Interview with Firaxis' Dennis Shirk!

[dexters]

Brian Reynolds is spending his time sleeping in a bed made of money from Zynga, of which he is the founder. Where former Firaxis Civ3/Civ4 producer Jesse Smith now works and whose chief product Brian masterminded is Farmville.

A game so simple even "your girlfriend can play"

Now that all your childhoods have been stolen and your heroes killed, lets continue with the rage. It's much better than engaging in acts of fantasy.

 

[eviltypeguy]

Sid had some great ideas 20 years ago (Pirates!, Railroad Tycoon, Civilization), but I feel that he deserves about 10% of the credit he gets. Brian Reynolds designed Colonization, Civilization II and Alpha Centauri, possibly the three greatest Firaxis/Microprose games released, along with Civ IV (designed by Soren Johnsen).

The games Sid Meier has designed the last decade have mostly been crap:

SimGolf, Railroads!, Civilization: Revolution

It's funny you believe they were "crap" since they were all considered commercially successful (except perhaps SimGolf). I certainly liked Railroads! and Civilization: Revolution.

Team up Brian Reynolds and Soren Johnsen to make Civilization VI with Sid Meier as supervisor, let Shafer port Shafer 5 to consoles.

(There you go with silly name games again. Really, we're going to stoop to grade school games like that?)


I suspect Civilization 5 will be ported to consoles in some form, although the current form is not simple enough for a console's typical user interface IMO.

As much as I loved Alpha Centauri, I don't want another game exactly like that. I want something new, but with the same core concepts as Civilization. That's why I like Civilization V so much.

If someone created a sequel to Alpha Centauri, I'd want it to have similar concepts, but not be the same.

 

[Abegweit]

And you can call Civilization 5 "Shafer 5" all you want; it doesn't make it factually true.

Sid's name is still on it; he allowed it and we know Sid has played it.

It also clearly shares many core concepts with previous Civilization games, so I think your vague insinuations are not well justified.

Which core concepts?

Sliders? Gone. Research, gold and happiness are now completely separate.
Resources? Gone. All tiles are pretty much the same. All boring.
City growth? Gone. We now have an idiotic exponential formula which makes big cities nearly impossible until the game is almost over.
Tech trees? Gone. We now have four lanes with passing zones.
Wonders? Gone. Replaced with maintenance-free buildings .
Diplomacy? Gimme a break. Gone. Gone. Gone.

All that is aside from the incredible lack of balance, the gaping holes, the endless exploits. And do you know what? Just suppose that Firaxis actually manages to fix all of these issues. Well... what we have have left?

NOTHING.

The only thing interesting about this game is the exploits. If you take those away then you will have exposed the dirty truth. The core of this game is not concepts from previous civs. The core of this game is

NOTHING.

 

[Osetjka]

Shafer this, Shafer that? I see that your Shafer 5 brand is starting to catch on, Thormodr.

By the way, someone mentioned Thormodr V somewhere in the thread. Consider my pre-order confirmed for that one (the deluxe edition).

 

[Stefanskantine]

My dream team would be whoever made the CTP games (I don't know the names, I spend my free time playing games not learning the history of the industry). I found Civ 3 and 4 to be a step backwards from those in a lot of ways.

I think one thing I like about Civ 5 is it's trying to reintroduce more "empire level" management descisions like CTP had. Although currently I admit these attempts are currently a bit flawed and unbalanced, but I remain hopeful that they are fixable.

Come to think of it, the game I really want to play is Call to Power with hexes, modern graphics, 1 UPT and ranged combat, culture, unique civs/units, and city states. A Civ V/CTP hybrid.

 

[Jolly Rogerer]

I think espionage is such a difficult system to deal with because it is essentially tactical level play. People complain about warring and 1upt, and espionage essentially is an extension of that.

I do generally feel there needs to be ways for Civs to play a bit underhanded, but the problem is, it's frustrating when it is used against the player. People only really want it to use against the AI.

Espionage points was the right solution, but the implementation with spies was kind of shoehorned. I like high level stuff.

You accure EP and can do operations to steal maps, and do minor sabotaging. Nothing too overpowered.

but I suspect what we will get instead is a spy unit (agian) and a whole lot of balancing to sort of get it to work.

I agree with this. Much better to set general goals and not have to move yet another piece around the map. The less stuff I'm moving on the strategic map the better imo. Same goes for workers, especially now that they create havoc for movement.

