Civ 6 drops below Civ 5 on Steam

[Raider]

oh god don't even mention Beyond Earth the whole thing was just a big civ V MOD. what a disaster!

What baffles me is that after seeing the garbage that was along with Firaxis straight-up lack of interest or ability to fix it, people just turned around and paid for Civ VI on release. Did Beyond Earth and Civ 5 release teach gamers nothing? Heck, Civ 5 vanilla is the reason I never pre-order any more.

 

[Gub]

I gave some pretty high-profile examples (RTS being at least somewhat comparable in terms of genre, with Unreal Tournament being a dissimilar but massively-successful FPS franchise). I don't have the time to sit here listing negative community reactions to game sequels. They're everywhere. People will often stick with what's familiar to them, it's Psychology 101.

Nevermind the fact that people having played Civilisation 6 before going back to Civilisation 5 has very little to do with Civilisation 6 being a bad game. It just means they prefer a game with six years of support and modding projects behind it (or consider Civilisation 6 a bad game; it's not all of one or the other).

True, also sometimes its mater of hardware, Civ4 requirements are ~10 times less than Civ6s, offering familiar rules and MUCH more content. So its easy to nitpick arguments and denounce Civ6 as bad, as oppose to different.

Speaking of franchises and sequels, I feel that many times sequels are intentionally developed with different priorities. Take simcity franchise for example, many know Simcity4 which was a huge success and most hardcore fans hated Simcity5 because we wanted better and bigger simcity4. However, considering the amount of free content\mods (e.g. on simtropolis), I doubt that Maxis could have made anything but a glorified expansion with more Hardware requirements( smaller target audience), more complexity(smaller target audience) and less content (overall receiving the same flak they got with the other expansions), and for what compete against a strong title of their own? So I feel that Simcity 5 was a concussions decision to return to the more colorful and less serious roots of the franchises prior to simcity4, to appeal to a younger demographic. This way they can increase their fan base, continue to improve their engine and eventually revisit the next simcity4. And I believe that more than one franchise that has been growing with their fans for over a decade did such small reboots.. Civ5 anyone?

Anyway, I still feel that Civ6 eventually will be a very strong contender for civ4 throne, it will just take a few expansion and mods to catch up to civ4 post release decade of polish.

And this is why buying games in unfinished state is a terrible practice for gamers. This is why I am especially happy that I requested a refund.

I don't think the game was released bellow the industry standard for such games, as a LONG time fan of strategy games that is exactly how most are released. Do what I usually do, wait at least half year for a few patches and mods to land, or better yet wait for some sort of one year all included release with steam discount.. But if you do buy it because you want to play it on release and then spend dozens of hours on it, don't ask refunds and don't blame anyone but yourself. -- If you are fat its not the fault of the cookie jar...

 

[Ferocitus]

And this is why buying games in unfinished state is a terrible practice for gamers. This is why I am especially happy that I requested a refund.

Seriously? You are basing that on DocRock's guess which has absolutely no supporting facts?

Buying games in an "unfinished state" might also help to get the game finished.
It allows people to get the game earlier than if they had to wait until it met
unrealistic expectations of an insignificant (and ultimately irrelevant) minority.
There is a chance for those players to suggest improvements and to find bugs, especially
those that can arise with peculiar hardware combos.

Here's my guess based on no facts - Civ devs and Firaxis have short-term tactics and long-term
strategies for Civ6 that neither you, nor anyone else here know about.

 

[Dale]

wait until it met
unrealistic expectations of an insignificant (and ultimately irrelevant) minority.

Here's my guess based on no facts - Civ devs and Firaxis have short-term tactics and long-term
strategies for Civ6 that neither you, nor anyone else here know about.

Firstly, look what happened to Spore, Maxis and Will Wright because they ignored the irrelevant minority as you like to call us.

Secondly, the short and long term goals for Civ6 are simply to make money. Nothing else I'm sorry to point out.

 

[Hail]

Firstly, look what happened to Spore, Maxis and Will Wright because they ignored the irrelevant minority as you like to call us.

what bs. Maxis (and Westwood and Pandemic) went down because EA is greedy capitalist scum.

Secondly, the short and long term goals for Civ6 are simply to make money. Nothing else I'm sorry to point out.

if the sole goal was to make money, then Firaxis should have kept milking civ5 and its large player base. only when civ5 player numbers start to steadily decline should Firaxis select a group of devs to prototype a civ game very different to civ5 for diversification reasons.

