Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by bite, Mar 24, 2020.
Smoke and Machines?
Will they bring Rifleman and Gatling guns back to Civ 6?
Smoke is obviously a reference to Mortal Kombat : Shao Kahn leads Outworld CONFIRMED.
Moderator Action: As instructed in the now-closed Future Updates thread, please do not toss around the word "Confirmed", even in jest, as it simply confuses visitors and causes unnecessary anxiety. -- Browd
I just hope it isn't another scenario.
Give us Portugal, Byzantium, maybe some curve balls like the Italian Empire, and Mexican Empire as well. We have two Greeks why not Italian? Give us the Cherokee especially. That and Huge TSL Earth map.
I think with the remaster craze a civ 1 remaster would be a huge hit.
A remaster of Civ 4 would be a bigger hit.
A "Pirates!" remaster that you play on the rando generated civ maps
Yeah, clearly FXS/2K's old-school marketing methods, you don't announce until you have a date, etc. are at play here. But man, those are feeling antiquated in 2020. Even Creative Assembly seems to give a road map for their Total War expansions (from what I can tell), and Paradox obviously does too (though I wouldn't want FXS to adopt the Paradox expansion model).
FXS/2K really need to rethink their communication strategies. Obviously they'll never be as open and transparent as an indie studio, which is understandable, but their current strategy is more tuned to 2005 than 2020.
And yes, we could all use a distraction right now...
Remasters of other games wouldnt be depots of Civ6 though
A remake of Civ 2 where the advisors are as fleshed out as FE: 3 Houses's characters.
oh definitely, i just want a new Pirates
Did anyone notice they just announced a port for XCOM 2 to Nintendo Switch?
Yes. And I am hype.
Smoke from Amazon burning.
Oh yes, it's possible that an expack was delayed and/or broken up because something else wasn't workings. Like, for instance, they weren't able to "theme" the civs and mechanics as well as in R&F and GS. Or new mechanics were tripping over the existing bulk of mechanics. But pandemic mechanic is, to my mind, at least as likely a reason.
And yet, weren't there a few bugs revealed post Fall patch that we absolutely would have expected a Winter patch to fix like the pantheon glitch? (I don't know if this indeed was fixed, I've been busy with other things the past few months).
This isn't Grindr dude. It is possible that the poll results influenced a decision to break up the expansion pack into DLC. But if I recall correctly, none of the questions in the poll even gave players the option to vote for a full expansion pack. Which to my mind means that, either:
1. The poll was intended to gauge interest in DLC after the intended release of expack 3.
2. They had already made up their mind not to release expack 3, and were floating what their options were to redistribute that content.
So if your hypothesis regarding the poll is true, I don't think the survey would have been a reason to change their distribution schedule so much as a symptom that they were already going to. Which I think it what you meant.
True, getting more buy-in, a larger playerbase, and allowing players to save up could also be part of a strategy to wait on more content. Although the question is still begged why they had so much engagement and goodwill-building for about six months and then suddenly went quiet. I was prepared for them to keep releasing quarterly content indefinitely on effectively this basis, but it didn't happen.
Yeah I think if nothing else there are practical considerations, and it is many media releases, including games, and possibly including Civ, are being pushed back until the market recovers. Although we would also need to consider the gamification of this and whether a race to be the first to release might also occur; to get the last of consumers' expendable income before they really start pinching pennies. And, given how many of the gamer markets are in self-quarantine mode, this would also likely be a great time to release more content, providing it was at a good price point. Civ is, hour-per-cent, one of the best values on the market outside of MMOs and worldbuilders without monthly subscription fees. So it's hard making any hard speculation on this particular issue.
It really depends on how much needed to be reworked, how long that would take, and whether they could fill in that time with things to keep players engaged. I agree that at this point it seems unlikely those factors balance in favor of an expansion re-tool.
HOWEVER, I observed in the previous thread that it's possible that they might be planning an even bigger blowout expansion. 10-12 civs, more alternate leaders, alternate game modes. The bigger the expansion becomes, the more leeway they could probably get for delays without player engagement and still make sales quotas. Again, unlikely (and again the question of a price point comes up), but still within the realm of possibility.
I think economics, corporations, and future tech are quite likely. I think ideology is a bit of a pipe dream since much of it was lumped into government and policy cards (which I think was a lot more elegant than trying to carve a new space for something which overlaps so much with religion/politics, which are de facto strong ideologies).
Pandemics would also be a late game mechanic, though. Yeah you could have plague in the mid-game, but pandemics are very much a modern issue as well. Most of the relevant medical research was industrial era and later, medical campuses are a fairly modern feature. And if you've ever played the board game Pandemic, it's quite clearly a modern problem. I just don't really see the devs adding a "plague" mechanic without adding late game content as well.
I think we are on the same page here. I'm almost wondering if they had some internal problems, which would explain why marketing practically disappeared from the face of the planet.
Does anyone know/remember what the questions and choices on that 2K Games poll were like?
I remember it included new leaders, civs, mechanics, scenarios and maps. And various prices.
Yas get them homophone callouts gurl
I'm leaning toward the idea that they are going to release a couple DLCs. I wouldn't be surprised if they offer a season pass like was mentioned on the previous thread months ago. I'm sorry but outside of additional civs I can't really think of any mechanics that warrant an entire expansion. I think they can do system overhauls and deepen the experience by releasing Civ and feature packs. For example, a lot of people have clamored for some type of health mechanic.. why not release one civ with an update that overhauls housing to better account for and introduce a health like mechanic?
