I pledge to not buy Civ 6 until it is released

[blackcatatonic]

The last two games I pre-ordered were both clearly released before they were ready (one of them was Civ 5).

I'm confident Civ 6 will have a better launch, and it is just about my most anticipated game since... well, Civ 5. But I'm still hesitant. I'm certainly not going to pre-order it before launch week, and at that point it might make more sense to wait until a week or two after launch.

 

[Zaarin]

If your responding to me (OP) then I don't think I've ever thought that. I think Pre-Orders are something that is wrong with the gaming industry, but I don't think anything is wrong with the "Heart" of the gaming industry. As industrys go I think it is pretty much on par with some good examples of Customer friendlier companies (Valve and Blizzard, for my money - though I'm sure this can be debated) and evil, deplorable companies (EA, Ubisoft).

Most, like 2k Games / Take Two, fall in between not only as companies but on individual issues. In my humble opinion anyways.

How refreshing would it be if 2k Games said something like, "No preorders. No Gimmicks. Everyone will get the same game on release." I just find a lot more integrity with that then "If you trust us and buy now we will give you free lutz!!>!> ZOMG! BUY BUY BUY." No?

That wasn't directed at anyone in particular; more of an address to the general topic as I've seen some people very passionately decry pre-ordering in terms quite out of proportion to the topic. But I think your argument for it here is one of the most sensible I've seen. Not quite enough to make me feel bad about pre-ordering (though after being sorely disappointed by Beyond Earth and Dragon Age: Inquisition, I'm certainly much more reticent to pre-order than I have been in the past), but I can certainly see why you'd take that position at any rate. I agree that it's certainly dubious when companies essentially attempt to bribe you to pre-order; since Civ6 has no pre-order bonuses, however, I don't think that's relevant.

I agree with you wholeheartedly on this and you have put this more succicently then I have previously. I recently lost a week of my life to Factorio... damn out-of-nowhere brilliant indie games.

If I were to make a list of my top 5 favorite games, Civ and Morrowind are probably the only non-indie titles that would make the list. So many great games out there.

 

[m15a]

Ok, what would you accept as proof? What could I provide to you right now that would cause you to go, "Oh, damn - I hadn't seen that - OK, I'm convinced?"

Outside of Math and Science proof is a subjective concept. People believe the earth is flat because there is no proof. (I tried to tell them about the +1 ship movement speed bonus for being the first to circumventing the earth but they didn't get it).

Keep in mind that the proof you need may not be out there, and that makes it no less true. At the risk of getting in to a philosophical discussion on the nature of truth: when we see consistent, cohesive, correspondent situations we usually adopt them as "true" whether or not we have a mathematical equation to back us up.

But in a world where 97% of scientists can say "Yes" to global warming and people still say "SHOW ME THE PROOF!" ... well. Maybe our extinction is justified and for the best

The post you quoted asked for evidence, not proof. Like you said, when "we see consistent, cohesive, correspondent situations", that is accepted as truth. Those situations are evidence... So cite that evidence.

You make the analogy of global warming. Those "97%" of scientist base their opinions on evidence and that's why we accept what they say. But we don't accept the opinions of people that spend a lot of time outdoors as truth even if there is an accepted "truth" among serious nature fans that they've been talking about for years.

 

[thecrazyscot]

Ok, what would you accept as proof? What could I provide to you right now that would cause you to go, "Oh, damn - I hadn't seen that - OK, I'm convinced?"

I already told you what I would accept as evidence, but I'll set the bar lower: what games' development were negatively impacted by preordering? I will be happy to discuss examples if you present them. Then the "anti-preorder" hypothesis will have a place to start.

But keep in mind that just a few examples of a game being negatively impacted by preordering doesn't establish a clear, consistent pattern. However, if that clear, consistent pattern can be found, I will happily concede that I am wrong. Heck, I'll raise the stakes. I'll not only concede that I am wrong, I'll take the pledge not to preorder

The post you quoted asked for evidence, not proof. Like you said, when "we see consistent, cohesive, correspondent situations", that is accepted as truth. Those situations are evidence... So cite that evidence.

Exactly.

 

[Red Pearl]

I do. It's not a life-regret or anything, but if I knew then what I know now I would have passed on it completely.