 

[Gub]

Buying games in an "unfinished state" might also help to get the game finished.
It allows people to get the game earlier than if they had to wait until it met
unrealistic expectations of an insignificant (and ultimately irrelevant) minority.

There are many ways to support developers. Most people who buy games, care about their entertainment value alone. And it can be argued that many (if not most) on civfanatics belong to a minority, and while they are often very passionate and have high expectations I wouldn't call them insignificant or irrelevant any day.

 

[Ferocitus]

Firstly, look what happened to Spore, Maxis and Will Wright because they ignored the irrelevant minority as you like to call us.

And while those hopeless ones failed, Civ/Firaxis thrived.

Secondly, the short and long term goals for Civ6 are simply to make money. Nothing else I'm sorry to point out.

And they have continued to do so with their 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 strategy.
How they pace themselves, i.e. their tactics and strategies for development over the next few years is
something most of us are happy to admit we don't know.

What form of divination do you use to make your mystical predictions in the absence of facts?

 

[Acken]

A failure to attract Civ 5 players is an objective & meaningful statistic.

Youd have to show that there is a below expectation in Civ6 sales. Or that its release didnt move Civ5 popularity at least. Not everyone will make the transition due to the price, the computer requirement, waiting for more patches etc.

 

[Dale]

what bs. Maxis (and Westwood and Pandemic) went down because EA is greedy capitalism scum.

I'll finish your sentence.....

"and catered for the casual gamer to make money rather than making a good game for the traditional fanbase."

Oh..... isn't that what 2K is doing?

if the sole goal was to make money, then Firaxis should have kept milking civ5 and its large player base. only when civ5 player numbers start to steadily decline should Firaxis select a group of devs to prototype a civ game very different to civ5 for diversification reasons.

What's better......
Civ5:
3 years of making ~$20 million off Civ5

OR:
Civ5 + Civ6:
3 years of making ~$20 million off Civ5
+
3 years of developing Civ6 at a cost of ~$20 million
+
6 months of making ~$80 million off Civ6.

Civ5 total = ~$60 million
Civ5 + Civ6 total = ~$120 million

And while those hopeless ones failed, Civ/Firaxis thrived.

Did they REALLY thrive?
- CivSocial: failed.
- Sid's Dinosaurs: scrapped.
- CivRev2: failed outside a couple minor markets.
- Civ4 Colonisation: luke warm reception didn't do as expected, support scrapped.
- CivBE: luke warm reception didn't do as expected, support scrapped.
- Lost an entire team to BHG.
- Lost an entire team to Oxide.
- Lost an entire team to Stardock.
- Lost an entire team to other indies such as Mohawk.
- Firaxis had to sell out to Activision, and then to 2K just to stay afloat with enough financial backing.

Games development is a tough industry. There are many more failures to successes. No one company can boast continuous success.

What form of divination do you use to make your mystical predictions in the absence of facts?

What powers do I use?

- Firaxis is owned by 2K.
- 2K is a public traded company.
- Shareholders own 2K.
- Shareholders want money.
- 2K will only finance a project if the boffins can prove it will make money (even then there is medium risk it might fail).
- Firaxis can only make a project if it will make money. That defines scope of project. That moulds the design.

If a project will NOT make money, it will NOT be funded. Therefore, the goal of any game is to make money.

 

[Raider]

Seriously? You are basing that on DocRock's guess which has absolutely no supporting facts?

Buying games in an "unfinished state" might also help to get the game finished.
It allows people to get the game earlier than if they had to wait until it met
unrealistic expectations of an insignificant (and ultimately irrelevant) minority.
There is a chance for those players to suggest improvements and to find bugs, especially
those that can arise with peculiar hardware combos.

Here's my guess based on no facts - Civ devs and Firaxis have short-term tactics and long-term
strategies for Civ6 that neither you, nor anyone else here know about.

It would be so great if it was believable that Firaxis has this great overarching plan for Civ6 that we can't see right now. Two things about that though:

1. So then it's apparently part of their plan to release a game in an unfinished state and a completely non-functional AI. Hum, yeah, back to my original point, this is why not paying for unfinished products is a good idea. When and if they complete the game, I will pay for it.
2. The master plan theory falls apart as soon as you remember what happened to Beyond Earth and Civ 5. Civ 5 AI was never fixed. And Beyond Earth was a glorified mod to begin with, had all the AI issues Civ 5 had, including the few that Civ 5 got fixed, and even as mod, the game was still meh and was never properly thought through or improved past the flawed release and expansion. So yeah the company that did little to fix its last 2 games (with the more recent Beyond Earth being left in even worse shape than Civ 5) has this master plan to make Civ great again. Yeah, sure.

