1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

I kind of hope sales of this expansion are low....

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Tapewormlondon, Feb 17, 2012.

  1. mabalogna

    mabalogna Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    176
    Location:
    Canada
    I think a lot of people have amnesia. Civ 3 wasn't complete until Conquests came out - and Civ 4 wasn't complete until BTS came out. Both versions in the series were missing units, game concepts, and civilizations in the vanilla, and were only made into "the greatest game ever" after undergoing the trial and error of 2 expansion packs each; Civ 5 is no different.
     
  2. Buccaneer

    Buccaneer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    3,562
    I understand your points but I do not agree with them. I was in a similar boat 10(?) years ago when Civ3 came out. I was a fairly well-known Civ2 strategist at Poly and was heavily involved in the pre-release discussions regarding Civ3. After release, I rejected many things about Civ3 including its new implementations of borders (Civ4 and Civ5 did this better) and resources (Civ5 does this the best), among many other elements. I simply dropped Civ3 and happily played Civ2 until Civ4 was released. Civ3 wasn't important to me and therefore, I gave it no more further thought and did not dwell on what-it-could've-been at Poly or CFC.

    In some ways, Civ5 was a natural progression; in other ways it was a lateral at best, (degradation at worst) move and in still further ways, it was simply a radical departure. Despite some of Civ5's weaknesses/streamlinings/simplicities, the addition of the traditional hex-based 1upt was a brilliant change. I can understand those that prefer Civ4's awful SoD approach to massive bulldozer armies would object such a radical departure. Admittedly the AI (as poor as it was in Civ4) probably could handle SoD better than 1upt (which has always plagued traditional single-player PC wargames even before John Tiller's time) but I have been a hardcore Civer since 1996 and find this mode of combat far more fun and challenging than anything they had before.

    I would also add Social Policies as the best implementation of a 'civics' model in any Civ game (Civ4's civics offered no decision-making, SP does given its scarceness).

    Finally, one of the best things about Civ5 for some hardcore gamers was the absence of Civ4's cheesy religion model, awkward espionage and corporation implementations. Just because they were in BtS does not make them good - they were among the worst features of an otherwise great expansion pack. One last point is that I think Civ5's leaders traits - esp. with UU/UA/UB - was a great evolutionary improvement for hardcore civers from what we have in Civ2, Civ3 and Civ4.

    My point is that I had been there when Civ3 came out but I did not continously attack that release and simply moved on (or back) - even when its expansion pack was announced. When Civ5 was released, I gave it a 5/10 with the hope that its patches would improve thing. They certainly have (along with the DLCs) - everyone of them - and I am pleased that they are still working on making the game even better. I didn't want a Civ4 2.0, that's what BtS was for. But the implementation of 1upt in Civ5 would cause me to not being able to play BtS ever again and to hope that they can still make it even better.
     
  3. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    Well said. There are still some things I think Civ4 did better, but Civ5 also does things better.

    The only thing I'll say about Civ3 is this. It blew away a lot of good features added for Civ2. However, in doing so, it provided a good base that the game was able to expand on. Things like gold support for units, resources, city borders, and great persons all had serious flaws when implemented but are now accepted features. I think a lot of good features were because of Civ3 stripping out features from Civ2.

    Not that it really excuses it. Civ3 was a rushed game that had a lot of band-aids added to it. It was the first that I truly learned the strategy behind and started posting here, though, so I won't entirely knock it.
     
  4. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,116
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Yes, Civ3 was a rushed game due to the falling out between Sid and Brian Reynolds. Soren was brought in at the last minute and the game rebuilt from scratch in 18 months(?). Reynolds wanted an RTS game (recall this was a time when RTS on PC had a huge cache and was the hot thing to do- that game ended up being rise of nations)

    Years on, it is hard to argue against Sid. Sid's instinct to insist the franchise stick to TBS may be one of his biggest and greatest contribution to the franchise as the absentee lead designer. It was a positive decision.

    Also I think you're underselling Civ3 by a bit here. Not only did it provide the base for Civ4, Civ3 fundamentally changed how Civ games were played that has shaped the 2 entries following it.

    Before Civ3, AI stuck to a set build pattern. They are thus unable to value buildings and units correctly. When stats changed in mods, patches or if the situation on the ground changed it still used the same old build order. Soren Introduced a valuation table where each stat is assigned a value, and thus relative importance can be weighted and measured by the AI. This is perhaps the single most significant change, without it, the modern Civ could not be what they are.

    Before Civ3, diplomacy & trades was an afterthought. Civ3 introduced the trade table with rational valuations by the AI. I personally rank this as my most important feature, because it made Civ games less about the dichotomy between peaceful tree huggers and blooth thirsty warmongers, but introduced politics to the game. My Machiavellian Doctrine was written around power maximiation via influence using the game's systems to create de-facto vassals, city-state clients and the like, years before Civ5.

    Before Civ3, civ games were about patching together a collection of city-states settled or conquered by the player into an abstract unit called an empire. As you noted, Civ3 globalized unit support but also created 'cultural borders'. Civ3's contribution is the introduction of the empire and nation state as concepts that the game AI could understand. Most importantly it shifted the synergy of the constituent parts of your empire into the whole. The whole idea of 'small' national wonders play into this. The idea of using cities to acquire resources for the national/emperial interests became the norm.

    Before Civ3, resources were something of a trade/shield/food modifier. After civ3, we send millions to their deaths for one more source of X.

    If anything, I should be mad at the constanty harping about Civ4 by detractors of the current game. Civ3 is so undervalued as an entry and its influence so important I would rather compare Civ5 to that game.
     