That is a convincing argument. I will buy it most likely the day after it is released.

Edit. I will not preorder.

 

[evanaurora]

though after being sorely disappointed by Beyond Earth and Dragon Age: Inquisition

ugh, DAI, don't remind me. I think you may have singlehandedly convinced me not to preorder...

 

[Zaarin]

ugh, DAI, don't remind me. I think you may have singlehandedly convinced me not to preorder...

Yep, that game was enough to kill what little faith I had left in BioWare; Mass Effect: Andromeda is going to be a very tough sell for me.

 

[evanaurora]

Yep, that game was enough to kill what little faith I had left in BioWare; Mass Effect: Andromeda is going to be a very tough sell for me.

I know; DEFINITELY waiting until after that one's released. If it's just another billion empty worlds with a series of fetch quests....

 

[Aristos]

I will not buy Civ6 until it is on sale. Because I am Canadian and do not want to pay $80/$100 for a video game. But hey who knows, maybe the Loonie will bounce back up to 1:1 by October... Birthday wish

By October of 2019 when we get rid of the stupid mistake we made...

On topic: "I pledge my self to not buy the game until it is finished, patched, balanced and possibly even discounted".

 

[mjs0]

It's funny, I would agree with OP on pretty much any other game, but I feel differently about this franchise, which I have been playing since the original.

Pre-ordering Civ6 and then finding out it wasn't finished and having to wait for a few patch cycles before it feels complete doesn't bother me...I think there is more at stake.

What bothers me is enough people holding off purchasing before or at release for the revenue numbers on Civ6 to drop because the bulk of purchases are made later and at a discounted rate.

What bothers me is for the suits at 2K to look at the revenue for Civ6 and say, well that wasn't the best use of our investment dollars, and then either delay or cancel any expansions or even Civ7, or (my greatest fear) use the drop in revenue to start to put pressure on Firaxis to make future projects appeal more to the great masses of casual gamers.

At the moment we have a pretty nice balance between, what is still with Civ5, a satisfyingly complex strategy game and, what is also, a game that appeals to, and is fun for, the casual bulk of purchasers. Any campaign that reduces the revenue for Civ6 (as any successful attempt at discouraging pre-purchasing inevitably would) will, in my opinion, have the exact opposite effect that OP intends.

In other words Civilization is the only franchise I will ever pre-order for the sole reason that it is the one situation where I care more about the franchise and its continued survival in its current state than I care about the state of any particular iteration of the game at release.

For me, that future is worth 50, 60, even 200+ dollars of my money (by the time expansions and DLC are factored in) every iteration.

So, I pledge to never wait and buy a Civilization game for a reduced price.

 

[Red Menace]

I'm not going to buy it vanilla unless I am VERY impressed, I already decided never to pre-order after my brother got me beyond earth (discounted but still). after reviews come in and if they are offering a suitable bonus I might be convinced, only if the Inca are present, no Inca no purchase. #Incadeservebetter #IncabeforeBrazil #needsmethemountainciv

Yep, that game was enough to kill what little faith I had left in BioWare; Mass Effect: Andromeda is going to be a very tough sell for me.

I'm still hurting from ME3 , I hope they don't mess this up because I think the direction is much better for the series.

 

[Thormodr]

By October of 2019 when we get rid of the stupid mistake we made...

On topic: "I pledge my self to not buy the game until it is finished, patched, balanced and possibly even discounted".

Agree strongly with both of your points.

 

[OnceAKing]

I'm not sure if I can make that pledge just based on honest brand appeal alone. But on a macro scale I get your point...


Follow this line of thinking......


If EVERY Player that would ever buy Civ 6 bought it before it would be released, what would the developer's incentive be to make it as crisp and polished as possible? They don't have to worry about a post release word of mouth appeal or even game reviews, they'd have every dollar they could make

If you had a lemonade stand, and 100 people paid for a cup before you even went to the store, when you go to buy sugar, would you buy the good sugar or the discount sugar, knowing you've already made a profit? Wouldn't you want to squeeze out that extra profit because taste isn't a factor in your future sales?

So if we take that extreme and dial it down by 50% and said that half of all the people that would ever buy the game, pre-order the game, wouldn't that, by a percentage, reduce there incentive to improve the game to improve sales?

