Firaxis; who do you actually make a Civilization games for?

[lindsay40k]

What is Civ Rev II?

Mobile shovelware dragging the franchise's name in the mud.

https://www.civilization.com/en/games/civilization-revolution-2/

 

[Browd]

Moderator Action: This is turning into a bit of a rants thread, without much productive discussion (particularly about Civ V, rather than other titles). We could just merge this thread with the rants thread, but, frankly, would prefer to see the discussion become more constructive, so please post in that spirit and let's hope that the focus and quality of this thread improves. Many thanks.

 

[beetle]

I think Firaxis makes games for me. For the most part, I liked III more than II (but played it less), and I liked IV more than III. I definitely like V more than IV and have gotten more play out of it than any other title than maybe SMACX.

But Firaxis was very clever this time around and offers a version that I would think is appealing to people new to the series. I think III and IV would be intimidating in ways that V is not. And V is so pretty!

And then the V expansions add enough to keep the grognards engaged. It is a very good game. I am just glad I waited to try it until GnK was released!

 

[Chum]

What is Civ Rev II?

More importantly, why are we discussing it in the Civ 5 forum? It's existence does not degrade the quality of Civ 5, and I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess the people developing a mobile game aren't the same people developing a PC game.

This really is just an odd thread full of unsubstantiated claims and topics not really conducive to this particular forum, so I'm really confused by the fervor with which some people hate a 6 year old game. You can still play Civ 5 Vanilla. You can still play Civ 5 GnK. It's not like the game wasn't "finished" in either iteration. They were nice enough to fix the overflow bug once it was discovered a year and a half ago. I don't really see where this unfinished and unsupported stuff is coming from.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Civ 5 is fine.

What's your beef with it? Its been a top game on steam for over 5 years. I don't think your opinion of its quality is widely accepted.

Popularity has never, ever, been a indicator for quality. Unless you think McDonalds is the epitome of high cuisine and Justin Bieber a musical prodigy, in which case I'm not sure what to say.

Taking the quality of vanilla Civilization into a consideration, I take it that their target audience is not the old fanbase but some young newbies, children.

My concern is that Firaxis wants to make milions of dollars just because the game is named Civilization. That they want to sell a few ideas that do not necessarily work as intended to. They sell a poor quality game; they never fix it and abondon it after 3 years (Paradox still supports CK2, new DLCs, patches etc.) because they think "kids" will be happy with it. This is their target audience, which is less demanding etc. They can, however, destroy this franchise in the future - just as UBI destroyed a HOMM series, for instance. I think Firaxis should be punished for what they did to Civ 5.

I mean, they cannot expect that a community of modders will fix their game. Modders modify a game, not fix them. Otherwise, this is a terrible mentality.

This is a milions of dollars income to Firaxis. Why do some gamers even approve it, not to mention support it? Before they can earn milions of dollars, they should provide a quality first. Unfortunately, other BIG companies do the same - take advantage of gamers. Expectations and demands are constantly rising among gamers; and they should not only be aware of that, but also they should be able to satisfy them/us, at least in the respect of quality and challenge.

I very much agree that Civ V clearly had money over quality in mind. Not only the lack of support shows this, also the continuous release of heavily overpriced DLC material.

I however don't at all think that Civ V is a bad game. A bad game is a badly designed game, at least to me. Civ V is a badly balanced game, that's for sure, but there's ways to fix that.

I, too, think that it's a shame that modders essentially had to do the balancing and that even now the AI still plays very poor, even on the highest difficulty setting, but those are just things you have to come to terms with.

Hardcore gamers are not the target group anymore, casual gamers are. There is nothing wrong with that. Firaxis is trying to maximize their profit, something every company strives to accomplish.

I don't want this to be an anticapitalist rant so I'll stop myself right here. Just be aware that in a system like this companies are more or less forced to act this way.

There is, after all, a reason why games like Call of Duty and Assasins Creed sell so much, even though every remake is just a slightly modified older version. That reason definitely isn't quality.

People don't really care for quality games anymore, they care for entertainment. So that is what we are supplied with. The demographic of "people that play video games" has changed heavily and the games have adapted.

To be honest I don't see much of a bright future for video games. There is infinite untapped potential, but no big company takes any kind of risk. At all.

This is no problem for me though - I would much rather play Morrowind for the 5th time than get to terms with Skyrim, which bored me after about 20 hours of play. I would much rather play Age of Empires 2 in a competitive setting, or Starcraft, or Age of Mythology, than any new RTS with flashy graphics. Those games are so good they just don't get old for me. Maybe I'm the one getting old, who knows?

 

[darko82]

Guys, Civ 5 is a good enough game now, especially thanks to the community. Yes, Firaxis should still support the game (like Paradox) because it is not finished - left with bugs etc. If Paradox games can, why Firaxis can't? They could develop and improve it while releasing new DLCs to make more money for its development. This is what Paradox does. The patches are free, however; dlcs are optional.

I think they made the game for young audience because of the graphics, and the fact they do simplify some systems or sub systems in the game, for instance, the espionage etc. I prefer more serious graphics, like in CK2 or even further than that. Some 3D models look so childish and colorful, eh.

