Full Price Beta

[Delvi]

It's normal for this kind of games: developers need to get feedback from many users in order to balance it.

I don't have much free time, so I'll wait until the game is polished and well balanced, it will take some time for sure but it's not a tragedy. The important thing is that vanilla version will be patched and balanced, when it will be so I'll buy the game (hope it will not take two years).

 

[DJ_Tanner]

They did say on the battle royal stream, that basically the game is not done. The editor/publisher/producer whoever it was seems to have set a hard deadline and then they rushed towards it for months after the announcement instead of releasing when it's done.

A culture of releasing incomplete/untweaked/unpolished games and then selling expansions to (maybe) fix that just does not make me want to spend any money or keep gaming, the impact on quality and community is enormous. Love many of the concepts and ideas of the game, but I'm not buying for now.

While they did say they are still working on it, that isn't the same as saying it isn't done. I mean, for a dev, a game is NEVER done. There is always something more to polish up or feature to add. But even in terms of what they were talking about it was not done in terms of tweaking numbers and bug squashing, not feature incomplete. The game is not lacking on any of those features. Yes there will be updates for numbers, yes there will be expansions, yes there will be QoL changes that pop up. None of that says this game is lacking at all.

Now if you don't wanna play then fine don't play it, its that simple. But to say that because deadlines exist or that games evolve over time now that makes all these 'betas' is ridiculous.

 

[Ulthwithian]

This is the most smoothly polished beta I have ever played, if indeed this is a beta.

In short: No, I don't think I paid money for a beta. Or, said another way, I would gladly pay the money I did for a beta of this quality.

 

[Dracul JOSHI]

Because it is extremely unclear why you are suggesting the game is a beta. A beta is generally characterised by bugs and stability issues, but is feature complete. What you're suggesting is that it's not feature complete. Whether you feel you're discussing technical issues or not, you've brought technical issues into the discussion.



The other thing to keep in mind is that even if you have 100 people in the beta tests, playing for a month straight, 100,000 players with a release copy with dwarf that playtime within a day of release.

You really feel this game is feature complete, as you like to define it? Well, at least one of us. I don't feel that way from a design standpoint... like... at all.
Let me give you the most basic and petty example I can think of.... oh yeah, how about naming cities? or forming a Building queu (which is realistic, it's called planning)? or Double-clicking empire yields to get into the appropriate views? (such as economic view or cultural victory view). Or playing on a map resembling earth (I know this is coming... but it's not here yet... and it can be called a 'feature' by the definition of the word)
And as I said before, the District mechanic, difficulties, Placed wonders, automatic streets, inspirations & Heurekas and Leader behaviours are mostly very interesting mechanics but feel grossly unfinished from a development standpoint.

I ain't trying to hate and as a professional in analysing complex systems and program architecture... I can provide very quick an easy solutions for a few of these, although not all of them.

The district mechanic could be implemented inside the city itself... maybe like a city planer, maybe different with attacks towards the city causing them to be damaged and destroyed, cities not automatically regenerating health and instead requiring to repair the destroyed districts and buildings to heal. giving players a real reason not to want to fight on their own turf as well as not cluttering up the map any further. Plus, they could still get boni from adjacent fields... but only up to 6, giving reason to pick carefully with the numbers being limited by population, much like trade routes in BERT.

As for difficulties... I don't know what they did... but maybe it just needs a better surrounding system to work properly.

I LOVE the placed wonders... it looks awesome... reminds me of Civ 3's city view... just better... I can also understand and agree with the tile-type requirenment. But what they need to do is to drastically increase the bonus from wonders, given that now not only do they require production, but also remove the base yield of a tile and take up space, so that you are unable to build any type of improvement there. Heck, if they really wanted, they could implement a 1.0, 1.2, 1.5 multiplier to the production cost based on the vicinity to the city that builds it on top of that.

automatic streets... okay, I simply don't understand these yet, but I liked the 'city connection' mechanic... even without trade routes. I don't like trade routes tbh.

