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

BE still fairly boring

Discussion in 'CivBE - General Discussions' started by HughFran, Oct 23, 2015.

  1. Kutuzov

    Kutuzov Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2006
    Messages:
    362
    But isn't that true of most 4x games? I do that when I play Endless Legend too. ;) Why single BERT out in this instance for a flaw inherent in 4x games, or even strategy games in general when played against an AI opponent? Even EU4 fans will tell you that there's nothing left to do after the first 150 years of a SP game and that's not a 4x game. Strategy and 4x games' AI can't play a long game.

    Boring? Not for me even if it is undeniably boring for others. There are millions of people who think durian is delicious and call it the king of fruit whereas for me, it has the appeal and the texture of congealed snot and smells like vomit. We're all different.
     
  2. rastak

    rastak Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,567
    Location:
    Minnesota
    That's well put. EUIV seems like one giant slog more or less. I'll admit, BERT grabs me much less than Civ V but that's more theme. I'm in the middle of a pretty intense game, it's been fun. Honestly, I don't keep playing games that bore me. Once I've determined I'm just not engaged, I'm done. Like the OP, I'll make my statement if I've been active in the forum and then you'll not see me again as I have better things to do than to post about games I find boring once I've made my point.

    I have had a few of those but I generally enjoy most 4x games and rarely decide to dump them as boring. Pandora might qualify.
     
  3. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    Seem is an understatement.
    It's very easy to reach a point in CivBE where you make buildings in 2 turns... even in your newly funded cities.

    I'm not sure in what world people are supposed to care fore +2 production or +2 food buildings when you get +60 total from routes. Sure you can make them to get even more power creep out of trade routes I guess ;)
    It's the same thing as Civ5 atomic era buildings... but in civBE this phenomenon appears too early to be ignored.

    Trade routes just trivialize empire management and are a cause of boring buildings.

    Because CivBE LITERALLY asks you to wait around. 3 of the 5 victories are basically science victories with no strategy involved beyond reaching the level, wait the wonder, wait the arbitrary turn #. And contact directly just ask you to wait 45 turns because that's their fix to the most horrible victory condition I've seen in a while (and that's from someone thinking Civ5 diplomacy is horrible). These wait turns are out of your power and this creates boredom. The only real exception being transcendance where a city spam will save you some minutes (that you can spend on another game :D).

    And because of the previous point, economy is so poorly designed that your midgame really asks very little thoughts. There's a reason why it took 2 games for players to get their victory turn numbers in the 150-175 area (and motivated players will go even lower). This game is just so badly balanced (at the moment :rolleyes:) that it took very little to figure it out. Comparing that to how much work it took to get equivalently breaking times in civ5 or even simply win deity (in G&K if you want a fair comparison) it's no wonder some players are getting bored and single out CivBE.
     
  4. HughFran

    HughFran Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    348
    I am the OP of this question and after some advice I decided to play on a smaller map and harder difficulty. It still took over 250 turns before any AI DoW me and they were hopeless when attacking. There are some good things to do like Quests and discovering artifacts but after playing another two games at the weekend, I still find BE quite boring.

    I disagree with the person that said that BERT has more to do early game than Civ 5 - there is plenty to do early game Civ 5, ESPECIALLY if you start off right next to a warmonger or have raging barbarians enabled.

    There are some things about BERT that I definitely like. It looks beautiful, the sound and music are really good and there are some fun quests/challenges but there are periods in the game where I feel like I am just clicking next, next, next.
     
  5. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    You're doing something wrong, then. The last two games I was on a Standard Map with normal number of opponents, and in both games I pissed off my nearest neighbor (intentionally) by settling with a spit of their capital. DOW before turn 90.

    They were still worthless on the attack, though. I've lost cities before, but those were when I wasn't expecting the attack, and the city was basically defenseless.
     
  6. HughFran

    HughFran Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    348
    I wouldn't exactly say I'm doing anything wrong - you stated that you intentionally pi**ed off your neighbour to provoke them but I am saying in a game where I played normally and didn't intentionally provoke anybody, the AI was just too damn passive.
     
  7. SupremacyKing2

    SupremacyKing2 Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2014
    Messages:
    4,473
    Location:
    Indiana
    What is interesting is that while the AI can be passive towards the player, they are not as passive with each other. Most of my games, the AIs have a grand ol' world war with each other. I put up a spy satellite in my game yesterday and watched the AIs take and retake cities left and right. They were really duking it out with large armies too.
     
