Discussion in 'CivBE - General Discussions' started by Qbix, Dec 21, 2014.
Companies can't be compared with other companies because they're other companies. Got it.
Dodging all questions, barring the ones you can mock. Okay.
For the sake of clarification, you can't compare companies as if they were the same, because they're not the same. You can compare them if you bear in mind and recognise their differences, which is virtually-impossible barring public data on both revenue and employee count.
So Firaxis are too small and poor to do a good job with patching, and we shouldn't hold that against them because they're trying really hard?
Folks, before you start bashing each other's head in - let us rather get back to the original issue of the thread.
Because there is another thing that really baffled me about CIV:BE: The focus.
On the one hand we have detailed animations for all units that are beautiful to look at, but after three games you turn them off because they take up way too much turn time.
On the other hand we have stuff like two voiced lines per leader in the diplo menu, no diplo menu backgrounds, a single voice actor for all tech quotes and that stuff.
I feel really sad that I will never get any insight in the CIV:BE production process. So many questions regarding the design that will never get answered.
Because sometimes I get the feeling that one main design paradigm was style over substance. Make it look shiny and they buy it. Is it true? Proabably not, but I will never get their train of thought. And I wonder: What were actual design choises and what was done to lower production cost or because they lacked workhours?
So many reports...
So many questions...
Not what I said either. But it's okay, you haven't read a single thing I've posted from the start. Just leave me alone, please.
I tend to keep on combat animations, personally (even in CiV, though I think the animations in BE are even better). Movement animations are always the first to go (in any game that gives me the option ).
Voice acting is an expensive process (that also takes up a lot of HDD space. Shadow of Mordor has a good ten GB of audio or something daft). It's also often contracted out to third-party talent (i.e. voice talent isn't always in-house), whom are managed by unions. It gets pretty complicated, quickly.
A lot of the design work on the UI looks like Firaxis wanted it clean, without backgrounds. Maybe it's intentional, or maybe they just ran out of time with regards to their art team. Who knows?
One of the things I found weird was that the ingame diplomacy for the leaders is so bare-bones, with repeated lines all over the place. Meanwhile, the marketing team were churning out pages of interviews with the leaders with all sorts of backstory and character.
But somehow that pretty much never made it to the actual game.
Heh, new mod project for someone.
Go through all the leader background fluff and copy/paste/edit text into the diplomacy screens.
"I know you don't like me... and that's fine because I'm used to it, but you will respect me!"
Open Borders <--> Open Borders
I'm not certain it can actually be modded in - I think the leader diplomacy lines (aside from a couple like their initial greeting) are actually determined by their affinity, so there's no difference in what Harmony 13 Hutama says compared to Harmony 13 Koslov.
Check these pictures of the leaders at max affinity out - they're all sharing their dialogue.
My pet peeve with Firaxis patching isnt that is slow. Its that while being slow it also broke some things like quest system.
So now I need to wait even more for another patch to come slowly in order to have features that worked at release to work again.
Thars a lot of waiting time.
IMO, if you break something in patch, fix it asap with the hotfix. Do not force custumers to wait for another 1-2 months in order for advertized feature to work correctly.
Keep larger patches for enhancements and balancing.
Yep. Health is largely fixed. They can still improve things but we can mark that one off as not a problem when it was the biggest problem before.
SMAC was rated appropriately when it came out but now it's overrated. Tried it again a few months ago. Bland resources, ineffective expansion balance, ugly terrain. After four more civ games I can't accept a game without these improvements.
ugly terrain? wat? you mean even uglier than in civ:be?
you will be surprised, but Half-Life does not support DirectX 11
After four civ games a retarted AI, "going through the motions" gameplay, lack of interesting choices is unacceptable. civ:be is plain boring and sincerely unfun.
Ugly is ugly. DirectX versions don't correlate to the perceived beauty of a game.
I got Alpha Centauri as soon as it was released, and even then the graphics were a weak point. It's not just ugly by today's standards, it was ugly by 1999 standards. I remember thinking that they should have kept it 2D and that Starcraft and Master of Orion 2 looked much better.
It is described anywhere you look as the "spiritual successor". Even if the devs can't say it, everyone knows it.
pretty much my feelings on it.
BE just, feels empty. I don't know how to explain it better than you did.
The technical problems can be sorted out, the core gameplay can be improved..
but, i am saddened by the thought that it will likely always be a soulless, empty experience.
I recall hearing those words "spiritual successor" by someone at Firaxis as well. I don't have a problem with them saying that as I suppose it really is the successor to SMAC.
Unfortunately, saying this did set the expectations very high and there was no way BE was going to live up to them.
Just to add another point with games BE has to compete with, don't forget about Gal Civ III. It is probably the game that will most seriously challenge BE for the 4x space genre crown.
Of the games I've played, I'd probably put Endless Space at the top of recent 4x space games but I am looking forward to Gal Civ III.
I agree with the op. The game, for many reasons, is bad, poorly thought out, poorly implemented. I'm amazed the shills haven't gotten this thread locked yet. I expressed my disdain on 8 other gaming sites in the last 24 hours with scathing reviews and I've been warning my friends not to bother with it, even on the free weekend.
Moderator Action: Calling those who disagree with you "shills" is trolling. Continuing in this manner is what will get the thread locked.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Why is the game so bad that even playing it for free isn't worth it?
Probably because most of the posters who post here would agree with you You're preaching to the choir here.
Hopefully, you expressed your disain on those eight other gaming sites in similar, scathing tones to your post here so that folks get an idea of just how angry you are about a computer game.
Cheap shot. You're trying to discredit my opinion by insinuating it's petty and baseless. I'm not "angry about a computer game". I'm angry because I've followed this series for over 20 years.
Civ 1, novel game, easy to exploit hitting spacebar on settlers so as to finish multi-turn tasks in one turn, but if you can restrain yourself, pretty novel.
Civ 2, sucked, learning experience.
Civ 3, great game, definitely learned from past mistakes.
Civ 4, started slow but had amazing mod potential, finished strong.
Civ 5, started sucking, but brought a couple new ideas with their own hurdles, like 1upt and disembarked units instead of cargo.
Civ BE, brings nothing new to the table, mistakes from Civ 5, particularly in diplomacy and AI brought no wisdom, somehow less of a game than the predecessor of which it's a cheap doppleganger. Boring. Flavorless. No replayability value. They went backwards, handed us a steaming pile of doo and smiled at us, basically saying "this is what we think of our fans".
I'm offended. I'm disappointed. Now I'm not even allowed to express my opinion in my own thread, just because it's negative, without it being locked, my opinion basically belittled as trolling, so, I took it elsewhere. Saying Civ BE is a garbage money grab is the god's honest truth. Saying it's a big sign of the coming end of the series, particularly in value, is admittedly opinion, but not a huge stretch of truth.
I'm not happy with it, but it's not "the game" that makes me angry, it's the guys who made it.
I'm not even going to grace the person above you with an answer. He likes to prod like you do, and I can't seem to communicate with him without myself appearing the bad guy.
FaceUnderMask: attitude like yours is what is wrong wtih today's gamer generation. You are willing to wait for a game to "develop" after paying 50 euro for it. CivBE should have been as polished and detailed as Civ 5 BE out of hte box if it will cost so much!
Separate names with a comma.