Inspirations and Heurekas are too powerful for what they are and tying into this... China's 60% isn't significant enough from what I have played. I think both of these issues could be fixed by reducing them to 30%... which is still significant and from what I can tell from the underlying code, shouldn't be difficult to implement. It also benefits china without any change, because they will simply get double that if they fulfil the conditions, giving them a strong reason to play to fulfil these.
(plus, since China's bonus doesn't seem to trigger when a City state triggers one, how about setting City-State Heurekas/inspirations to 45%? Better than a normal one for regular players and not quite as much of a punch in the groin for China players)

As for leaders... Look... I get it... 'friendship' is not an official agreement, but I still think that Leaders should act a little like they would. A trade civ might for example make you good deals when trading or send you small gifts from time to time while a Warmonger might gift you units or come to your aid in wartime, because it gives them an excuse to replace their older troops with new ones and go to war with a civ without losing face (i.e. without a warmonger penalty)
Heck, some leaders might even congratulate them for defending somebody weaker and not just be a world-class bully.
On the other hand... people who don't like you won't care and will make it difficult for you... for like they already do.
And don't tell me that's hard to implement, because the unit-gifting mechanic is in Civ 5 for city states (and probably here too, haven't gotten well enough along with one before they were all conquered)

Anyone arguing that this had better release than CIV V or BE. Please set a huge map. On Immortal, in continents and Marathon or Epic speed. Let me know if you do not get battered by turn 25, consistently
The slow game speed affects only the Player not the AI. Hence before you get your second warrior out, the AI has 4 cities and 8 units, thinking you are weak, and they come all together knocking your doors.

That wasn't an issue with CIV 5 nor BE on release, nor affects Standard speed on Civ 6.
And everyone who says CIV 5 had release issues to post them here. Because I played it since day 1, without issues.

Thanks for the info... that might be part of my issue, since I always play marathon... which honestly, is still too fast IMHO.

what are you smoking? lol It can't be worst than civ 5 vanill.

I hope your enjoying all the attention your getting by us replying to your troll thread.

Sorry to disappoint, but I am drug-free... no smoking, drinking or other such here. Although I don't mind if people do, as long as they are aware of what they are doing... and aren't sitting right next to me.

 

[Menzies]

You really feel this game is feature complete, as you like to define it? Well, at least one of us. I don't feel that way from a design standpoint... like... at all.
Let me give you the most basic and petty example I can think of.... oh yeah, how about naming cities? or forming a Building queu (which is realistic, it's called planning)? or Double-clicking empire yields to get into the appropriate views? (such as economic view or cultural victory view). Or playing on a map resembling earth (I know this is coming... but it's not here yet... and it can be called a 'feature' by the definition of the word)
And as I said before, the District mechanic, difficulties, Placed wonders, automatic streets, inspirations & Heurekas and Leader behaviours are mostly very interesting mechanics but feel grossly unfinished from a development standpoint.

Feature complete is a standard term within programming. Considering that you yourself are the grand arbiter of the English language, I'd have assumed you'd have been familiar with it.

Was naming cities ever an advertised feature? The lack of a queue is pretty obvious as well, considering the impact of districts now.

Was an Earth map an advertised feature?

How are the features you mention unfinished? How are they any more unfinished than features from Civ IV or Civ V on release?

I ain't trying to hate and as a professional in analysing complex systems and program architecture... I can provide very quick an easy solutions for a few of these, although not all of them.

Ah yes, the appeal to authority, the silliest of common fallacies. I myself am a quantum physicist, and could offer little to help their development of future patches.

The district mechanic could be implemented inside the city itself... maybe like a city planer, maybe different with attacks towards the city causing them to be damaged and destroyed, cities not automatically regenerating health and instead requiring to repair the destroyed districts and buildings to heal. giving players a real reason not to want to fight on their own turf as well as not cluttering up the map any further. Plus, they could still get boni from adjacent fields... but only up to 6, giving reason to pick carefully with the numbers being limited by population, much like trade routes in BERT.

