Dennis Shirk acknowledges fan disappointment and Civ5 development problems

[Grapa]

Fireaxis doesn't need to apologize to a bunch of spoiled, whiny "fans". The game isn't bad at all, it's just apparently some people were expecting the second coming of Christ.

I have thoroughly enjoyed CIV 5. While there were some things that I liked that were removed, the patches and mods have made the game play a lot better. I've put many hours into CIV V already.

 

[Guardian_PL]

Fireaxis doesn't need to apologize to a bunch of spoiled, whiny "fans". The game isn't bad at all, it's just apparently some people were expecting the second coming of Christ.

I have thoroughly enjoyed CIV 5. While there were some things that I liked that were removed, the patches and mods have made the game play a lot better. I've put many hours into CIV V already.

So did I. Thinking I'll find similar level or immersion as of its predecessors. Didn't happen.

 

[Thormodr]

Fireaxis doesn't need to apologize to a bunch of spoiled, whiny "fans". The game isn't bad at all, it's just apparently some people were expecting the second coming of Christ.

I have thoroughly enjoyed CIV 5. While there were some things that I liked that were removed, the patches and mods have made the game play a lot better. I've put many hours into CIV V already.

First of all, it's "Firaxis".

Second of all, people are whiny and spoiled for expecting a game to be relatively close to complete instead of this half baked mess?

People have legitimate complaints here. This game was released at least 1-2 years too early. Let's let them know that it's totally unacceptable to treat your long time fans (and new fans) like this. Not make excuses for them.

 

[Shurdus]

First of all, it's "Firaxis".

Second of all, people are whiny and spoiled for expecting a game to be relatively close to complete instead of this half baked mess?

People have legitimate complaints here. This game was released at least 1-2 years too early. Let's let them know that it's totally unacceptable to treat your long time fans (and new fans) like this. Not make excuses for them.

Givwen your stellar reputation as a game maker, I am sure you are the authority to say how much too early this game was releaed. We can rest assured that those numbers you mention do indeed mean something. It is not like you pull stuff like that out of your behind or anything...

The game could have used a bit more tweaking at launch, but to say it is half baked is pushing it. It was a meagre game to follow up BtS, but then again that was imo the best game ever made. I would have been surprised if civ5 would have been better than BtS right out of the box.

 

[Thormodr]

Givwen your stellar reputation as a game maker, I am sure you are the authority to say how much too early this game was releaed. We can rest assured that those numbers you mention do indeed mean something. It is not like you pull stuff like that out of your behind or anything...

The game could have used a bit more tweaking at launch, but to say it is half baked is pushing it. It was a meagre game to follow up BtS, but then again that was imo the best game ever made. I would have been surprised if civ5 would have been better than BtS right out of the box.

Your sarcasm is not warranted or appreciated thanks. Resorting to personal attacks actually takes away from your argument believe it or not.

Civilization 5 was their most ambitious Civ yet. Strangely enough though it was only worked on for barely 3 years. That isn't even close to enough time, especially considering how they tried to fundamentally change the game.

The designers are admitting as much. Sorry you can't see that.

No one was asking for BTS. We were asking for a relatively complete game on launch which we didn't get. (Barely functioning multiplayer, horrendous AI that can't handle 1UPT for starters) Half baked describes it best. That bun needed a lot more time in the oven.

 

[Shurdus]

Your sarcasm is not warranted or appreciated thanks. Resorting to personal attacks actually takes away from your argument believe it or not.

Civilization 5 was their most ambitious Civ yet. Strangely enough though it was only worked on for barely 3 years. That isn't even close to enough time, especially considering how they tried to fundamentally change the game.

The designers are admitting as much. Sorry you can't see that.

No one was asking for BTS. We were asking for a relatively complete game on launch which we didn't get. (Barely functioning multiplayer, horrendous AI that can't handle 1UPT for starters) Half baked describes it best. That bun needed a lot more time in the oven.

My point stands though. I placed your comments in a perspective by using sarcasm. It is not an attack on your person, since I responded merely to your statement and nothing more. If I attacked you personally I appologise, but I do not see how I attacked you.

 

[sharkles]

Fireaxis doesn't need to apologize to a bunch of spoiled, whiny "fans". The game isn't bad at all, it's just apparently some people were expecting the second coming of Christ.

That's it in a nutshell. A game's forums are where you'll find the most disappointed people, because that's where you'll find the fans who have invested the most into their hobby.

 

[Thormodr]

My point stands though. I placed your comments in a perspective by using sarcasm. It is not an attack on your person, since I responded merely to your statement and nothing more. If I attacked you personally I appologise, but I do not see how I attacked you.

No problem. Perhaps my dislike of sarcasm was the real problem.

Still don't agree with your point though. It's patently obvious that the game was released far too early. Is that the fault of Firaxis? Partly it is for being too ambitious and mostly the fault of 2k Games for looking to cash in and satisfy their shareholders.

