Are you pre-ordering?

[DSveno]

Face it, the game is being marketed as a complete experience, and therefore to avoid deceptive adverts, etc., it assumes they've done the basic blocking and tackling get it right before asking for my money and putting me though the disappointment of playing a bad game. At the very least if the game isn't working well, they should go early access, so there's no confusion. Honestly the reason they don't do early access is likely publisher greed.

What if, you know, the game is not a bad game? It's fine to hold your opinion, but you're starting to rambling about the good old days and looking down to people who are happy with their purchase. The same good old days when there was no patch and such, people were happy with whatever purchase they did, happily talking about the great exploit against stupid AI in strategy game, one trick pony in every builder games and called it "great tips". It's still the same as today, just that people have the internet where they can shout the loudest.

 

[salty mud]

You're telling the very same people who are going to give you their opinion and advice, that they are wasting money.

Sorry but I don't think their value of money is the same as you. What they consider good could be not good for you and vice versa. It's very childish to condemn others for how they are spending their money. We're all adult and we know better what to do with our earning.

Your point would be valid if his purchase affected only himself. It's been argued time and again that pre-ordering games affects the whole industry by sending a message to developers that sub-standard game development is a-okay. People will just buy it anyway. Look through this very thread - someone has already said they don't care if the AI is bad, they'll just knock the difficulty up. I mean, what? That's literally saying that they forgive bad game development. The ever lowering standards of consumers affects everyone, not just the person who buys the game.

I never cease to be amazed at the gymnastics people will perform to justify buying a product they don't even know about from an unbiased source.

 

[Toulouse]

Salty - thank you! You are right- the evidence against pre-orders is contained in this thread.

Next time how about we Civ fans get together and not pre-order together, just to see if the results are any better? Just one time as an experiment, you know?

 

[treadwin]

I guarantee that at least some of the people railing against the AI will not be able to even beat the Barbarians, on the highest difficulty levels, to start with.

 

[nokmirt]

You should see a Civ5 AI battle and compare. Civ5 AI is a mess... got so many troops that it cant even move them. While Civ6 AI isn't perfect, I actually think it is an improvement over civ5.

When you see an AI that has warriors in late game, it's a matter of bad upgrade design - there's no upgrade alternative when you dont have iron or niter. This has nothing to do with the AI. An expansion with units can fix this, better mapbuilding can fix this and a mod with units can fix this.

I'm not worried at all to be honest.

I think it will be when either they fix things with the AI or the issues are solved by modding. Getting rid of niter would help a lot at this point. Perhaps iron as well. I wil make swords not need iron and musketmen not need niter. Then I'll see if the AI upgrades. I think it will. Then when the devs fix the issue. I won't need the mod. At least in the meantime the game will be more playable. At least there will be AI unit progression which is the real issue. The AI may not be perfect, but it will upgrade and wars will not be so one sided.

Hopefully our unit creators design a rifleman and a tech for them. This would help the AI progress their armies to infantry far better.

 

[StittsvileJamie]

Your point would be valid if his purchase affected only himself. It's been argued time and again that pre-ordering games affects the whole industry by sending a message to developers that sub-standard game development is a-okay. People will just buy it anyway. Look through this very thread - someone has already said they don't care if the AI is bad, they'll just knock the difficulty up. I mean, what? That's literally saying that they forgive bad game development. The ever lowering standards of consumers affects everyone, not just the person who buys the game.

I never cease to be amazed at the gymnastics people will perform to justify buying a product they don't even know about from an unbiased source.

Thank god [most of us] are adults and can do what we like with our money. But please continue to tell others what to do with their entertainment dollars.

 

[nokmirt]

I am pre-loaded and ready to go. Let's see how the first game goes as America.

 

[Nefelia]

Fully, end-state, polished is not what I'm talking about? But a game at release should be a complete, well balanced experience, and a reasonable facsimile of a finished product. Otherwise it should be in early access, which is not a "rather dated" concept.

It's great that you enjoyed Civ V at release. You were in the minority, as I recall? In any event, I am pleased to avoid early access games by definition, even while appreciating that others may enjoy their rough edges.

This isn't that -- and the confusion is regrettable and completely avoidable. The experience of playing day one is being held hostage by AAA pre-order culture, and we should make common cause to put it down.

Everything I have seen thus far shows that Civ VI is going to be a good product on release. There are some wonky AI issues, but nothing even close to game breaking. I think you may be engaging in a bit of hyperbole here.

The game has now unlocked, so people will be posting their actual experiences soon. No more need for speculation.