  5. RD-BH

    RD-BH Human

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2009
    Messages:
    818
    Location:
    Formerly: Missouri, USA
    I've always thought SMAC/X was a bigger influence on Civ4.
    Civ4 seems closer to it than to Civ3.
    ... especially BtS

    Civ5 is a new direction, and thus it stands alone.
     
  6. Pazyryk

    Pazyryk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,585
    This is an excellent post. Really, each of the Civs have been evolutionary, with III and V perhaps the most undervalued here. Many of the individual changes are badly received at first (sometimes because initial implementation is pretty rough) but then go on to be core elements that feel essential for Civilization. Now, of course, you have to make these evolutionary changes into good game play, but sometimes that takes a bit of patching and expansion to get right.

    My own favorite in Civ5 is that they are (at least starting to) separate commerce and science. In Civ<5, the slider made these two completely interchangeable. In Civ5, they are starting to become two different game elements that need to be managed separately. I say "starting to" because the RA system completely negates everything I just said. But I think in later Civs you will have to manage gold and research as very different game elements.
     
  7. Buccaneer

    Buccaneer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    3,562
    I do realize that I have been too harsh on my experience and perception of Civ3 and do apprecriate its criitcal value as a building block for Civ4 and Civ5. Civ2's value and fun was in its scenarios and events editor, even if the main game became a joke to play. My point still stands though, I left Civ3 alone after my falling out with it.
     
  8. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Entangled Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    29,986
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    The expansion has convinced me to buy the game. Sales $ +80

    Or perhaps it is time for you to let go and move along. ;)

    Civ 3 has been my all time favorite and I've been playing since Civ 1. I'd like tosee all the innovations of SMAC added to Civ especially the unit creation part. I want to custom make my troops.
     
  9. qec

    qec King

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    I've been a regular, at least on the front page of the site checking updates and new polycast episodes, for like a couple years now. Been coming almost everyday and checking and posting on the forums for like 2 months now.

    Very rarely in this time have I ever got the message 'Server too busy', but after finding out about the Exp Pack yesterday and checking if any news is out every couple hours, I get the server too busy message on a regular basis. So I figure that must be from increased traffic, and if that is any indication of how popular such an expansion may be then I have a feeling it'll sell pretty well.
     
  10. Sommerswerd

    Sommerswerd All Your Trickle Down are Belong to Me

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    11,444
    Location:
    Give them to me the tax cuts
    I come on here a lot (waaaaay too much TBH:blush:), and I have seen the server too busy a bunch of times, but NOTHING beats the day Civ 5 came out. That day you just could not get on, period, all day long... It was crazy!:lol:
     
  11. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    Excellent post with excellent points (sorry I had to cut them out, they almost deserve to be quoted in whole). You're right about a lot of good features (diplomacy screen is one I had even forgotten was a change). Civ3 was one of my favorite games. I still find it a lot of fun. Maybe it's unfairly maligned, but this might just have to do with the fact that there's no bad Civilization game.

    BTW, was it Soren Johnson who was brought in or Jeff Briggs? Briggs was the main developer, but Soren obviously took Civ as his baby (which shows in Civ4).
     
  12. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,116
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    You are correct. Briggs took over lead design after Reynolds left. He is featured prominently in the special edition 'bonus video' that can still be found online.

    Soren's role was programmer, but seemed to have a pretty strong influence on the design.

    Actually now that we're talking about it, I started searching and found this ancient thread posted here linking to a chat Soren had over at Apolyton on Civ3 AI.

    Fun read.

    http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=101948&postcount=1
     
  13. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    Soren is a cool dude. Back when there were many, many active Civ sites, we convinced him to have a Firaxis team compete. The team was mostly just him, but he was a good sport about it, even when the Germans (the fan site, German Webring team not the German civ) steamrolled Firaxis.

    Interestingly enough, though, every single team except one (including Firaxis) picked an Industrious Civ.
     
  14. Helmling

    Helmling Philosopher King

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,666
    I hope that there is no Civ 6 because it's time for ME to move on.
     
  15. RD-BH

    RD-BH Human

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2009
    Messages:
    818
    Location:
    Formerly: Missouri, USA
    Meh, 20hrs Civ4/week vs 20hrs Civ5 -or-Civ6/week ...
    ... its all good: "Time Well Wasted"
    I don't want to move on ;)
     
  16. Mivo

    Mivo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    207
    Location:
    Germany
    Where to?
     
  17. Glassmage

    Glassmage The Desert Flame

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,623
    Location:
    USA
    They should make new Alpha Centauri and move to other projects. Civ5 and its expansions and DLC's are good enough imho for a good legacy.
     
  18. Minor Annoyance

    Minor Annoyance Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,247
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario
    I'm so sick of people who think because they don't like something it should not exist and be taken away from everyone else.
    Self-centered.
     
  19. strhopper

    strhopper Okie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    406
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Yes, this was my point earlier about not liking CIV4. Just because I didn't like it didn't mean I thought it should end.

    That's the good thing about civ. You may not like this iteration but there's always another one coming in a few years.

    I still think most people think this way. Only the extreme views tend to post. I.E. super fans and haters alike

    and yes I am a fan of CIV 5. My favorite since CIV3 didn't like 2 or 4. Was too young to ever really get into the first one. Only got to play that one on SNES :mischief:
     
  20. Menzies

    Menzies Menzies

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,897
    Location:
    Australia
    I can see only one thing being achieved by poor sales of the expansion; they will give up on expansions. That is the opposite of what we want, but hey...
     

Share This Page