As I said, the major and the most important thing in a strategy game like this is the AI. And this was a big disappointment because the vanilla AI cannot really handle the game mechanics. If Firaxis cannot handle the AI they made; if they abandon it, then they do not take the game seriously enough. Come on, it's like... "we are satisfied with the sales; now it's time to go to the next project" I mean, they should care not only about the sales, but especially about the quality. They should care about making something extraordinary, something unique, revolutionary and keep perfecting it for a long time.

 

[Browd]

Paradox? Really? They issue patches only when they are working on DLCs. Yes, each DLC comes with free patch content, but once they stop working on DLCs support ends. Just ask those playing Vicky 2 and HOI 3, both of which have unpatched bugs galore. And if a patch breaks prior DLC content, they exhibit little sense of urgency about fixing it.

Don't get me wrong -- I very much enjoy Paradox games (which remain very playable even with bugs and frequent crashes), but don't have an illusion that they are paragons of how the industry should work.

 

[darko82]

Paradox? Really? They issue patches only when they are working on DLCs. Yes, each DLC comes with free patch content, but once they stop working on DLCs support ends. Just ask those playing Vicky 2 and HOI 3, both of which have unpatched bugs galore. And if a patch breaks prior DLC content, they exhibit little sense of urgency about fixing it.

Don't get me wrong -- I very much enjoy Paradox games (which remain very playable even with bugs and frequent crashes), but don't have an illusion that they are paragons of how the industry should work.

Paid DLCs are a way of expanding and perfecting the game; they need the income to perfect, expand the game at the same time. I think it is a fair compromise - unless the DLCs are too expensive, which is often the case. However, after a while sales solve the cost issues.

Firaxis gives the DLL source code to the community --- which is a must (it is a HUGE thing) --- and that is how things work nowdays. Paradox has also a modding community, though.

 

[Browd]

Agree. Not being critical. Just emphasizing that expecting indefinite support is unrealistic. Support while they are actively working on DLCs, yes. Support once they've moved on to other priorities, nope.

 

[darko82]

Agree. Not being critical. Just emphasizing that expecting indefinite support is unrealistic. Support while they are actively working on DLCs, yes. Support once they've moved on to other priorities, nope.

Yes, but if it is evident that the game still needs polishing or improving, they should not move to the next project; that is the point. If the community gives feedback, if something does not work as supposed to, they should not abandon the game like that and move to the next project just because the game (trademark) sold well enough. That is my opinion.

 

[Aea]

Yes, but if it is evident that the game still needs polishing or improving, they should not move to the next project; that is the point. If the community gives feedback, if something does not work as supposed to, they should not abandon the game like that and move to the next project just because the game (trademark) sold well enough. That is my opinion.

The whole industry works like this, no recurring revenue stream = minimal on-going polishing and improving.

Can you really blame Firaxis for this? The core game is super stable and super popular.

 

[darko82]

The whole industry works like this, no recurring revenue stream = minimal on-going polishing and improving.

Can you really blame Firaxis for this? The core game is super stable and super popular.

I hope that their policies change. If they decide to move to the next project, the next project should already contain things like religion or espionage (most things from the expansions) in the vanilla Civilization VI. I cannot imagine that they will add religion or spies in Civ VI expansions again. That would be really ridiculous and predictable.

They should take into account during the development that:

- the gaming industry is evolving
- many gamers are not children anymore
- the expectations are higher and higher just as the income they have made.

This franchise is old enough (not only popular), which means, they might pose a question, who they make this game for?

I think they should make one solid game supported (paid addons) for years rather than release another "unfinished" product.

Anyways, now thanks to the community and CP and other great mods, this game has become really the best.

 

[Chum]

So by your assessment, Vanilla was unfinished because it didn't contain religion and spies?

So, they think of new ideas for the game after the game is finished, and that immediately makes the game unfinished?

What if I come up with some new ideas for BNW, does that now make BNW unfinished?

You're moving the bar here, and doing it with the benefit of hindsight. This is the most ridiculous argument I've ever seen.

 

[jekke]

Exactly. IMO, what lead to Civ5 having an initial reaction of "questionable" was that people were comparing Civ5 "hot off the presses" edition to Civ4 at the time, which had had two expansions, limitless mods, and numerous patches to address it's "hot off the presses" issues.

Additionally, if the Civ5 developers were as vane as the OP suggests, they would not approach the game as they did. With the series as successful as it has been, it would have been much easier and INCREDIBLY safer to just do what EA sports does with their games: take civ4, update/upgrade the graphics, add another unit or two, tweak performance issues, and call it Civ5. Instead, they completely changed the engine, as well as serious gameplay tweaks like hex grids, 1UPT, nixed civics for social policies, overhauled religion... they elected to make a new game instead of updating a previous game all the while aware that the new changes may not be accepted by some gamers - they acknowledge they may lose some of their audience as that's the cost of making the best game that they can.