 

[Bad Brett]

It's funny you believe they were "crap" since they were all considered commercially successful (except perhaps SimGolf). I certainly liked Railroads! and Civilization: Revolution.

Yes, because they all have been "dumbed down" and "streamlined" (except for SimGolf which was a very strange game) to appeal the younger mass audience.

Did you ever play the original Railroad Tycoon? That was really an economy game. Building railroads were just a tiny part of the game. You could win the game without laying a single track, by buying shares in other companies. Well, in Railroads! they decided to streamline it removing most of the economy part. So what was left? An ugly spider web of tracks all over the place.

If you just enjoy building your little sandbox railroad, Transport Tycoon is still far superior.

 

[jpinard]

Soren was brought in way too late to affect Spore development very much.

 

[Thormodr]

Shafer this, Shafer that? I see that your Shafer 5 brand is starting to catch on, Thormodr.

By the way, someone mentioned Thormodr V somewhere in the thread. Consider my pre-order confirmed for that one (the deluxe edition).

I promise the game will be at least as good as Civ VI!

 

[Benzidrine]

Don't be so quick to condemn the man for Spore. It had potential, and it too was streamlined in the end (compare e3 demos of the game back to back).

Well I wouldn't condemn him for spore alone it is just that Soren Johnson's personal involvment in projects has not had a particularly good outcome. I think we need a Civ 6 with George Broussard as lead designer then we can really just hold a funeral, pronounce the series dead and move on with our lives.

 

[Thormodr]

Yes, because they all have been "dumbed down" and "streamlined" (except for SimGolf which was a very strange game) to appeal the younger mass audience.

Did you ever play the original Railroad Tycoon? That was really an economy game. Building railroads were just a tiny part of the game. You could win the game without laying a single track, by buying shares in other companies. Well, in Railroads! they decided to streamline it removing most of the economy part. So what was left? An ugly spider web of tracks all over the place.

If you just enjoy building your little sandbox railroad, Transport Tycoon is still far superior.

I loved Railroad Tycoon. You know what the funny thing was? I distinctly remember Sid Meir talking about how everyone plays the game for a reason or how they make their own fun. He recalled a person that would save up enough money in the game and then sell off all his railroads except for a single track and play the stock market for the rest of the game. Sid said that it is important to be able to play the game in many different ways. Not everyone likes to play the same way. He said that about 20 years ago.

Ironic that Railroads ended up the way it did after what he had said.

Transport Tycoon was awesome too. I still remember transferring "valuables" to banks. That made you a lot of money.

 

[eviltypeguy]

Yes, because they all have been "dumbed down" and "streamlined" (except for SimGolf which was a very strange game) to appeal the younger mass audience.

I'm certainly nowhere near the younger mass audience in age. And again, "dumbed down" != "streamlined".

Did you ever play the original Railroad Tycoon? That was really an economy game. Building railroads were just a tiny part of the game. You could win the game without laying a single track, by buying shares in other companies. Well, in Railroads! they decided to streamline it removing most of the economy part. So what was left? An ugly spider web of tracks all over the place.

If you just enjoy building your little sandbox railroad, Transport Tycoon is still far superior.

I've played both Railroad Tycoon and Transport Tycoon. In fact, I even played the Linux port of Railroad Tycoon II from the short-lived Loki Games studio.

Nevertheless, I enjoyed Railroads!

 

[Benzidrine]

Yes, because they all have been "dumbed down" and "streamlined" (except for SimGolf which was a very strange game) to appeal the younger mass audience.

Did you ever play the original Railroad Tycoon? That was really an economy game. Building railroads were just a tiny part of the game. You could win the game without laying a single track, by buying shares in other companies. Well, in Railroads! they decided to streamline it removing most of the economy part. So what was left? An ugly spider web of tracks all over the place.

If you just enjoy building your little sandbox railroad, Transport Tycoon is still far superior.

When I played railroad tycoon I thought I am enjoying the simulated economy, production based trade, strong competition, interesting events and relevant technological progress. But then I realised what this game really needs is more clicking, because clicking the mouse button is the most fun part of the game. And instead of opponents which can challenge my position how about opponents so slow and braindead their affect on the game is almost unnoticeable. And instead of technology meaning something lets just change the train graphics a little over time.

So I was really pleased when Railroads! because now I could just click randomly and often. It was like starcraft without any of that pesky balance or challenge getting in the way. Good job Sid.

 

[eviltypeguy]

Which core concepts?