 

[nokmirt]

No problem. Perhaps my dislike of sarcasm was the real problem.

Still don't agree with your point though. It's patently obvious that the game was released far too early. Is that the fault of Firaxis? Partly it is for being too ambitious and mostly the fault of 2k Games for looking to cash in and satisfy their shareholders.

I agree with your assessment of CiV. I bought everything all the dlcs, the maps. It just got to the point where I decided to take an extended break from the game. I did have fun in some instances, but the AI just disappointed me to no end. I hope it gets fixed soon. If they can do that the game has a lot of potential.

 

[Oneluv]

Fireaxis doesn't need to apologize to a bunch of spoiled, whiny "fans". The game isn't bad at all, it's just apparently some people were expecting the second coming of Christ.

I'm so fed up with these infintile cheap shots. This type of mean-spirited hyperbole has no place in CiVilzed conversation. And yet it persists like a disease in this forumn.

How does this level of absurd hyperbole help anything? Ugh. I was enjoying this thread!

I've reached the place where I can't decide which is worse. The way this game was delivered or what the discourse in the forumn has devolved into.

I haven't been on this sight in months, just disgusted with the evolution of games and gamers in general mostly. As illuminated by Shirk

Last week my brother called me and told me of a new patch, thought I'd check it out since I hadn't played CiV since Oct/Nov..

Which led me back to this forumn and this thread and the Dennis shirk article which i consider to be a bit of fascinating post-mortem on CiV. And then wham! For no good reason some jerk comes in and says something that is just spoiling for a fight.

Thanks Grapa for being just one more major buzz kill in a thread I was actually enjoying. Why these mean spirited comments are neccesary is beyond me.

Liking or not liking a game is what's in play here, amigo. That's all. The wonton attacks on other people, particullarly in this context illuminates your character. I don't appreciate being called "whiny" by somebody who is completly ignorant to the tone or motivtion behind my assertions.
Moderator Action: Such insults are not acceptable here.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

All I wanted to do was read an article by the game dev. And to then join in the discourse about the articles revelations.

To the threads author, Thank you for making this information avail. I love this Kinda' stuff.

I do appreciate your efforts and I applogize If my taking offense has made anyone other than Grapa un-comfortable.

 

[Grapa]

Fireaxis doesn't need to apologize to a bunch of spoiled, whiny "fans". The game isn't bad at all, it's just apparently some people were expecting the second coming of Christ.

I'm so fed up with these infintile cheap shots. This type of mean-spirited hyperbole has no place in CiVilzed conversation. And yet it persists like a disease in this forumn.

How does this level of absurd hyperbole help anything? Ugh. I was enjoying this thread!

I've reached the place where I can't decide which is worse. The way this game was delivered or what the discourse in the forumn has devolved into.

I haven't been on this sight in months, just disgusted with the evolution of games and gamers in general mostly. As illuminated by Shirk

Last week my brother called me and told me of a new patch, thought I'd check it out since I hadn't played CiV since Oct/Nov..

Which led me back to this forumn and this thread and the Dennis shirk article which i consider to be a bit of fascinating post-mortem on CiV. And then wham! For no good reason some jerk comes in and says something that is just spoiling for a fight.

Thanks Grapa for being just one more major buzz kill in a thread I was actually enjoying. Why these mean spirited comments are neccesary is beyond me.

Liking or not liking a game is what's in play here, amigo. That's all. The wonton attacks on other people, particullarly in this context illuminates your character. I don't appreciate being called "whiny" by somebody who is completly ignorant to the tone or motivtion behind my assertions.

All I wanted to do was read an article by the game dev. And to then join in the discourse about the articles revelations.

To the threads author, Thank you for making this information avail. I love this Kinda' stuff.

I do appreciate your efforts and I applogize If my taking offense has made anyone other than Grapa un-comfortable.

Grow a set of balls and stop being such a child. If you can't handle my opinion on the incessant complaining and moaning of people who are looking for flaws in a perfectly fine piece of entertainment, get off the internet. Your entire rant is filled to the brim with hypocrisy. I'm so sorry I have a different opinion than you. God forbid someone doesn't join in the orgy of useless bickering and complaining which is all that this entire thread and most of the forum has degenerated to.

If all you wanted to do was read the article by the dev, than don't bother reading the forum posts after it, where, I know, god forbid, somebody may have a different opinion than you. Now go enjoy your article my friend, hopefully nobody else will say something against popular opinion. We wouldn't want to offend anybody now would we?
Moderator Action: Such insults are not acceptable here.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Shurdus]

You guys, there is this great invention called PM's. It makes it so that you can go at it all you want without poluting this thread and the forum in particular.

Give it a go. All the cool kids do it!
Moderator Action: Don't answer to such posts, report them instead.

 

[JohnnyW]

Irony.

 

[The_J]

Moderator Action: That fight stops here now.

You guys, there is this great invention called PM's.