So... your recommendation is essentially "no districts"? The district system appears to be working as intended, and is actually a lot of fun so far. Not sure why you're picking it out for particular criticism, it comes across like the few who didn't like hexes in Civ V.

As for difficulties... I don't know what they did... but maybe it just needs a better surrounding system to work properly.

What are you referring to here?

I LOVE the placed wonders... it looks awesome... reminds me of Civ 3's city view... just better... I can also understand and agree with the tile-type requirenment. But what they need to do is to drastically increase the bonus from wonders, given that now not only do they require production, but also remove the base yield of a tile and take up space, so that you are unable to build any type of improvement there. Heck, if they really wanted, they could implement a 1.0, 1.2, 1.5 multiplier to the production cost based on the vicinity to the city that builds it on top of that.

This is a game balancing complaint, and to be honest I don't think the wonders are that badly balanced. Things change, there are good benefits with the wonders given the right choices being made. You shouldn't be clogging a city with enough wonders for the complain you have to become the key issue.

automatic streets... okay, I simply don't understand these yet, but I liked the 'city connection' mechanic... even without trade routes. I don't like trade routes tbh.

Personally this is one of my favourite changes. Roads now have some sense to them, it's a better system than the massive charges on roads. It offers some interesting choices with early trade routes as well. I'd suggest using it a bit more.

Inspirations and Heurekas are too powerful for what they are and tying into this... China's 60% isn't significant enough from what I have played. I think both of these issues could be fixed by reducing them to 30%... which is still significant and from what I can tell from the underlying code, shouldn't be difficult to implement. It also benefits china without any change, because they will simply get double that if they fulfil the conditions, giving them a strong reason to play to fulfil these.
(plus, since China's bonus doesn't seem to trigger when a City state triggers one, how about setting City-State Heurekas/inspirations to 45%? Better than a normal one for regular players and not quite as much of a punch in the groin for China players)

I'm guessing from the Heurekas that you're Finnish. Doesn't really add anything to the discussion, just curious.

Again, this is a game balance complaint. Decisions on long term game balance usually take many hundreds of thousands of hours of player data and feedback to be done properly. Such balancing will go on in time as it did with previous installments. At this time though, the eureka/inspiration mechanic appear to offer an interesting gameplay choice, and 50% doesn't seem to be too powerful so far. Haven't played with China enough to decide if it's enough of a bonus.

As for leaders... Look... I get it... 'friendship' is not an official agreement, but I still think that Leaders should act a little like they would. A trade civ might for example make you good deals when trading or send you small gifts from time to time while a Warmonger might gift you units or come to your aid in wartime, because it gives them an excuse to replace their older troops with new ones and go to war with a civ without losing face (i.e. without a warmonger penalty)
Heck, some leaders might even congratulate them for defending somebody weaker and not just be a world-class bully.
On the other hand... people who don't like you won't care and will make it difficult for you... for like they already do.
And don't tell me that's hard to implement, because the unit-gifting mechanic is in Civ 5 for city states (and probably here too, haven't gotten well enough along with one before they were all conquered)

Do you go about offering your friend AI things for free a lot then?

The diplomacy seems alright so far. I've made a few allies, and the progression seems a bit more natural than in the past.

 

[ProMeTheus112]

While they did say they are still working on it, that isn't the same as saying it isn't done.

I think they said "believe it or not the game is not finished yet" or something like that.

 

[Dracul JOSHI]

Feature complete is a standard term within programming. Considering that you yourself are the grand arbiter of the English language, I'd have assumed you'd have been familiar with it.

Was naming cities ever an advertised feature? The lack of a queue is pretty obvious as well, considering the impact of districts now.

Was an Earth map an advertised feature?

How are the features you mention unfinished? How are they any more unfinished than features from Civ IV or Civ V on release?



Ah yes, the appeal to authority, the silliest of common fallacies. I myself am a quantum physicist, and could offer little to help their development of future patches.