To dispute that would be to dispute the whole idea of profit motive or market based competition.

Now counter arguments would be:
Brand value reduction
Expansions and DLC sales
Future game prospects

We've seen with companies like EA and game brands like Tomb Raider or the Sim family that sometimes brands and big game titles can endure a bad release. In fact, the gaming world's problem isn't the bad release, its the mediocre, non-terrible release. Its not sharknado but its not Jaws. As long as they deliver a C or B-, they can give you another hope for a great game in the next 2 to 5 years

Expansion and DLC, its fair to say that's an incentive for companies to get it right, as you can milk a game for 2 or 3 expansions if its decent. But again, if the brand's big enough or its decent enough in the multiplayer realm, you can always hold out the promise of an improvement to the game people already bought. Remember the sunken cost fallacy persists on in the human brain

Future game prospects. For the developer and employees, yes this could hurt them, but it really doesn't affect the developer. Again, they can lean on branding and marketing to get you ramped up in the same cycle for a slightly different game in the future. The business stays after a bad game while the developer and artists suffer in purgatory



slim to none of this applies to CIV and firaxis but its a creeping phenomenon that could come to grip it like the regal name Sim City, so we must be vigilant. I respect the OP's stand on this.

 

[Thormodr]

It's funny, I would agree with OP on pretty much any other game, but I feel differently about this franchise, which I have been playing since the original.

Pre-ordering Civ6 and then finding out it wasn't finished and having to wait for a few patch cycles before it feels complete doesn't bother me...I think there is more at stake.

What bothers me is enough people holding off purchasing before or at release for the revenue numbers on Civ6 to drop because the bulk of purchases are made later and at a discounted rate.

What bothers me is for the suits at 2K to look at the revenue for Civ6 and say, well that wasn't the best use of our investment dollars, and then either delay or cancel any expansions or even Civ7, or (my greatest fear) use the drop in revenue to start to put pressure on Firaxis to make future projects appeal more to the great masses of casual gamers.

At the moment we have a pretty nice balance between, what is still with Civ5, a satisfyingly complex strategy game and, what is also, a game that appeals to, and is fun for, the casual bulk of purchasers. Any campaign that reduces the revenue for Civ6 (as any successful attempt at discouraging pre-purchasing inevitably would) will, in my opinion, have the exact opposite effect that OP intends.

In other words Civilization is the only franchise I will ever pre-order for the sole reason that it is the one situation where I care more about the franchise and its continued survival in its current state than I care about the state of any particular iteration of the game at release.

For me, that future is worth 50, 60, even 200+ dollars of my money (by the time expansions and DLC are factored in) every iteration.

So, I pledge to never wait and buy a Civilization game for a reduced price.

Civilization 5, as poor a game as it was, still generated a lot of revenue for greedy 2k games. I'd wager that the bulk of its revenues came after launch and not before it.

The same will hold true for Civ VI. More revenue after than before launch.

 

[darko82]

I pledge to buy it, but I won't pre-order it. If the game is not playable at launch, if there are some big problems, then I will wait untill it gets fixed.

But I would buy Collector's Edition if a decent one comes out, particularly with globe figure, and a few hundred pages book about the game.

Furthermore, I think people who pre-order should get special bonus, maybe a free DLC or something like. Just as it is with other games. Usually those who pre-order pay the most, and they get the least. Those who pay later, get a lot more, and pay less. Funny.

 

[DeutschDachs]

ugh, DAI, don't remind me. I think you may have singlehandedly convinced me not to preorder...

Beyond Earth can't even lick the boots of DA:I bleh. Didn't DA:I win several game of the year awards? I can understand it wasn't your thing but clearly it wasn't a failure or even disappointing to most people.

Don't preorder Civ VI it might become game of the year

 

[Scauthra]

I'm sorry. I'm going to pre-order it on Steam. Rather the game is bad at launch or not, I want to play it. I like what I see. The 50 or 60 I throw at it will be plenty of money well spent even if the game launches buggy or imbalanced. I've sunk hundred of hours in 4 and 5. If you took the $30 I spent on 4 and the $100ish I spent on 5 and put them into the the hours I played, it's like I spent a nickle or less for an hour of entertainment. Even when that Civ 5 entertainment was not the best at the start.

