Having played all of the civ games, expansion packs and most of the best mods to death and beyond, I was extremely disappointed by the way in which Civ 5 had been dumbed down, because for me at least, it just wasn't challenging or entertaining enough.
Civ 5 was so bad and in so many different ways, that I just can't play it, and I can't go back and play the older games in the series, because I have played all of them to death. So, it's been a life without Civ for the last 2 years, and I have really missed not having a Civ game to play, as I always had the latest version installed on my computer, and have happily pumped many thousands of hours into them, over the years.
I didn't complain when Civ 5 came out, because to be honest I thought it was pointless. The Civ series had avoided the decade long trend in the dumbing down of PC games, but had produced Colonisation to create a toe in the water of the new mass market that every developer and their dog were chasing. I therefore expected the Civ franchise to provide two different types of game in the future, with the Civ 5+ games satisfying the demands of the existing customer base, and the Colinisation+ games creating a new customer base within the broader market.
Boy was I wrong.
It's spectacularly bad business practise to piss off your existing customer base so badly, and not own up to it, before you have established a new customer base.
The developer have really shot themselves in the foot on this one, because they have managed to completely alienate a huge segment of their existing customer base. All sales figures for Civ 5 are meaningless in the context of future performance, because the developer has lost their "trusted" status in the eyes of many gamers, who automatically bought Civ5 expecting more of the same high quality strategy that they had seen in Civ1 - 4, and various expansion packs.
Every long running game franchise can sound a bum note from time to time, but you can forgive a developer for trying and failing in such a context. What you can't forgive a developer for, is deciding to change the demographic they are targeting, and to then produce a game designed to satisfy the tastes of that new demographic, but not mentioning this huge policy change to their old / existing customer base. Civ 5 isn't a one off bum note, it's a complete rethink in the type of game that they are now making so as to target a new type of player.
Civ 6 is therefore going to be more of the same watered down mass market rubbish, which is fine for the guys who like Civ 5, but where does that leave people like us, who are voicing our concern in this thread? Well speaking personally, there was no point in my complaining before, because they had obviously made a policy decision to chase the mass market with Civ 5, and I wasn't going to to be able to change their mind, so what has changed?
Well I have been watching "Kickstarter" with interest over the last few months, and I have been pondering. There is no way that the developer is going to publicly admit what Civ 5 is, because that would just piss off their new customer base, who they obviously want to keep sweet and happy to buy Civ 6.
However, you know, I know and they know that Civ 5 is a complete departure away from the direction taken in Civ1 - 4, and when all is said and done, these guys still know how to make the sort of mature / challenging game represented by Civs 1 - 4. All we have to do, is to financially make it worth their while.
I personally would throw money at them to get the Civ game that I want, and "Kickstarter" is just that. A way of throwing money at a developer to get them to make the game that you want to play.
I am not going to pre-order Civ 6, because I expect it to be more of the same, but bizarrely and despite what they did to me when they made Civ 5, I still trust the developer to be competent enough to produce the sort of game that I want to play, if they hand on heart promised to do so. I don't even need that much in terms of detail about the game, just their assurance that it will continue along the path trodden by Civ 1 - 4. Deep challenging AI, multi-layered, abundance of player choice, infinite replayability, etc.
The developer are not going to make that game without an incentive, and if they floated the concept on, "Kickstarter", they might then get the financial incentive that they need.
Food for thought?
Yes, there is a potential pr issue here, as the awkward squad in the press will ask why Civ"X" is being funded on, "Kickstarter", if Civ 6 is being funded by their normal method, but the developer can be economical with the truth, and simply explain it away as a one off game that is being developed to satisfy a niche audience. If they need some actual truth to that statement, then they can give us Alpa Centauri 2 or something similar, or anything they like, just as long as it targets people with more than two brain cells to rub together. I personally don't think those of us who were disappointed by Civ 5 are in a minority or represent a niche market, and it would be deeply ironic if Civ "X" were to outsell Civ 6, should Civ 6 be the dumbed down mass market game that I expect it to be.
I won't pre-order Civ 6 on release, but I would throw money upfront and with no strings attached at Civ X. Would you?
Regards - Mr P
and 20%
over all civfanatics members.
It has endless re-playability. Plus, I still need to beat Deity.