So... your recommendation is essentially "no districts"? The district system appears to be working as intended, and is actually a lot of fun so far. Not sure why you're picking it out for particular criticism, it comes across like the few who didn't like hexes in Civ V.



What are you referring to here?



This is a game balancing complaint, and to be honest I don't think the wonders are that badly balanced. Things change, there are good benefits with the wonders given the right choices being made. You shouldn't be clogging a city with enough wonders for the complain you have to become the key issue.



Personally this is one of my favourite changes. Roads now have some sense to them, it's a better system than the massive charges on roads. It offers some interesting choices with early trade routes as well. I'd suggest using it a bit more.



I'm guessing from the Heurekas that you're Finnish. Doesn't really add anything to the discussion, just curious.

Again, this is a game balance complaint. Decisions on long term game balance usually take many hundreds of thousands of hours of player data and feedback to be done properly. Such balancing will go on in time as it did with previous installments. At this time though, the eureka/inspiration mechanic appear to offer an interesting gameplay choice, and 50% doesn't seem to be too powerful so far. Haven't played with China enough to decide if it's enough of a bonus.



Do you go about offering your friend AI things for free a lot then?

The diplomacy seems alright so far. I've made a few allies, and the progression seems a bit more natural than in the past.

Swiss actually.

When they need it, yes!

When they tell me in Civ 5, that they are out of money, I give them money and some extra for nothing in return.
If they are suddenly at war, I first try to negotiate peace and if that doesn't work, I give them some of my spare units... which are usually 1-2 eras ahead.

Am I the only one to whom the word 'friend' has actual meaning?

 

[Menzies]

Swiss actually.

Cool.

When they need it, yes!

When they need what, there is a lot of text in what you quoted. I'm guessing this is the gifts things. Are you referring to when they ask (needed to not annoy them) or when they need it for your good (as in tactically)?

When they tell me in Civ 5, that they are out of money, I give them money and some extra for nothing in return.
If they are suddenly at war, I first try to negotiate peace and if that doesn't work, I give them some of my spare units... which are usually 1-2 eras ahead.

Fair enough. Do you do it in regular intervals without question, because that's essentially what you were suggesting above. Personally I prefer the full civs to behave like they are pretending to be a person, rather than like city states.

Friendship in game has a number of benefits in any case, most of which you just glossed over.

Am I the only one to whom the word 'friend' has actual meaning?

No, otherwise the word wouldn't be used. Words are used to convey messages between people, and are characterised by shared meanings between speakers. Unless you mean 'friend' to be something different, for example, a ham sandwich, then it is very likely that other people see the word friend as having actual meaning.

 

[LDiCesare]

I think it's not worth the full price right now.
It's missing a map editor, city renaming, a decent way of seeing that you built an improvement somewhere on the map, the ability to screen-scroll easily, the ability to zoom out and a few other UI issues.
The diplomacy is totally bugged, with civs you haven't met declaring war on you, and civs denouncing civs that have been dead for a century.
Plus I can't stand putting a leader condoning the slaughter of her people and having zero legacy for a leader.
There are also obvious abuses such as Scythia's double unit and to double one's production which should not have made it into the game.

 

[Dracul JOSHI]

Cool.



When they need what, there is a lot of text in what you quoted. I'm guessing this is the gifts things. Are you referring to when they ask (needed to not annoy them) or when they need it for your good (as in tactically)?



Fair enough. Do you do it in regular intervals without question, because that's essentially what you were suggesting above. Personally I prefer the full civs to behave like they are pretending to be a person, rather than like city states.

Friendship in game has a number of benefits in any case, most of which you just glossed over.



No, otherwise the word wouldn't be used. Words are used to convey messages between people, and are characterised by shared meanings between speakers. Unless you mean 'friend' to be something different, for example, a ham sandwich, then it is very likely that other people see the word friend as having actual meaning.