I've enjoyed Civilization 6 thus far but I do have quite a few gripes with it. For one, they have a plethora of systems but many of them feel quite shallow. I'd pay for an "expansion" if it was nothing but overhauls to deepen the experience. I don't want something as detailed or deep as paradox games but a lot of the systems are pretty shallow (housing being one of them). On top of that, in my opinion, a lot of the things that have been proposed seem like needless district or management-bloat in general. If they were to add a health district for example... that just seems like bloat to me. You have sewers, aqueducts etc in the game that serve little purpose in the meta that could be retooled.
I also REALLY hope they don't do anymore "future tech" and ultra end-game changes. I've played 500 hours since GS released (2000 hours in 6, 1300 in 5) in both single and multiplayer and have yet to see GDRs en-masse or even adoption of the furthest future governments. The games just don't last that long and everyone knows the most exciting part of the game ends once the Renaissance hits for the most part. They have repeatedly tried to address this by adding features in the end-game and frankly, it doesn't really do anything. At least not in its current iteration. I'd rather they just add more fun things to the mid or early game. I think a nomadic civ ALA Maori on land would be awesome.
I have several gripes as I mentioned, one being I really dislike how "board gamey" 6 feels compared to earlier iterations. I'd like to see some more immersion. My second major gripe is that they implement exciting ideas poorly and in very watered down formats. Weather/Natural disasters - great idea but in practice it has marginal effect on game play. I think they were afraid to really implement destructive weather. Global warming can feel damaging particularly if your cities end up submerged though. I feel the same way about the age system. I'd like to see dark ages be easier to avoid but be actually punishing. Loyalty is an excellent mechanic but can we tie it to culture output in some way? Can tiles have cultural values like in Civ 4? I'd like loyalty to have a bigger impact and be more interesting to manage.
Personally, I think they should re-tool governors and introduce the concept of regions to the game. Players designate regions and they can be composed of as few as two cities or as many as five (arbitrary numbers). Governors can be assigned to these regions to provide loyalty boosts, perhaps increased income (tax collection) and they could re balance the governor traits to apply region wide. The other side effect of this? individual cities can still rebel but there are risks regions rebel all at once and here they could introduce civil wars or mass domestic unrest in some form.
Lastly, I'd like to see random events. I'm not talking about "a great fire burns in Rome, population decreased by 4" but i'm talking about immersive pop ups that you choose how you respond to such as "a band of insurgents have agitated for Rome to declare independence from Macedonia, how will you respond? then you'd be prompted with a number of options with both positive and negative consequences. This will give it an element of risk/reward game play similar to settling near volcanoes that I do think is a fun concept. I'd like these to be fairly immersive even if they are random.
Lastly, a small request.. make the declaration and ending of all wars appear on the timeline. They don't need to add or deduct any era score but the original intent of the timeline feature was to increase immersion and tell your story. As of right now, it does not accomplish that in my mind. It serves little purpose beyond game play function. I'd also like to be able to edit and add our own events to the timeline but i imagine this could be a mod some day.
Here's a dream expansion, discluding leaders and civs because of course you would add some:
> Sports. A game system where you can create professional sports and teams in those sports to win games between cities and civs. These games would have a certain impact
> Ethnicity (it'll never happen, but having trade, religion, and loyalty tied to how you govern diverse peoples that live in your cities, including slavery and genocide as great evils as well as multiculturalism and shared heritage identity as great goods), tying into a...
> New Event system where you make important decisions about how to manage your people(s) but these are implemented in a sort of card system that works like a deck-building game where your choices become "history cards" that can come up later to give you great bonuses and also bad bonuses. I.e., it's now 2015 and the "Enslave minorities" card came back up during a World Council session and now you're in biiiiiiig trouble. Or a glorious thing you did in the past comes up and you are showered with respect and diplo favor by your peers. Unless of course the World Council is all full of evil warmongers who penalize you because you are a multicultural nation.
> New "Wealth" system (You know how Tourism in Civ V was like "advanced lategame culture"? think of this as "advanced lategame gold") where players control the flow of resources to attempt to control more of the wealth pie and with it control business around the world. Live your OPEC fantasies. Shut off the taps. That sort of thing.
> New "Information" system. Like "Wealth" this is "advanced lategame Science". In this system, using spies you fight to control more of everyone's data. The more you have, the more you can fake it to your opponents and influence their elections choices.
> Corporations that work to broker Wealth and Information.
> World War "Ideology" or "Axis" system: A system where nations are mapped out on a web of various different stances. Nations with similar stances create "blocks". If two "blocks" are too far apart, this may trigger emergencies where instead of having to choose whether to fight one civ you have to choose whether to fight entire blocks. The aforementioned History Cards are important here, too, since they will push you towards ideologies based on your previous events. You can lead your nation in directions that you history does not indicate, of course (nations CAN change!), but it will be a challenge.
> Proxy war elements coming from the above. Give nations weapons in exchange for their allegiance to a stance! Fill the world council with capitalists, or atheists, or iconoclasts in exchange for guns!
> Finally, for the late late super future fans: Colonise the oceans, and Mars.
Boy I realized that this would be a super cynical and dark expansion. Oops.
And the Deep Sea and Mars on top! That would be one big expansion.
I remember those questions. Basically, trying to gauge the interest in $5 wonder/scenario packs or $20 DLC/civs or $40 full expansions. Other questions were regarding how often we would like new content... From small updates quite regularly, or more bigger stuff with longer time between them.
They also asked what types of other video games we played and why. Whether we are into story-driven RPGs, or FPS, puzzle games, etc.
Separate names with a comma.