Are you still here?

[zyxy]

I think the particular joy of the demogame is that it consists of two things: "game" and "demo". On the one hand we are playing a game of civ; on the other we are mimicking a democracy. I sometimes get the feeling that we are maybe focussing too much on the first, and too little on the second.

The civ game is won. It may take another 150-200 turns to actually get the cultural win, but barring immense and prolonged stupidity we cannot lose this anymore. This could be a reason for losing participation in itself: I often lose interest in my own games after I have played to a winning position, and then usually I don't finish them. We'll have to find some other ways to keep this interesting, but I really don't know what .

The democracy part consists of discussion and voting. It seems to me that the discussions have been dying a bit lately (even though some of the officials and citizens are trying very hard). I don't know why this is or what can be done. Are discussions dying because the game is won? Or because we agree too much? Or because some people are intimidated by the difficulty level, or by others who seem to know more about the game? Or because we do not discuss overall strategy?

Actually, I think there is still quite a lot to discuss. For example, there is fairly little citizen input on strategy issues such as: How will we build up culture? How long will it take to reach 130K? How many cities will we build and where? Where are we going to move the palace (if we move it at all) and how? What is our research and trade policy? On many of these issues we are taking ad-hoc decisions because they were not discussed (for example, we now have an FP in Oxford that was never discussed or polled IIRC. Another example is the last minute Great Leader discussion). Most of such strategy questions can be discussed well ahead of the time when they need to be implemented.

Another thing that is completely missing from the game is the legal stuff. Our present ruleset needs quite a bit of improvement as it is rather vague. I get the impression that on many occasions officials and citizens are not so much playing by the book as playing nice. It would be better if the book of rules somehow encoded that behaviour.
I lurked a bit at one of the previous demogames, and there seemed to be quite a lot of people who were interested in these judicial matters, a subject that is almost entirely silent now. I could imagine that ruleset discussions easily lead to embitterment (if that's an english word ), and maybe this is a reason why many people left right at the start of this demogame -- it seems there was some ...disagreement... on the constitution. Still, it might be nice if we had some civilized discussion on the ruleset and its interpretation, and it might attract a new (or old) group of players.

On difficulty level: there are quite a few people around here who are comfortable with Emperor or higher, but I could imagine that someone who normally plays Regent is put off by the high difficulty and the corresponding level of the game-related discussion. I can only say that I value everyone's contribution, even if I don't agree with it, and I would like to encourage everyone to post his/her thoughts, and state their arguments as forcefully as they can. Nothing more boring than a discussion where everyone agrees.

--------------------

... This game is really better off without us anyway. Or is it......?

Why? (I can ask this in complete innocence as you left before I came ).

 

[Gregski]

I don't have Conquests so I only have a general idea as to what's going on.

 

[RegentMan]

If this game is in the bag, let's go fifteen turns of forced anarchy. That'll spice things up a bit.

Each demogame, it seems, has less and less people. My prediction is that DGVII has such a low participitation rate that we'll have no justification to continue the demogame. I think that the Civ III demogame reached its peak a long time ago, and is now facing the same fate as the Civ II demogame.

 

[Ulyaoth]

I haven't been active at all really. I just have little time with school and all, especially now at the end of the year.

 

[Provolution]

What if there are other reasons, but if we state them here, publicly, some will be verbally butchered, disenfranchised and ridiculed, as well as character assassinated?
What if people do not feel the need to face the music, and just let this forum based niche game pass quietly in the background?

I have only seen this game take place one game before, but I have learnt one thing, it is all about entertainment, and if one specific group monopolizes what is considered entertainment and minimize/exclude/marginalize the other so effectively that these groups sense they have no personal creative influence on the game, the game surely loses population. Speaking for myself, I am a spent force, and I would do more harm than good posting here in this environment, as I see most of my main support base is gone, and I really see no recourse to change myself to the perceived betterment for those few that remains.

I think the fierce resistance in defending the flawed constitution, and the sabotage in the attempts to reform it has effectively worked well. I am also amazed that the paragraph riders fighting for this outcome have left their own creation, now that their successors are forced to live with the consequences. Some of us tried to improve this, but the resistance proved too strong. I am sorry, I failed.

 

[Strider]

I'll list all the reasons I can possibly think of, that might cause for the lack of partcipation:

Getting Old
The Democracy Game itself will never get old, and I'm betting were see the basic idea used for a long while on. However, what happens inside of a single game may get boring. It gets only worst when it's basicly the same for 3 years. We get off to a bad start, get acouple of fancy wars, start taking over, we win. Yeah, for the 6th time.

Difficulty to hard
I doubt the average "newer" player even loads up the save. I also seriously doubt that the average newer player is stupid enough to think that just because they don't play on that high a difficulty level, the other 20 people who play the game won't either. I have misgivings that this is really a problem. Also, there has never been any evidence to support that this could possibly be true.

Constitutional discussions
Likely the biggest killer this entire demogame, first there was to much of it. Now there seems to be to little. All I can say is, what the hell do you expect when you say you want it to stop? Hell, DZ and myself were to of the most active in Constitution related matters. Now we've both said that were no longer really active.

Game in the bag
This shouldn't be a problem, oh sure, unless were blessed with our own chorus of village idoits (and it's not up for debate wether or not that's already happened) were guaranteed to win, almost. However, there should be dozens of other things to generate interest. Communication, mini-games, Role-play, etc. What happened to it all? We destroyed it, and then proceeded to gut it and pull a Jerry Springer over who did it.