Well, depends. Early-mid game I can only give so much since I am still at major build-up, but mid-late game that changes drastically since I usually make so much money that I can't even spend most of it because I need to wait for my previously settled cities to grow before settling more. That surplus money I usually throw at city states or friendly zivilizations because they can use it.
I also improve their tiles, build roads... do stuff that can be done, you know?
The Miltiary City states gift me a lot of units... more than I can support and usually not those I want... so yes, those go straight to my allies, all the time.

 

[Dracul JOSHI]

I think it's not worth the full price right now.
It's missing a map editor, city renaming, a decent way of seeing that you built an improvement somewhere on the map, the ability to screen-scroll easily, the ability to zoom out and a few other UI issues.
The diplomacy is totally bugged, with civs you haven't met declaring war on you, and civs denouncing civs that have been dead for a century.
Plus I can't stand putting a leader condoning the slaughter of her people and having zero legacy for a leader.
There are also obvious abuses such as Scythia's double unit and to double one's production which should not have made it into the game.

yeah, scythia is an early-rusher's wet dream... probably in more ways than one.

 

[Menzies]

Well, depends. Early-mid game I can only give so much since I am still at major build-up, but mid-late game that changes drastically since I usually make so much money that I can't even spend most of it because I need to wait for my previously settled cities to grow before settling more. That surplus money I usually throw at city states or friendly zivilizations because they can use it.
I also improve their tiles, build roads... do stuff that can be done, you know?
The Miltiary City states gift me a lot of units... more than I can support and usually not those I want... so yes, those go straight to my allies, all the time.

So basically, in Civ V you gifted things when it was 1) tactically advantageous, or 2) of no consequence to you.

Why should the AI, which will always be fighting an uphill battle management wise, give you free stuff just because you're friends. You seem to be mixing what the city states did in Civ V with what you think the main civs should be doing now. Personally I don't see the value to it from either a balance, or a gameplay perspective, nor do I see how it fits into the concept of friendship either. You shouldn't have a friendship simply to get free stuff.

 

[Louis XXIV]

I said it before and I say it again... I didn't say 6 is worse, I said that which is there doesn't feel as wholesome and finished to ME.
It's an impression, nothing more.

"As" is a comparative term. Saying it doesn't feel as wholesome means that it is worse in wholesomeness. Saying it doesn't feel as finished means it is worse in completeness.

Nice attempt there, but by that logic many good games shouldn't exist... particularly those before patches were a thing for console games.

Games are far more expensive to make than they were back in the day, which is why there are different standards.

 

[MkLh]

It's essentially just as unfinished as V was. The UI is clumsy and balance is terrible.

 

[Dracul JOSHI]

So basically, in Civ V you gifted things when it was 1) tactically advantageous, or 2) of no consequence to you.

Why should the AI, which will always be fighting an uphill battle management wise, give you free stuff just because you're friends. You seem to be mixing what the city states did in Civ V with what you think the main civs should be doing now. Personally I don't see the value to it from either a balance, or a gameplay perspective, nor do I see how it fits into the concept of friendship either. You shouldn't have a friendship simply to get free stuff.

I don't, but friends do make gifts. Just about a month ago I bought a Scharnhorst Superlativ in World of Warships for a friend who has been really helpful this year and I had some money leftover.

Well, the point of giving a gift isn't to give something away you are still using or need... so what else am I supposed to 'gift'.

and Why do the City states do it? Because they like you...
A friend should like you too, you know... there really isn't much of a reason for them to not act like that except in a bigger scale... because they are civilizations.

heck, say about SPORE what you want, but they got AI behaviour in the Space Stage right, as simplistic as it was.

and it's meant for roleplaying purposes... the same reason there are actual personality-presets in the game to begin with... or historic leaders for that matter.

And those aren't the only things they could do... they could send workers to build stuff for you like automated workers... or they share their discoveries... technologies... virtues/policies... religion? There's a lot of things they can do for you that doesn't ruin them if they do it every 200 turns or so (marathon)... particularly since you can do it for them too.

heck, there could even be a system to merge religions of civs that like each other.