  8. SupremacyKing2

    SupremacyKing2 Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2014
    Messages:
    4,473
    Location:
    Indiana
    I would point out that the +60 trade routes are a special case because several factors have to be involved to make it happen. You essentially have to exploit the system to get them. I've actually never had a trade route like that, ever!
     
  9. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    They're friendly, not passive. Passive means they're basically dead in the water. They're not. They're colonizing the world and what-not. There's supposed to be an agreement between all factions to leave war and conflict behind in Old Earth - that's part of the fiction. That's why colony leaders will sometimes chide you for bringing "madness to the world" if you conquer a city. You're supposed to be beyond that (war isn't supposed to end up with razing and city-taking and such).

    Once again, having said all that, I now also recall a game where Kolzov declared on me from across an ocean - all my units were defensive Tidehunter and were invisible so he probably mistook it to mean that my aquatic cities were defenseless. They weren't, of course. And I unintentionally pissed him off by neglecting my orbital coverage.

    On a very broad note, CivBE's faster and more engaging than Civ V. Stripped of its historical trappings, Civ V's Victory Conditions take longer and are much more tedious. Civ IV's were actually worse, if that can be believed - build a specific number of buildings in a specific number of cities. Then wait. Exactly like Harmony except with more buildings and more turns waiting. Fun huh?

    You either engage with the scifi of it or you'll feel it's Progress Quest. In fact, Progress Quest is a fairly spot-on critique of Civ design as a game. It's that kind of game and always has been.
     
  10. Olodune

    Olodune Emperor GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    1,083
    They also make the tiles on the map much less relevant when so much of a city's production and growth is generated "off map". Passive science and gold from population doesn't help. I find it strange for a Civ game to move in this direction - we should care about where cities are placed! (In a more nuanced way than just "next to titanium").
     
  11. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    Actually, not really. You have to think about the history of the Civ game design and what CivBE is trying to say. Terrascapes, Vivariums, Domes - all mechanics and fiction meant to express the idea that we are supposed to thrive anywhere. In fact, Trade Routes only enhance this central theme. We're NOT supposed to care where the cities end up - we will have ways to make them useful anyway. It doesn't even matter if they're deep in snow!

    Many independent tiles being able to be deployed anywhere (Manufacturies, Academies, Nodes) also speak to this same theme.

    Moreover, if you think about why we care about strategics in Civs, it's because they're attached to OP units like the Legion and the Keshik. When they tried to say that the Battlesuit was a similarly dominating unit, people cried foul.
     
  12. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    Theme is hardly going to sound like a good excuse for someone criticizing poor gameplay.
     
  13. Ryika

    Ryika Lazy Wannabe Artista

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,395
    That's like... the silliest whitewashing of bad design (or design that doesn't quite work out yet) I've ever heard.
     
  14. GAGA Extrem

    GAGA Extrem Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,589
    Gender:
    Male
    Reminds me of the Errant Signal episode where he gives one interpretation as CIV:BE being a dystopian tale about humanity being doomed to repeat the Great Mistake.

    "Mechanics as metaphore" are a pretty good thing and I agree that the CIV series did always have this positive, "growing as a species over time" aspect at the hart of it's design. Same for cities that are one of the core elements of the game to represent your civilization. But you can still have Terrascapes AND meaningful gameplay.

    In fact, by making the early city placement more important, you'd underline how far humanity has come from the ragged colonists landing on a new world and struggeling to compete with aliens during the early game once you start turning the arctic circle into a tropical Terrascape paradise at the end of a session.
     
  15. Gorbles

    Gorbles Load Balanced

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2014
    Messages:
    5,331
    Location:
    UK
    Given that the actual criticisms I've seen range in their scope and vehemence, I'd imagine "bad design" is actually incredibly subjective on a number of levels.

    Which allows room for subjective counters based on other aspects of the game.
     
  16. Ryika

    Ryika Lazy Wannabe Artista

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,395
    No, bad design is objective and everyone who disagrees with me is obviously just wrong and has yet to understand that I'm infallible.

    But setting that aside for a moment: The question whether it's good design or not wasn't even asked in the first place, people agreed on something they disliked and then someone said that the reason behind that may very well be "real life reasoning" (can't think of a better term right now), so obviously from that point on there's an unwritten "If we agree on the premise that it is indeed design that we don't like..." in the conversation.

    No need to repeat that in every post, it's part of the context.
     
  17. poom3619

    poom3619 Ping Pang Poom!