 

[God of Kings]

Take-Two Interactive owns 2K.

 

[Raider]

If a project will NOT make money, it will NOT be funded. Therefore, the goal of any game is to make money.

And this is why it's important to not pay for unfinished games. Selling and marketing garbage half-baked releases makes money. Fixing them after the fact does not. So if you remove the incentive to release finished games, you get crap games that the developer forgets about as soon as they collect the money.

 

[Dale]

Take-Two Interactive owns 2K.

Doesnt matter how many holding companies in between shareholders and Firaxis. If it won't make money it won't be funded.

 

[HF22]

Youd have to show that there is a below expectation in Civ6 sales. Or that its release didnt move Civ5 popularity at least. Not everyone will make the transition due to the price, the computer requirement, waiting for more patches etc.

There seems to be a coherent story that phase 2 hype & sales are not what they could be. Low steam player numbers, terrible steam dlc reviews etc.

Phase 1 hype & sales seem to have been excellent. But a failure to kick on is evident.

 

[Hail]

I'll finish your sentence.....

"and catered for the casual gamer to make money rather than making a good game for the traditional fanbase."

Oh..... isn't that what 2K is doing?

making game(s) aiming at the casual gamer is only part of the issue. they release unpolished games, prioritize visuals & audio over gameplay & AI, abandon games that fail (commercial failure, low ratings, etc.).

what's better?
buy off Vox populi's devs for like $40,000 and sell it as a $10 DLC.
have someone at Firaxis create a WW1, Napoleon wars, Korean war, colonization era etc. scenarios and sell them as DLC.
sell Earth maps (Europe, Asia, Africa, etc.) packs as DLC.
do a Mars map & conversion mod (Mars style terrain improvements, etc.) as DLC.

there is a ton of money Firaxis is leaving at the table by desiding that civ5's lifecycle ended.

Did they REALLY thrive?

CivWorld was the Sid's Facebook game. he explicitly metioned that CivWorld is his game.

Sid Meier's Starships should also be mentioned here. another game that received abysmal ratings on PC & mediocre ratings on iOS and likely did not reach 2K's profit threshold.

civ:be did get an expansion (Rising Tide) unlike civ4:col. 2K bosses had high hopes for civ:be

What's better......

where are your numbers from?
keep in mind that the numbers you cited are income not profit.

Lost an entire team to other indies such as Mohawk.

Soren Johnson left Firaxis to found Mohawk Games. who left with him?

 

[Disgustipated]

What baffles me is that after seeing the garbage that was along with Firaxis straight-up lack of interest or ability to fix it, people just turned around and paid for Civ VI on release. Did Beyond Earth and Civ 5 release teach gamers nothing? Heck, Civ 5 vanilla is the reason I never pre-order any more.

I disagree. Civ6 is quite different than Civ5 and BE. Where as it was plainly obvious BE was almost exactly like Civ5. If anything, they changed Civ6 too much and didn't have time to get the basics right. I pre-ordered and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I knew what I was getting into because I seen the pre release Youtube videos by Quil18 and others. It only had about half the game, and that was good enough for me. What I seen in those Youtube videos was quite good. And I loved the district system and still do.

And I still play Civ6, but only on occasion when new content is released. While I may not ever reach the time played I had with Civ5, I easily got my money's worth. All my hours of Civ5 didn't come until after the 2nd expansion. Yes, Civ5 was that bad. Far inferior to Civ4 upon release.

My hours of Civ5 played 3 months after release: 8
My hours of Civ6 played after 3 months: 199
'nuff said

 

[ThERat]

CivWorld was an abomination, I didn't even understand what it tried to achieve as a game

 

[Ferocitus]

It would be so great if it was believable that Firaxis has this great overarching plan for Civ6 that we can't see right now. Two things about that though:

1. So then it's apparently part of their plan to release a game in an unfinished state and a completely non-functional AI. Hum, yeah, back to my original point, this is why not paying for unfinished products is a good idea. When and if they complete the game, I will pay for it.
2. The master plan theory falls apart as soon as you remember what happened to Beyond Earth and Civ 5. Civ 5 AI was never fixed. And Beyond Earth was a glorified mod to begin with, had all the AI issues Civ 5 had, including the few that Civ 5 got fixed, and even as mod, the game was still meh and was never properly thought through or improved past the flawed release and expansion. So yeah the company that did little to fix its last 2 games (with the more recent Beyond Earth being left in even worse shape than Civ 5) has this master plan to make Civ great again. Yeah, sure.