Would be nice to hear a thank you for a change, just for improving one of their resources... or for a technology...
Once I get the science victory, I actually gift all my technologies to my allies, after all, what do I still use them for?

 

[Menzies]

I don't, but friends do make gifts. Just about a month ago I bought a Scharnhorst Superlativ in World of Warships for a friend who has been really helpful this year and I had some money leftover.

Well, the point of giving a gift isn't to give something away you are still using or need... so what else am I supposed to 'gift'.

This is exactly the point though, you're suggesting that they start gifting you things for no reason, without much reference to where they're going to get these gifts from.

and Why do the City states do it? Because they like you...
A friend should like you too, you know... there really isn't much of a reason for them to not act like that except in a bigger scale... because they are civilizations.

Because that was the whole point of City states, it doesn't cost them anything.

heck, say about SPORE what you want, but they got AI behaviour in the Space Stage right, as simplistic as it was.

There were problems with even that, and this is a vastly more complicated game. Spore's AI wasn't that good in any case, they did little to prevent you just beelining to the centre of the galaxy.

and it's meant for roleplaying purposes... the same reason there are actual personality-presets in the game to begin with... or historic leaders for that matter.

Again, gifts have nothing to do with roleplaying. You shouldn't expect things from your friends that way. Gifts are exactly that, gifts, not expectations.

And those aren't the only things they could do... they could send workers to build stuff for you like automated workers... or they share their discoveries... technologies... virtues/policies... religion? There's a lot of things they can do for you that doesn't ruin them if they do it every 200 turns or so (marathon)... particularly since you can do it for them too.

Again, everything you're suggesting is essentially kneecapping your allies still. The current way that allies work is good.

heck, there could even be a system to merge religions of civs that like each other.

I yes, that mega realistic merger of major religions. I remember when Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism reunited in the middles ages... oh wait no, Catholicism fractured far more.

Would be nice to hear a thank you for a change, just for improving one of their resources... or for a technology...
Once I get the science victory, I actually gift all my technologies to my allies, after all, what do I still use them for?

The AI in Civ VI are quite chatty, and even neutral parties will give you a "good going" here and there.

Love the "once I've already won" there, just like the "if I have any leftover". Carefully note how you very occasionally help the AI as though it's a sick puppy, yet expect them to gift things indiscriminately, while also complaining that the AI is generally weak. Stellar stuff.

 

[Haggbart]

I played CiV 1400 hours from vanilla to BNW, and after 30 hours with Civ6 I'm confident that it's allready a much better game.

The OP might be some of the silliest statement I've read this year. To even compare this gem of a game with Civ:BE. I'm still not sure if it's supposed to be serious.

Sure there are a few bugs and some polish to be done, but I could even play a 15 hour Civ6 MP-game without any problems, two days after launch, and I still can't do that in CiV!

 

[Lord Tirian]

Yeah, Civ6 is the best Civ-launch in a decade. CiV suffered so many issues in the start and basically required G+K (plus the patches leading up to it) to be enjoyable, with the second expansion to make it fantastic. Civ:BE's launch was hellishly rough and, again, required an expansion pack to be vaguely okay (and it's still only an average 4X game).

Civ6's core game is already at the point where it feels it has the polish of the first expansion in it. The only thing that really feels "unfinished" are the UI warts (e.g. what's up with edge scrolling?) that don't take away from the really strong core of the game.

 

[qadams]

I wouldn't say it's beta, but maybe gamma. The game is a lot of fun to play, but it does feel unfinished to me, as if it needed a few more weeks of work before release. But I guess that's okay. I'm very happy to be playing, even if there are a lot of UI issues.

 

[Brianstorm]

This is the most smoothly polished beta I have ever played, if indeed this is a beta.

In short: No, I don't think I paid money for a beta. Or, said another way, I would gladly pay the money I did for a beta of this quality.

Maybe give that money to the AI so they can actually upgrade their units