About pre-ordering I don't think that it's the corporations fault but rather the consumers. If there is interest the game companies would be idiots to not use it. All the "advantages" that they give aren't game changing (you don't need day-one DLC to play the game) and only serve as a bait for people who will probably get the game day-one anyways. It is a bad practice? No , as at the end what companies care about is profits. Consumer satisfaction is important but only because they get money from it. Do you want to blame someone for the current gaming situation? Blame the consumers, not the companies that profit from it. If people can live with broken game releases they are just strengthening the system. Once the system of poorly built game releases get rejected by the masses( if it ever does) we could expect a quality change. Until them, nothing will change
Civ4 Lovers/Civ5 Haters Level of Optimism for Civ6
- Thread starter polypheus
- Start date
You can add No Mans Sky to that list....
Apparently the devs completely skipped beta round, as it doesnt run on AMD cpus.....
If someone had told all the pre-ordering customers a week ago, that this s... happens, they would have defended preordering. Now... not so much I think.
Aristos
Lightseeker
NO a thousand times. An undisclosed member of CFC wrote me a PM once stating:
I could not say it better, so I leave it at that.
Staler87
Warlord
I meant to teleport back in time to re-make civ V not making the mistakes he himself pointed out (1upt, global happiness, etc.). I wasn't saying he should design civ VI, although it would be mildly interesting to see what he comes up with.
Aristos
Lightseeker
I read some of the Steam comments on No Man's Sky. What a mess. I don't think that Civ 6 will turn out that badly, though. I'm concerned that Firaxis might low-ball the hardware requirements like they did for Civ 5, and people with older or less powerful systems will have trouble playing the game. But other than that, I don't think Civ 6 will be that big of a mess. At least I hope not for the people who pre-ordered it. I still think it will have serious flaws, though, and I won't buy it until I see some unbiased reviews from people here. If I buy it at all it will be on sale. Significantly.
I guess Civ is still the only major game franchise which showcases anything vaguely to do with the real world as a major game element, and that's worth cheering! Most games are time-wasting and brain-rotting and have nothing at all to do with anything at all ... at least with Civ that's mitigated to a degree 
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 27,129
Ha..I did too. All the complaints are about the game not running. Looks like it might actually be a good game if it worked, although not really my kinda game.
Try some Paradox games like EUIV
Aristos
Lightseeker
Phillip will jump at you at any moment
but yes, EU4 with all its debatable decisions in every patch/expansion is one hell of a masterpiece.
Still, man, big NO.
"Bar the Gates!"
Estimated delivery for the game was July 2014, IIRC.
So over two years late already. Not unusual for a Kickstarter to be late but this is getting close to vapourware, IMHO.
I backed At the Gates and I am starting to worry that I flushed my money down the toilet.
It's odd the way Jon stopped updating his blog and posting on the At The Gates forum even though people on there are getting more and more frustrated. It's starting to look really unprofessional. He did briefly pop in there to mention a health problem a few months ago so who knows what the story is. Re. the game it's a shame because the people who backed to get into the alpha last year say it was nearly finished then and quite good.
Yes I'll definitely try EU4 when my new PC turns up! Current one's waaaay too old and tired.
Aristos
Lightseeker
Estimated delivery for the game was July 2014, IIRC.
So over two years late already. Not unusual for a Kickstarter to be late but this is getting close to vapourware, IMHO.
I backed At the Gates and I am starting to worry that I flushed my money down the toilet.
I hate to tell you so, but...
I told you so. Many times.
I said many times that time would have (confirm, for some of us) the final judgment in regards to the professional qualities of said designer (as with anyone and anything, mind you), and well, time is telling.
Chantas... chantas never change.
I hate to tell you so, but...
I told you so. Many times.
I said many times that time would have (confirm, for some of us) the final judgment in regards to the professional qualities of said designer (as with anyone and anything, mind you), and well, time is telling.
Chantas... chantas never change.
I believe in redemption. People do change and sometimes dramatically.
Anyway, I do hope that Civ VI is a vast and dramatic change from Civilization 5.
plasmacannon
Emperor
Civ4 BTS has 92 techs in it's tech tree.
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/files/1/techtree_original.jpg
Civ5 has 74 techs in it's tech tree.
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=3376&original=1&c=36
Civ6 has 67 techs in it's tech tree.
http://well-of-souls.com/civ/images/civ6_tech_tree1.jpg
Is anyone else concerned that the Tech Tree is becoming too simplistic?
I feel like we are losing much of the depths of earlier versions.
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/files/1/techtree_original.jpg
Civ5 has 74 techs in it's tech tree.
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=3376&original=1&c=36
Civ6 has 67 techs in it's tech tree.
http://well-of-souls.com/civ/images/civ6_tech_tree1.jpg
Is anyone else concerned that the Tech Tree is becoming too simplistic?
I feel like we are losing much of the depths of earlier versions.
Lexicus
Deity
I've found the Europa Barbarorum mods for the total war games are pretty high in realism too.
Civ4 BTS has 92 techs in it's tech tree.
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/files/1/techtree_original.jpg
Civ5 has 74 techs in it's tech tree.
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=3376&original=1&c=36
Civ6 has 67 techs in it's tech tree.
http://well-of-souls.com/civ/images/civ6_tech_tree1.jpg
Is anyone else concerned that the Tech Tree is becoming too simplistic?
I feel like we are losing much of the depths of earlier versions.
On the surface it looks that way but we'll have to see.
I just played the Caveman to Cosmos mod which has, god knows, how many techs, and it wasn't a good thing.
mourndraken
King
That's a very interesting podcast !
Civ4 BTS has 92 techs in it's tech tree.
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/files/1/techtree_original.jpg
Civ5 has 74 techs in it's tech tree.
http://www.civfanatics.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=3376&original=1&c=36
Civ6 has 67 techs in it's tech tree.
http://well-of-souls.com/civ/images/civ6_tech_tree1.jpg
Is anyone else concerned that the Tech Tree is becoming too simplistic?
I feel like we are losing much of the depths of earlier versions.
Not entirely true.
Civ VI divides advances into a scientific and civic tree. Added together, there are around 120 techs. For example, Craftsmanship or Early Empire are found in the Civics tree.
I would say that things are more returning to cIV, than anything.
Plus, the 92 techs for BTS were cIV with expansions. We'll see what Civ VI has after its expansions to make a totally fair comparison.
plasmacannon
Emperor
Not entirely true.
Civ VI divides advances into a scientific and civic tree. Added together, there are around 120 techs. For example, Craftsmanship or Early Empire are found in the Civics tree.
I would say that things are more returning to cIV, than anything.
Plus, the 92 techs for BTS were cIV with expansions. We'll see what Civ VI has after its expansions to make a totally fair comparison.
Good to know. I forgot about the Civics Tree.
