TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
Reading comprehension...FAILURE! This isn't a good start for your counter-arguments. I am insulting the logic of your argument, not you. But man, am I insulting the logic of your argument, because it's terrible.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intuitive
A city that indicates that it will do one thing, then does another does not possibly fit the definition of intuitive. Maybe in your time playing you didn't notice the issue, but you seriously can't tell me that mis-representation of game data/controls constitutes "intuitive", or that such a matter is subjective. Well, you can, but not with any degree of plausibility. I might as well say I can destroy the moon by punching it, which is just as true as your interpretation of the term "subjective" thus far (so far, you seem to like to define anything for which you have no answer as "subjective" in an attempt to hand-wave valid points/counterarguments).
Maybe, but what I left out was that it claims it has the best yet-available in the series. It will. Doesn't now though. They know it and are working on it. Even the DEVELOPERS realize this isn't finished. When a patch breaks the mods of the "most mod-able" title in the series for some time, that's seriously sour.
Aside from gameplay issues (which are irrelevant to whether this is finished), try playing with say 8 players in a MP game. Supposedly, you can, but in reality not so much. If you prefer "false/misleading advertising" to "incomplete", fine, but AFAIK they're going to do something about it.
My point is that when you stack up a game that crashes more frequently than the average release title, has issues with its controls, and doesn't run smoothly on recommended specs next to some of the more stable on-release titles around, it obviously compares poorly. If you want to say it's "more unfinished" rather than "the others are finished and civ V isn't", then we're basically agreeing on the relative complete-ness of the games, and are arguing over definitions rather than what is actually going on. My point from the start has been that at least 2 (don't know much about the new fallout) of the titles Civ V competes with on that list are objectively more complete games that work better within recommended specs. That is a FACT. On top of that, they themselves are top tier games in their genres; civ V's higher degree of incompleteness really hampers it (though sadly it is still top-tier in its genre). It does not DESERVE game of the year, it deserves fixes so that its potential can really shine.
It's amazing to me that you've gone 92 hours without recognizing the control flaws/issues, but then again it's amazing to me that people aren't aware of them in civ IV, too. You need only to watch one of my "let's plays" on youtube to find multiple examples of UI issues such that I'm attempting to do something and can't do it, the game does something different from what I ordered, etc. Laughably, that is an IMPROVEMENT from civ IV though, where units FORCIBLY moved at start-turn even if you tried to cancel their orders, workers would move next to barbs ALREADY in sight and THEN blow their remaining move on a tile improvement, and one could declare war on an AI without prompt (an instant loss in XOTM and HoF formats). So while the controls in V suck from a streamlining point of view, at least they aren't game-breaking...unless you're in MP and the unit you just ordered attack refuses to do so only because it's pathing through a city, then you lose your chance. A MP experience based on fighting the UI and not the actual game mechanics...yeah...THAT's a good experience
.I'm flexible on this point, however. You can argue since it's possible to complete the game with the current UI, that it isn't "incomplete". That would shift the UI/controls issue to simply "bad game" territory. Firaxis is aware of it, and a heavy portion of the forum is also. Basically, anyone who uses hotkeys instead of preferring to spend hours of dead time playing inefficiently (literally hours extra to play the same #games) knows just how limited the civ V UI is. Maybe they're done with it anyway; if they are it is one of their single worst design decisions, ever.
How many games have you completed in those 92 hours? That will say a lot ^_^.
Well, I've done neither in this instance, since you don't seem to want to touch this particular point
. No worries, I'm sure you're not alone. However, your inability/unwillingness to even address issues like this really does weaken your argument considerably.I am entitled to claim anything I wish to claim so long as it fits within forum rules. You definitely are not entitled to tell me what I can and can't say here.
Also, none of the issues I provided you are subjective. They are real, documented problems. Your only argument, and it's weaker than straw at this point, is that all games are incomplete and as a result those things don't make civ incomplete. The reality, however, is that no "AAA" title I'm aware of and probably a lot of games that are far from such lofty publicity do not and did not share those same issues on release, or ever after release.
Your continued insistence on problems with this game that have been shown on VIDEO FOOTAGE, and CONFIRMED on the very forum you're typing being "subjective" is bordering ludicrous at this point...or more likely crossed it. Whether you want to admit the issues merit incompletion or not, THEY ARE ISSUES. If you can't even grasp that, there's not much point in arguing. I'll call on your wisdom when I want an escape...a powerful escape...from reality (actually an enviable skill).
Anyway, so far your best evidence is to point toward other titles that had less of the above problems on release. That isn't a strong defense of your point. Nobody wins a debate by saying "that's subjective, so I disagree". If you can't do better you're out of ground to stand on.
Well, I didn't want to get into ALL of the control issues, it would take up a page by itself. The lack of hotkeys/shortcuts (and ANY effort to allow them AT ALL by firaxis) certainly frustrates me most, but those 3 examples provided are excellent ones for making my point also; they are all examples of controls getting in the way of playing the actual game...something that is *not* the hallmark of a good game, and can completely break settings like XOTM, HoF, and MP. And yes, I've been arguing against UI issues since civ IV. Some of them fortunately did not make it into civ V, but too many did (and there are new ones). I haven't hidden this opinion from the developers; the resource allocation apparent in patches since release shows how the combo of 2k/firaxis prioritizes gameplay. They do not care if the controls work properly and have not cared for years. That is why, in BTS 3.19, when issues with alt-selecting units then declaring on someone w/o prompt because the game "thinks" you're still holding alt, being unable to control/shift click consistently, etc. were still known, the developers chose to 1. Introduce a bug in overflow. Again. 2. Patch the spread culture espionage mission, which they broke in 3.17. 3. Speaking of 3.17, they again felt it more necessary to mess with barb galley spawn rate (and not playtest it) than to fix the controls. Same for 3.13 and other things, on and on. The control problems are pre-BTS; even an expansion couldn't convince them to fix a known UI issue (of course this same UI was programmed to lie to players outright starting from the warlords expansion; most people don't seem to care for some reason). To sum it up, I have SERIOUS issues with the franchise's priority with its controls, AND with the community tolerance of what amounts to failure of a gameplay 101 aspect. They've the UI on such a low priority that they felt it more important to patch away an obscure mechanic that top players were abusing rather than fixing the keyboard shortcuts they claimed existed.
The "fix" in civ V was to eliminate many of those shortcuts entirely
. Every person in support of this is another person who helps make civ V's expansions and civ VI, if that happens, equally bad. It's not realistic to expect me or any competitive/competent player to tolerate that nicely. It's a serious insult to gaming that CONSOLE controls are superior to civ's, on the simple basis that they consistently work X_X.People arguing in favor of civ V on that list are the exact people who have played a strong role in its inability to actually compete with those titles. As a civfanatic, that angers me. Lethargic fans who like pretty pictures and only care about sandbox come hell or high water are killing this franchise. This is supposedly a STRATEGY game, why are controls in the way? Why are new civs being added while the core strategic balance elements are off-kilter? WHY, in a STRATEGY game, is it so difficult to pass a turn? Too few care, and as a result good titles like starcraft 2 blow civ V to pieces on every objective measure.
![[pissed]](/images/smilies/pissed.gif "Pissed [pissed]")
This crapload doesn't deserve that honro.