Don't have Conquests
This shouldn't have been a problem either, but guess what? We screwed this one up. At the very start of this game, I posted a list of things that we need to focus on. Making it "non-conquest friendly" was one of those goals. The others included Freedom of Information, increase in partcipation, etc. When I first posted that list, every seemed to generally agree, so I went forward and posted all of my thoughts and ideas over what we need to do. Once again, everyone seemed optimistic and agreed. Then I took a short 3 day break from the game, figuring I'll allow some discussion before charging forward into this. I came back to find the thread completely dead, only to be replaced with a thread over the creation of a new constitution. So, unluckily making it conquest friendly got completely left out. Strangely enough though, the Freedom of Information was copied word by word from my orginal ideas, and was used to help pass the piece of trash we call a constitution.

Semister Finals:
Not a huge one, for me atleast. I've been studying for my Spanish Final while typing this up. Could possibly be differant for others though, so this is not out of the question.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Why? (I can ask this in complete innocence as you left before I came ).

Strider and I liked to fight each other alot, but there is no question that both of us brought a lot of passion to the game. However, having been around since the early part of DG2, I have degenerated into such a caricature of my earlier, more articulate self that even I have grown tired of my act.

Whatever happens here in Civ3, you can rest assured that the DG will revitalize itself when the new model comes out. Until then, I shall most likely remain the eccentric lurker.

 

[DaveShack]

However, there should be dozens of other things to generate interest. Communication, mini-games, Role-play, etc.

Some people are good at role-play, and some are not. One of the contenders for being a role-play leader got tired of heavy-handedness on the part of certain "citizens with more than average power" and left / got thrown out. Other contenders for role-play leaders focused way too much energy on their negative perception of the game structure, energy which could have been spent positively on role-play.

However

I have a different twist to put on this whole poll and discussion. I see it that the currently active leadership are mostly relatively new but we do have some who are veterans of several games. Also, even though the total quantity of discussion and polling might be less than the level of participation some fondly recall as "the heydey of the DG" we seem to be in good shape when there is something to discuss. Is it perfect? Of course not -- but it seems to be good enough.

 

[donsig]

No, I'm not here.

I don't own conquests and my time for fun and games has been limited the last few months. There being no easy and timely way to keep up with what was happenening in our country I lost interest rather quickly.

Perhaps someday we'll find a way to play a demogame where looking at the save and attending the chats isn't required for active and fun participation.

 

[zyxy]

Hi Donsig,

what do you think about the TC summaries and other information being posted now? What is missing?

 

[greekguy]

I don't attend chats and i still keep up with the game, although i do look at saves. I think if you look at Furiey's TC summarys, they explain pretty much everything. Also, if so many people without C3C, are not playing because of a lack of information, i'd be willing to help out there.

 

[Civanator]

Another reason may be that some people just arent entertained by the genre of Civ3. I know for me this is a main reason. Yes it's fun, but it's long, and gets boring with the repetitive victories. I have since turned to RPG's and first person shooters and things that keep me entertained every second. just a matter of the person's interests at the time.

 

[Provolution]

I also found that some of the idiots over-reporting posts are probably gone, as there is no prey to bother. So these clowns are probably gone the same road as the "great" constitutional masters, their loyal constitutional posse asking for no reforms and finally the ones preaching political correctness and non-entertaining non-sense. The fun part crowd is mostly gone too, but when there is no one to moral police or politically correct, they lose their reason for existance, and simply disappear, interesting phenomenon.

 

[Bootstoots]

I just sort of lost interest between demogames 4 and 5 and haven't really gotten it back yet. I still lurk here and follow elections and such, but I'm no longer active. I think the long, protracted rule discussion that eventually ended up with the old rules reinstated between 4 and 5 may have played a part in my losing interest, but other than that, I can't really explain it. I may or may not eventually come back in an active role.

 

[Gregski]

Okay, how about a new way of looking at the issue:

What changes would be required for you to be able to actively participate in DG6/7?

I'll list some of my reasons:
1. A simple clearly defined leadership structure and ruleset
IMHO we need fewer elected people not more; more people only generate more confusion.

2. More role playing; less game playing
If we say move the palace, it should be done for aesthetic reasons, not just game benefits. Of course, the latter has to be taken into consideration, but overemphasising it is not good either.

3. Animosity between veterans
I've sensed that some DG veterans seem to be not at ease with certain others. Although we come from various different backgrounds and even continents, this does no good to the general goodwill in the DG. Perhaps people should look at the game as a distraction from RL and not as a personal mission.

4. RL issues
Certain times of the year (like now) are busy for a lot of people (exams, deadlines, etc). The game should take this into consideration and the pace at which we progress should reflect it.

5. Conquests
Not having conquests is a very good inhibitor (is there such a word) to be able to figure out what's going on.

Responses, flames, abuse welcome.

 

[Provolution]

First of all, I dislike the very term DG veterans, as if these people should be more spectacular than anyone else. It is just a matter of inflating egos and buidling false pedestals, and as method to disenfranchise novel and constructive ideas with spurious historical examples that are very creatively interpreted and abused.

 

[classical_hero]

First of all, I dislike the very term DG veterans, as if these people should be more spectacular than anyone else. It is just a matter of inflating egos and buidling false pedestals, and as method to disenfranchise novel and constructive ideas with spurious historical examples that are very creatively interpreted and abused.

Perhaps you prefer to be called Elites then.

 

[Civanator]

The Elites would be those still here from DG1

 

[Black_Hole]

First of all, I dislike the very term DG veterans, as if these people should be more spectacular than anyone else. It is just a matter of inflating egos and buidling false pedestals, and as method to disenfranchise novel and constructive ideas with spurious historical examples that are very creatively interpreted and abused.

experiance is usually somewhat helpful...

 

[GenMarshall]

The Elites would be those still here from DG1

Would that include me, since I was around twards the end of DG1 .