alot about Humankind, & from what I have seen I don't know what the fuss is about. That said, if the game is a big step down from CIV6, it must be poor, as that game is dreadful.

All previous Civs have been left in a good shape, enhanced by overhaul mods, particularly Civ 4 & 5, which have really have improved the game. This version looks to be the odd one out, & the reason I will not be buying any more games in the franchise.

Release the dll so modders can build on it like Vox Populi has for Civ 5. Hilariously, they wont do this as they think that doing so for Civ 5 has affected the sales of the new game when it has the opposite effect. If the dll had never been released for Civ 5, I would have never been tricked into buying this failure as I expect others wouldn't have. May fool me once but wont do it twice.

 

[JokerKara]

Well, I'm just in the middle of my first game in a long time, because recently I purchased the NFP. Most of the add-ons are really exciting, although I don't like everything ( zombies and vampires in Civilization - really Firaxis, really? ). Unfortunately, the game is unplayable as it is, it looks like the last patch broke the AI. Before that, it wasn't perfect, but it was playable. Now AI is completely screwing up, building nothing, improving nothing, not even founding new cities as before. I am waiting for the last patch, I believe that Firaxis will not disappoint, maybe that's why they have not announced a new game at E3 yet, because they know that there will be a wave of criticism that they show a new project, leaving the previous one in a bad shape ( and there were rumors that something new would be announced ). Hopefully this is the case. Otherwise - I will not play this game anymore and I will definitely not buy anything from this franchise in the future, no matter how appealing it will looks like.

 

[blackbutterfly]

Well, I'm just in the middle of my first game in a long time, because recently I purchased the NFP. Most of the add-ons are really exciting, although I don't like everything ( zombies and vampires in Civilization - really Firaxis, really? ).

Zombies is really a Tower Defense game mode for Civ VI.

Though after the April patch it got nerfed.

 

[JokerKara]

Zombies fit into Civilization games like a square peg in a round hole. I don't like it, I will never play in that mode.

 

[DizzKneeLand33]

and sadly every civ game left some details unfinished. Like how in Civ V the ai never learned to move and shoot on the same turn!

Right, this is the whole point, after like 4-5 years of updates, it still couldn't do a simple function -- do we find this to be acceptable? Some of us do and some of us don't. But the real point is this. As soon as the DLL was released, modders fixed this issue. Go play Vox Populi. Be careful or you will get annihilated by ranged units.

So, it wasn't that it was an impossible fix, or even a difficult one -- what it does is give the appearance that the people programming the game just don't care, or don't play the game. Maybe that's why modders do some things better -- they still play the game.