I think ShakaKhan nailed it. This is exactly the problem.
Civ IV was a very good game with all its patches, expansions and yes, mods. Civ IV had an enormous potential for modding. Now Firaxis says we need a new Civ. Was it so difficult to keep all the good stuff from Civ IV? Was it so difficult to have Civ IV with hex maps? Was it so difficult to change the stacks system to 1UPT one? Was it so difficult to leave the modding opportunities open and even make them more transparent (I remember in the beginning, people hardly knew how to change years count in Civ V)? Was it really so difficult to keep the research/culture/gold slider and not to make every stupid peasant or miner contribute to your science output?

No it was not. But then, many people would say "ah, that's just another Civ IV, we don't really have to buy it". If you want to make better games, you base your new one on a successful old one. However, if you want to make as much money as possible, you'd rather make a new game from scratch and sell it as a "completely new" Civilization.

This is what separates games like Civilization from games like NHL94 or Madden NFL 2013. It's why over the course of 25 years they've only released 6 titles (plus XPs) whereas EA has had 3 times as many titles in 1/2 the amount of time... in football alone, and then include hockey, basketball, baseball, soccer, FRICKIN' GOLF! If you want to troll about corporate greed in the video game industry, there's a lot of better targets than the Civilization developers.

I know what you mean here. However, I also know for sure that FIFA 16 is better than 13, and that one is better than FIFA 09, and that one is better than FIFA 05 etc. That's not true for Civilizations.

All in all, of course we all realize it's all about money and the company has every right to maximize its income. However, that should not stop us from mocking them for it.

 

[Tatran]

So, they think of new ideas for the game after the game is finished, and that immediately makes the game unfinished?

The art work for espionage must have been done during the vanilla period.
So, spies were deliberatly omitted from civ5 vanilla (and G&K?).

Also, civ4 vanilla only had some technical problems (crashes) in the beginning.
Almost no (or zero) gameplay was changed in civ4 vanilla.

 

[docbud]

Popularity has never, ever, been a indicator for quality. Unless you think McDonalds is the epitome of high cuisine and Justin Bieber a musical prodigy, in which case I'm not sure what to say.

No one goes to McDonalds expecting it to be high-cuisine. So far as Bieber--he's hardly what I (or most people) would say is a favorite musician (or a prodigy). Maybe the 10-12 year old girls, but that's about it.

Additionally, popularity can, indeed, be an indicator of quality. Look at some of the most popular cars out there. The very popular models are good quality. And how about very popular movies? Usually good quality and well-made.

 

[ShakaKhan]

I know what you mean here. However, I also know for sure that FIFA 16 is better than 13, and that one is better than FIFA 09, and that one is better than FIFA 05 etc. That's not true for Civilizations.

Yes, but using the same logic that's present in the rest of this thread, that would imply that everything from "John Madden Football" (1988) to "Madden '94" to "Madden NFL 15" are all "incomplete games." a total of 33 incomplete games, and next year we'll include Madden NFL 16 to that list. If they waited until the finished product, we'd have been waiting 26 years for the game.

When they think they have a finished product, they release it. The cost has to be what it is because some jerks ruin it for the rest of us by pirating. If you don't feel the product is complete, don't buy it, wait for the XP's and bundle packs and get more for your dollar. Or just keep playing last year's edition; everything from Civ3 on I've found to have nearly limitless replayability - didn't someone a few years ago post a single game of Civ2 that they spent about 15 years completing?

 

[darko82]

So by your assessment, Vanilla was unfinished because it didn't contain religion and spies?

So, they think of new ideas for the game after the game is finished, and that immediately makes the game unfinished?

What if I come up with some new ideas for BNW, does that now make BNW unfinished?

You're moving the bar here, and doing it with the benefit of hindsight. This is the most ridiculous argument I've ever seen.

No, the point is religion and espionage was already introduced in Civ 4 expansions, which they already did exactly the same in Civ 5. Thus, these are NOT new ideas. You are mistaken or ignorant of what I'm saying. Forgive you, though. I mean, this game has a lot more potential. It is so "unlimited".

It is also unfinished because of the numerous bugs and poor AI, which is not capable of copying with the mechanics that they implemented themselves. Funny they abandoned this game.

I just feel they should follow the path/policies of Paradox games (like CK etc.). Why to create XXX buggy, unfinished games of this franchise? Create one in a 5/10 years time but perfect and so huge that the next vanilla installment will feel very, very poor compared to it...

 

[Breezin]

Taking the quality of vanilla Civilization into a consideration, I take it that their target audience is not the old fanbase but some young newbies, children.

I thought Civ V was great and it still occupies my time 5 years on. If it wasn't for the weak diplomacy it would be the definitive version of the series. Right now IV and V both compete for that title in my view.

I do disagree that it was made for newbies/children. Some say it was dumbed down but I just think it was different which is good.

 

[Autocrat777]

I like civ5>civ4. I think it would have been hard to justify simply putting out another civ4 and calling it civ5. Firaxis had to mix it up a bit and try new things to keep the series relevant. It won't please everybody, but I don't have an issue with the direction they went in for civ5.