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,420
    Location:
    /r/civ battle royale
    Of course they done something subjectively right like giving our leader some more interaction, but something still subjectively wrong, except peace negotiation which is objectively wrong (in implementation, not its idea)

    Well, my subjective comment. I don't think the lore and what the game tried to convey to me is good or immersive enough for me to overlook flaws in gameplay like SMAC done. Sure, what we are basically do in every iteration of Civilization (and all turn-based video game) is hit the right button, at the right order then hit next turn until we won. But what make it difference from each other is that what button you're clicked or not should mean to whatever you playing and whether your victory make you feel good. In short, CivBE lore didn't impressed me like those of GalCiv or SMAC

    Main Civ game "stripped of its historical trappings" is click and click, input and output, So as CivBE and every games without it's own trapping.
     
  18. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    Gorb has it right. "Good design" is highly subjective. That's why "too balanced" is a criticism which actually means "I know this makes sense but it's boring." It's also the reason why good game mechanics are based on wild, unbalanced ideas - such ideas form the springboard for interest. They're enjoyable because they're impressive and compelling. Balancing is done on the back end.

    Olodune's comment was:

    and I have to challenge all of you to think about that harder. Don't justify. Think from a basic nothing perspective. DOES a blank map-based game have to make the player care about placement aside from a specific resource? The obvious answer is no. That is not a required gameplay mechanic whatsoever.

    You don't care that much in Starships - you just want as many planet as possible, period. You don't care in GalCiv. Same thing. Once you research or acquire terraforming tech, it's basically all the same thing.

    It's not necessarily bad for a Civ game to move in this direction, especially in a game whose overarching theme is that you don't care about location, and which expresses this theme with multiple mechanics. Consider the removal of luxury resources - those made you care about expansion and placement in Civs starting from 3. This was intentional. Do we want that? Obviously, that's not what CivBE is going for at all - your ability to expand is functionally limitless and at your own pace. By design. Because that's what the game is supposed to convey.

    Bad design is bad design, but theme and intention are not bad. They are what they are and you agree and enjoy it for what it is, or you disagree and you play something else.

    I'll point out that absent unbalanced unit design (basis of power unit strategics - Battlesuit) and basic production, you ALSO didn't care much about Iron or Horse in any Civ. You were in it for the hammers and because you got what was essentially Battlesuits.

    Yes, I'm still sore about the Battlesuits. And the Xenoswarms and CNDRs. These are supposed to be iconic units that broadly represent the affinities, effective in some measure across the entire game. Right now, they're basically useless. Design doesn't meet theme. That's bad design.

    At the heart of Civ, the design has ALWAYS been bad for the VCs. This is not unique to CivBE. VCs across the entire Civ line has always been bad and tedious. We just forgave it because we like the simulationist aspects. CivBE's simulationist or scifi flavor isn't enough for some people.

    So yes, it's because there aren't nice videos. That's not an accusation of shallowness. I don't particularly care for the videos. I'm happy with the written lore, but I also recognize that not everyone is and that means that there is a presentation issue with the theme and flavor. So yes, that's a game presentation (not design) flaw.

    Which can make the game boring for some. There.
     
  19. jihe

    jihe Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    376
    You should try civ4 :)
     
  20. Kutuzov

    Kutuzov Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2006
    Messages:
    362
    Since my question was 'why is BE being singled out for flaws that are inherent in pretty much all 4x games when played against an AI opponent, your answer is that because it is badly balanced it's too easy and some players are getting bored? While I'll definitely agree that then game is badly balanced at the moment, let's be honest, that's an entirely different issue.

    That doesn't change the fact that other 4x games that have a variety of victory conditions where some play out in a similarly 'boring' fashion. Please point me to one that doesn't as I'd really like to give it a spin rather than be told that BE is badly designed... yet again :lol: <Broken record [click] broken record [click] broken...>. At least I can point YOU to other 4x games and say, 'look, it's the pretty much the same'. The only difference is that people on those boards actually like the game and are willing to forgive it the flaws as we did with earlier Civs too. Civ BNW culture or Diplomatic victories for example... absolutely heart-pounding stuff indeed. :lol:

    THIS! If folks are finding BE boring to play, then go and play a game that engages you and makes you happy. Live your life and be happy because there's absolutely nothing else to do. Why would you intentionally want to waste the precious time of your life fretting about something so utterly meaningless as a computer game when you can play another one?
     

Share This Page