You made the imprudent decision to buy Civ6 in an unfinished state,
even though there is a well-documented history of that kind of behaviour.
Civ5 was abominable on release, and did very well in the long term.

You then extrapolate from that to a "Firaxis doesn't care..." or
"Firaxis is doomed" conclusion.
You've got nothing except crystal-ball gazing and bitterness with your
decision to buy early.

At least you won't make that mistake again.

 

[Ferocitus]

I'll finish your sentence.....

"and catered for the casual gamer to make money rather than making a good game for the traditional fanbase."

Oh..... isn't that what 2K is doing?



What's better......
Civ5:
3 years of making ~$20 million off Civ5

OR:
Civ5 + Civ6:
3 years of making ~$20 million off Civ5
+
3 years of developing Civ6 at a cost of ~$20 million
+
6 months of making ~$80 million off Civ6.

Civ5 total = ~$60 million
Civ5 + Civ6 total = ~$120 million



Did they REALLY thrive?
- CivSocial: failed.
- Sid's Dinosaurs: scrapped.
- CivRev2: failed outside a couple minor markets.
- Civ4 Colonisation: luke warm reception didn't do as expected, support scrapped.
- CivBE: luke warm reception didn't do as expected, support scrapped.
- Lost an entire team to BHG.
- Lost an entire team to Oxide.
- Lost an entire team to Stardock.
- Lost an entire team to other indies such as Mohawk.
- Firaxis had to sell out to Activision, and then to 2K just to stay afloat with enough financial backing.

Games development is a tough industry. There are many more failures to successes. No one company can boast continuous success.



What powers do I use?

- Firaxis is owned by 2K.
- 2K is a public traded company.
- Shareholders own 2K.
- Shareholders want money.
- 2K will only finance a project if the boffins can prove it will make money (even then there is medium risk it might fail).
- Firaxis can only make a project if it will make money. That defines scope of project. That moulds the design.

If a project will NOT make money, it will NOT be funded. Therefore, the goal of any game is to make money.

Where did you get the idea that I think they're not in it for the money? Of course they are.

You are still crystal-ball gazing when you claim that Civ6 is somehow doomed to failure in the long-term
after being out for less than 2 months.

 

[Dale]

making game(s) aiming at the casual gamer is only part of the issue. they release unpolished games, prioritize visuals & audio over gameplay & AI, abandon games that fail (commercial failure, low ratings, etc.).

The points you cite I class as making games for casuals. Visuals and audio at the expense of AI and balance is an indication of being targeted at casuals IMO.

what's better?

buy off Vox populi's devs for like $40,000 and sell it as a $10 DLC.
have someone at Firaxis create a WW1, Napoleon wars, Korean war, colonization era etc. scenarios and sell them as DLC.
sell Earth maps (Europe, Asia, Africa, etc.) packs as DLC.
do a Mars map & conversion mod (Mars style terrain improvements, etc.) as DLC.

there is a ton of money Firaxis is leaving at the table by desiding that civ5's lifecycle ended.

Maybe so. But obviously they figured they could make MORE money with Civ6 than keeping Civ5 alive.

CivWorld was the Sid's Facebook game. he explicitly metioned that CivWorld is his game.
Sid Meier's Starships should also be mentioned here. another game that received abysmal ratings on PC & mediocre ratings on iOS and likely did not reach 2K's profit threshold.
civ:be did get an expansion (Rising Tide) unlike civ4:col. 2K bosses had high hopes for civ:be

I forgot about Starships. There's also Ace Patrol and it's spinoffs as well.

where are your numbers from?
keep in mind that the numbers you cited are income not profit.

The other thread. Note I used the approximate symbol too.

Soren Johnson left Firaxis to found Mohawk Games. who left with him?

A number of others left about the same time to join other Indies. There's plenty of 3D artists, level designers, concept artists, coders etc at Firaxis.