Zenstrive
Ocean King
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2010
- Messages
- 919
In all honesty,
if you want to look at future of PC gaming,
look at Europe and indie.
Witcher 2, Torchlight, Minecraft, Terraria, Jamestown, Who's That Flying ???!, Magicka, Elemental.
Civ V is a fine game, I even play it more and more since the last patch (after not playing it for more than four months due to boredom). Dragon Age 2 is more accessible, got more fun moments, and altogether feels not like a chore that is Dragon Age: Origins.
Mind you, in majority, there are two kind of PC Gamers right now: Grown up PC gamers that need to work and therefore have less time playing games if they want to balance their work, family, and gaming time and new generation of PC gamers that were brought into the scene already messed up first person shooters, mediocre games, and buggy releases.
The grown up PC gamers need to balance things, hence the need to have a quick fix. I was playing colonizations non stop for 4 years because I can have my TBS fix start up after five minutes and end it ten minutes later after finishing ten turns or more and finish the whole shebang it in two hours. I used to play Command and Conquer:Generals:Zero Hours for the same reasons: Fire it up in five minutes, finish it in ten, close it, and go to work, go to sleep, or satisfy the mistress.
The new gamers have choices: PC games where you can find loads and loads of RPGs, RTS, or TBSs, or console games where the cool games are all at. Many non-heavy gamers choose console, and so the new gamers went to console in flocks.
When they grown up a little, they got bored by their consoles and seek fulfillment in PC. Their mentalities are still that of console gamers: short fix, big boom, and have a bit of shooters mentality, or if not, on the rail RPGs. So they choose to play something that can supply that. They choose shooters because on the rail RPGs are rare in PC.
Strategy games are far from their minds.
So when they see a game, famously called Civilizations, they got curious and try it.
If the game is as complicated as fully expanded Civ IV, will they play it till the end and not moving back into shooters? Doubtful there.
And so thus born Civ V: Civilization with heavy emphasis on battle mentality at first.
Only later when the game sold in millions and peace-loving players found it to brutal and started to shout out loud to firaxis did they balance things out.
Now the game feels more completely strategic.
How many early adopters that love the battle emphasis of the game are now flabbergasted by the change brought upon the latest patch? Severe penalties on happiness and things are more spread out, making them thinking about it more.
If the statistics are showing that less and less people are playing the game after it made more strategic and less kablooey, don't blame Firaxis if Civ 6 will be more fast paced and streamlined.
if you want to look at future of PC gaming,
look at Europe and indie.
Witcher 2, Torchlight, Minecraft, Terraria, Jamestown, Who's That Flying ???!, Magicka, Elemental.
Civ V is a fine game, I even play it more and more since the last patch (after not playing it for more than four months due to boredom). Dragon Age 2 is more accessible, got more fun moments, and altogether feels not like a chore that is Dragon Age: Origins.
Mind you, in majority, there are two kind of PC Gamers right now: Grown up PC gamers that need to work and therefore have less time playing games if they want to balance their work, family, and gaming time and new generation of PC gamers that were brought into the scene already messed up first person shooters, mediocre games, and buggy releases.
The grown up PC gamers need to balance things, hence the need to have a quick fix. I was playing colonizations non stop for 4 years because I can have my TBS fix start up after five minutes and end it ten minutes later after finishing ten turns or more and finish the whole shebang it in two hours. I used to play Command and Conquer:Generals:Zero Hours for the same reasons: Fire it up in five minutes, finish it in ten, close it, and go to work, go to sleep, or satisfy the mistress.
The new gamers have choices: PC games where you can find loads and loads of RPGs, RTS, or TBSs, or console games where the cool games are all at. Many non-heavy gamers choose console, and so the new gamers went to console in flocks.
When they grown up a little, they got bored by their consoles and seek fulfillment in PC. Their mentalities are still that of console gamers: short fix, big boom, and have a bit of shooters mentality, or if not, on the rail RPGs. So they choose to play something that can supply that. They choose shooters because on the rail RPGs are rare in PC.
Strategy games are far from their minds.
So when they see a game, famously called Civilizations, they got curious and try it.
If the game is as complicated as fully expanded Civ IV, will they play it till the end and not moving back into shooters? Doubtful there.
And so thus born Civ V: Civilization with heavy emphasis on battle mentality at first.
Only later when the game sold in millions and peace-loving players found it to brutal and started to shout out loud to firaxis did they balance things out.
Now the game feels more completely strategic.
How many early adopters that love the battle emphasis of the game are now flabbergasted by the change brought upon the latest patch? Severe penalties on happiness and things are more spread out, making them thinking about it more.
If the statistics are showing that less and less people are playing the game after it made more strategic and less kablooey, don't blame Firaxis if Civ 6 will be more fast paced and streamlined.
Furthermore, my balance of work, family, and game time still cries for "depth before ease of play".