And as note: We're also taking insults via PM serious.

 

[gdambrauskas]

No Hailas you couldn't be more wrong.

Battles are one of few things in this game that are better than Civ 4. AI needs to be improved and a few other mentioned things, but battles can stay because they are good as they are. It's one if the reasons why I couldn't migrate back to Stack-of-doomed Civ4.

it's very simple: get a mod (ROM) and now you have unit limit per tile in civ 4. I play with 6 units per tile and never have to deal with stack of doom issue.

 

[gaiko]

Actually the March patch improvements only highlight the deficiencies of 1UPH. That's the core of the enduring design problem in the game: the AI can't handle it, and it requires punishing city growth and expansion to avoid a swqamp of units (further adding to the AIs inability).

Quote:
Originally Posted by rschissler View Post
A lot of truth to this and I don't know how it can be fixed, a serious flaw to the 1UPT concept. Of course some people will say: "So what, just deal with it, this isn't Civ IV." It's almost like the developers should start over, and work on Civ 6 instead.

Post March update, the model works much better. Tile bonuses and location directly effect type of buildings you can build inside the cities. Mints add tremendous gold, stables add a ton of extra production on cattle title, horses and elephants allow for extra happiness buildings.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Coins were usually minted close to the raw source of gold, silver or whatever. Sometimes they weren't - states have minted even though they lacked any nearby sources, and there were also "travelling mints". As far as gameplay goes, though, I reckon Firaxis made the right choice.

You could look at it this way for a realworld perspective - it's not exactly practical to transport heavy raw gold or silver a considerable distance just to press coins out of it. You're better off doing it as close to the source as possible.

That works. From a gameplay perspective, I feel it was also done to help give at least some kind of uniqueness to terrain. I definitely am motivated to settle near gold or silver, for example.

Like I said, it's always good to find both a historical and in-game reason for things, even if they're retcons.

 

[dilettante]

as posted by 4players.de website as translated by babelfish:
During Jon Shafer, the lead designer of civilization V , now with Stardock in pay and bread,

what? they're paying him in bread now?

i'm sorry... what was the topic of this thread? i can't stop laughing about the fact shafer is now paid in bread.

Ok back on topic: I guess for those who don't think that Firaxis hears the forums or that their criticisms fell on deaf ears, this is good news. They hear those criticisms very loud and very clear

especially those who were threatening to withhold pre-orders for X-paks or Civ6, that got them scared, i mean that's their yearly $$ bonus right there if you don't pre-order.

I wonder how Sid Meier feels about the criticisms of Civ5. Better question would be how would this acknowledgment of "missteps" by Firaxis be used to make Civ5 better by the Civ5 development team

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The first three things you listed there are probably not what he meant by 'core functions'. Without a good UI, functionality is limited, but it isn't non-existent, so I doubt it's the type of thing Shirk was talking about. I mean, sure, complaints about the UI are valid (although I don't think it's as bad as you do), but I'm just saying that I doubt that type of thing was what Shirk was referring to. The UI on release and to this day is functional, regardless of whether or not you think it is good.

As for being bug free, don't all games have bugs? The game running is certainly a core function, but being completely and absolutely bug free would seem rather stringent as a criterion. When Shirk said that they were trying to get the core features up and running, I would assume that that doesn't amount to a claim that it was bug-free.

Just because something does not preclude gameplay does not mean it isn't a core function. He might have chosen to define core function in some asinine/misleading way, but features that are common to every game in existence could be reasonably interpreted as "core functions". Civ V has many examples of those that don't function properly even now.

Most games have bugs. Not all games have bugs that ruin gameplay and go unpatched 6 months or more. For example, many of the bugs that existed on the commercial release date caused an actual forced cancellation of gameplay (CTD, permanent peace treaty, etc). Indeed, some fatal problems still exist:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=415

Speaking of fatal problems, how about advertised game performance not actually happening? Try playing a huge map on "recommended" specs. Try playing multiplayer with 6-8 people in a game. Actually, even with only 2 players you still frequently get "choose production" demands from cities that prevent you from ending your turn even if you already chose production there. Also not core functions? Surely not. Surely the game working in a playable fashion isn't a core function. Surely bugs that interrupt or end gameplay outright don't inhibit this mystical "core function" definition which is apparently unique to shirk now.

As for the UI being "not as bad as I think it is", I present you an issue that still existed FOUR MONTHS after release:

a) Select unit
b) Mouse over target
c) The UI displays "Ranged Attack" in big letters and shows an arc for how your unit will fire onto that hex
d) Executing said "ranged attack" causes your unit to move sideways next to an enemy unit that can now easily kill it, and not actually attack.

But remember, this "isn't so bad" and controls that actually do what they say they do is not a "core function". Obviously, units executing actions different than those ordered months after release is indicative of a FUNCTIONAL user interface.

 

[King_Course]

Moderator Action: if you cannot participate in a thread without trolling, please refrain from posting in it
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889