I want the game as soon at is releases. I enjoy playing games day one. It's thrilling, enjoyable and great to talk with other gaming friends.

Blizzard and the Civilization series are the only company and games that will always get my money before launch. Even with Diablo 3 being bad at launch, I do not regret getting it early. I would have just wasted more time playing peggle or loading back into warcraft, or playing civ5 or reading something.

Gamers are free to educate themselves how they see fit. From what is presented to me, I like Civ6. From what I saw of Beyond Earth before it launched, I was not really excited. Thus, I did not get it. It's really simple.

Eh- all I am saying is at 12:14am on Oct 21st I will finally bypass the launch bump and start a civilization that will stand the test of time.

 

[player1 fanatic]

Preordering is very beneficial for developers or publishers.

It gives them monetary stability and lowers the risk of bad sales after release. Same for any kind of other industry.

But for gamers? None at all. Gamers are getting the games based on the promise of it being good game. Promise solely given from marketing material from the same company (btw, Civ6 has great marketing!)

The only "benefit" for the gamers, in some case is small pre-order discount in case of less stingy companies. And in other cases getting "bonuses" you do not really need, like OST, minor DLC, etc...

None of this is worth the risk of getting bad game.

 

[Plus Ultra]

Lot's of good arguments against pre-ordering here.

But, I am one of those crazy customers that does pre-order games from time to time, and I plan to keep doing exactly that when the game meets certain criteria:

-Trusted developer: Firaxis, Bethesda, CDProject Red, Bioware, Naugthy Dog.
-Game I am completely certain I will buy on day one: Civilization, Elder Scrolls, XCOM, Witcher, Mass Effect, Uncharted.
-Not a multiplayer game (no server issues).

When a game meets that criteria, I pre-order the deluxe version as soon as its available. I'll check the game forums just in case there is some unequivocally objective reason to cancel such preorder, of course. I'll then play the game from day one, which has value for me, and then decide whether that developer/game franchise is still on my "trusted and therefore pre-order to show support and play on day one" list.

Case study: Bioware (Mass effect 3, Dragon age 2 ) is no longer part of that list, I bought Dragon Age Inquisition a couple of months ago through G2A for 7,95€. It was better, but not good enough to bring Bioware back to the trusted developer list. I will buy Mass Effect Andromeda when there is a good steam sale.

I think this kind of behaviour is good for the gaming industry, and is common amongst those that, like me, pre-order games from time to time.

TL;DR: Pre-order, as long as its based on prior track record of the company/franchise, is not necessarily bad for the gaming industry, nor irrational.

 

[evanaurora]

Beyond Earth can't even lick the boots of DA:I bleh. Didn't DA:I win several game of the year awards? I can understand it wasn't your thing but clearly it wasn't a failure or even disappointing to most people.

Don't preorder Civ VI it might become game of the year

I feel the same way about DAI that some on here seem to feel about 5. Awards, whatever; it was very shiny and completely empty, with nothing I liked about the franchise to begin with remaining. (Where were the cutscenes?!?!?) And I liked Beyond Earth! I only played it in small amounts as I don't own it, but my friend does, so that could definitely be influencing me; I can't really speak too much towards replay value.

Also, I adored Mass Effect 3 unreasonably. So clearly I'm fighting an uphill battle with my video game tastes.

To people's larger points about whether it's "good" for games to buy them beforehand: I play a LOT of video games in terms of time spent out of my life playing, but I don't play a wide variety of games. I just don't have enough money (poor student here!) to consider myself a "gamer." It's interesting reading about people's perspectives as coming from "what will be for the Greatest Good of the Industry" as opposed to "what will save me the most money," lol.

Ergo, my knowledge base is pretty thin as far as the former goes, but I will put in a brief defense of things like discount preordering, Steam sales, etc. Whatever the cause, you can never, ever, ever eliminate such things, or even diminish their quantity- you're going to make the situation worse rather than better. By sealing off most people without large wallets and a highly specific interest in video games from playing, you're creating a vacuum sealed environment; I don't think I have to explain why that's not a good thing for creativity.