nzcamel
Nahtanoj the Magnificent
Didn't they patch this bug?
Firaxis at 30, I'm celebrating 15 on civfanatics – final thoughts on Civ6 and the future
- Thread starter Bibor
- Start date
Linklite
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,717
If they did, it was recently. That thread was from June, and according to this wiki, the last update was April - https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/Updates_(Civ6)
If it's the case that there was one released recently that's slipped past me (quite possible if they did release one) and the wiki just hasn't been updated, then I'm happy to retract that part of my statement, or at least modify it. However, usually new updates usually have news articles come up on my phone, articles come up on my phone, people on here asking about it, etc, since none of that has happened, I don't think it has.
To be honest, I've given up at this point. When the XPs came out on the Switch, they substantially messed up the graphics, and despite it being years now, they haven't bothered fixing it. They also screwed up the UI, making it impossible to assign governors properly on the big screen(!), on top of a heap of annoying but not gamebreaking issues. It's been years now, so I don't believe that it will be fixed, nor can I trust Firaxis or Aspyr at this point.
If it's the case that there was one released recently that's slipped past me (quite possible if they did release one) and the wiki just hasn't been updated, then I'm happy to retract that part of my statement, or at least modify it. However, usually new updates usually have news articles come up on my phone, articles come up on my phone, people on here asking about it, etc, since none of that has happened, I don't think it has.
To be honest, I've given up at this point. When the XPs came out on the Switch, they substantially messed up the graphics, and despite it being years now, they haven't bothered fixing it. They also screwed up the UI, making it impossible to assign governors properly on the big screen(!), on top of a heap of annoying but not gamebreaking issues. It's been years now, so I don't believe that it will be fixed, nor can I trust Firaxis or Aspyr at this point.
nzcamel
Nahtanoj the Magnificent
No, you'll be correct then that they haven't AFAIK.
How I wish we could tinker with the support files on iPads and other platforms. I’d eliminate apostles and missionaries entirely.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
I think the main disagreement is about what Civ should really be – a game or a platform.
If it's a game, I rest my case. If it's a platform, well now I'm getting interested.
But why not have both?
Sim City 4 was a platform, So was Civ 4 in a sense. Civ 4 perhaps not so much in the game itself, but rather around it. You can't really put a price tag on Sim City 4, not with dozens, perhaps hundreds of DVDs full of buildings designed by architects and amateurs alike. Wasn't done by Maxis. But the game allowed for it. That's a platform.
The problem with platforms is that you can't sell them for an one-off amount. Or, if you do, you have to up the price. Or you got the way of Maxis. Interestingly, there are examples where people realize this, stuff like MMOs.
What I propose is to have two civs: Civ7 and Civ7 PRO.
One would be a game, the other a platform. With modding, SDK, graphs and the like. Nobody would really care if Civ7 PRO would cost $400, or a 10$ monthly sub, as long as the base game is 50. And I'd gladly pay. Really. If nothing else, to show my respect for someone who is offering me something I want.
What I don't want from 7 is yet-another-game. Worked on and milked until it's more cost-effective to release 8.
Even Civ6 would be a perfectly viable platform. There are enough mechanics already in-game (and the graphics will be adequate for a long, long time) to prolong the lifespan of the game for 5 years or more. It COULD be a platform IF Firaxis would want it to be.
Starcraft I & II are also perfect examples of platforms. Blizzard in general can thank its lucrative business for not making one-off games. Well, at least historically anyway. Talking about SC2... you want better AI? It can ONLY be built for a platform, like Google did for Starcraft II (well, not available for general public, but still).
If it's a game, I rest my case. If it's a platform, well now I'm getting interested.
But why not have both?
Sim City 4 was a platform, So was Civ 4 in a sense. Civ 4 perhaps not so much in the game itself, but rather around it. You can't really put a price tag on Sim City 4, not with dozens, perhaps hundreds of DVDs full of buildings designed by architects and amateurs alike. Wasn't done by Maxis. But the game allowed for it. That's a platform.
The problem with platforms is that you can't sell them for an one-off amount. Or, if you do, you have to up the price. Or you got the way of Maxis. Interestingly, there are examples where people realize this, stuff like MMOs.
What I propose is to have two civs: Civ7 and Civ7 PRO.
One would be a game, the other a platform. With modding, SDK, graphs and the like. Nobody would really care if Civ7 PRO would cost $400, or a 10$ monthly sub, as long as the base game is 50. And I'd gladly pay. Really. If nothing else, to show my respect for someone who is offering me something I want.
What I don't want from 7 is yet-another-game. Worked on and milked until it's more cost-effective to release 8.
Even Civ6 would be a perfectly viable platform. There are enough mechanics already in-game (and the graphics will be adequate for a long, long time) to prolong the lifespan of the game for 5 years or more. It COULD be a platform IF Firaxis would want it to be.
Starcraft I & II are also perfect examples of platforms. Blizzard in general can thank its lucrative business for not making one-off games. Well, at least historically anyway. Talking about SC2... you want better AI? It can ONLY be built for a platform, like Google did for Starcraft II (well, not available for general public, but still).
Last edited:
I'm not commenting on the specifics of Firaxis here, but there was a good Twitter thread recently by a dev I've followed for a long time (Raphael von Lierop, he's the head guy behind The Long Dark, a survival game, and before that he worked at Relic on some RTS games I'm very fond of). It starts off talking about a hot take on social media (as most things do), but it near the end drills down into costs for difference pieces of content. These kinds of things add up, fast. I'll quote the last relevant Tweet, just for emphasis:
Don't get me wrong, $575 million is a lot of money. But that's over five years (or so), across the base game, two expansions and a the staggered mini-releases of the Frontier Pass. Not all of that money gets fed back into Firaxis, because it's 2K calling the shots. I don't really want to get into that side of things - the point I wanted to emphasise is that folks outside the industry regularly severely understand the cost of putting a game together (as well as supporting it post-release).
Similar threads