Sliders? Gone. Research, gold and happiness are now completely separate.
Resources? Gone. All tiles are pretty much the same. All boring.
City growth? Gone. We now have an idiotic exponential formula which makes big cities nearly impossible until the game is almost over.
Tech trees? Gone. We now have four lanes with passing zones.
Wonders? Gone. Replaced with maintenance-free buildings .
Diplomacy? Gimme a break. Gone. Gone. Gone.

Oh, I get it. Core concepts are "gone" if they're not implemented the way you want them to be.

Sorry, but the basics of the Civilization series are all there if you bother to look.

Yes, I agree some things could be improved, but just because some things aren't as good as I'd like or implemented differently than you prefer, doesn't mean you or I can stick my head in the sand like an Ostrich and pretend they don't exist.

 

[Jolly Rogerer]

I'm guessing wildly here, but I'm going to bet a significant number of sales came from people who haven't played civilization before.

And as someone that has played Civ since the original, I don't feel duped, so please don't imply everyone (or a majority even) feels the way you do.

He said "many of us". You're the one who is exaggerating.

 

[Defianc4]

"What I love about Civ V is that great new foundation,"

Yeah, right.

Also, using complaints about new-ness in Civ IV is not an excuse for creating a far inferior game. Note how he didn't compare the criticisms, just said that they existed and thus the two games were both of similar quality.

An excellent point.

 

[zonk]

One thing that just occurred to me in another thread -- and I just relistened to the podcast to see if Dennis mentions it (he doesn't - he mentions panzer general, as always, but there's no discussion on how below was dealt with) --

I just dusted off an old SSI title (Pacific General, basically - a Panzer clone in the Pacific)...

The Civ hex 1UpT map -- any size -- doesn't scale to the panzer map.

Scale in a tactical hex/1UpT system is critical... don't know why this didn't occur to me, but just re-opening an old SSI map makes it clear as day.

Was this ever discussed by Firaxis anywhere? It seems like a rather critical detail -- the SSI titles worked because they got the unit scaling right.

This is actually, I think, one big issue that calls into doubt whether they can actually make hex/1upt work.... I.e., panzer general only has to scale its map to model modern units from a set period and it's also a very localized map - a battlefield, basically... the equivalent of a city and its vicinity (or island, the case of Pacific General... and then, not even the whole island).

How did V developers deal with the scaling issue? Or did it not occur to them? I feel like it HAD to, but the implementation doesn't feel like they did.

This seems like a rather critical oversight...

 

[eviltypeguy]

He said "many of us". You're the one who is exaggerating.

Many of us implies a majority, or certainly a larger group than a minority. I understand the need to identify with a group to justify beliefs, but this is just silly.

 

[Jolly Rogerer]

Yes, because they all have been "dumbed down" and "streamlined" (except for SimGolf which was a very strange game) to appeal the younger mass audience.

Did you ever play the original Railroad Tycoon? That was really an economy game. Building railroads were just a tiny part of the game. You could win the game without laying a single track, by buying shares in other companies. Well, in Railroads! they decided to streamline it removing most of the economy part. So what was left? An ugly spider web of tracks all over the place.

If you just enjoy building your little sandbox railroad, Transport Tycoon is still far superior.

It's unfortunate that RR Tycoon was never updated properly. They never managed to produce a decent sequel to it. A truly great game.

 

[Morningcalm]

*So* my highlighting some of the things Dennis Shirk said in the interview became a platform for people to say "I TOLD YOU SO". As much as I agree that Civ V is somewhat dumbed down, I think that's a bit excessive. Calm down, peeps. Whining about spilt milk won't make the milk better (esp. if, as Thormondr said, Civ V is "rotten cement" or some such).

I do kind of understand why they aimed Civ 5 at a different audience--casual games are the hot market, and if Civ is ever to touch them in a PC game that "medium gamers" might play--then they would need to streamline the game. Maybe not as much as they did, but I still understand why they took that approach (though I don't see it as justified given how many core elements they removed, thus alienating some of the fan base).

Also, earlier in the thread someone asked if there was anything in the podcast of interest other than the "Civ is streamlined" (not my words) part. Thormondr said absolutely not. I disagree. I think the tidbit about Montezuma's voice acting and the fact that the design team always reads fan forums were interesting.

Constructive criticism might make the game better (we hope), rather than saying "I TOLD YOU SO" with a big unhappy face and a pointing finger. Maybe some suggestions about how they should change social policies? Personally i'd like to see some heavy consequences for shifting social policy tracks--but do let people change them. Also, Free Religion and Theocracy in the same tree is a bit....yeah.

Just my 2 cents.