Interview with Firaxis' Dennis Shirk!

[zonk]

"There are many things that aren't in there that our fans wish were. All I can say is keep your eyes on the future"

Translation...

You hardcore suckers -- we knew we would get your money no matter what we did... so we went after the wargamer and the Wii'ers. Cry all you want, but we got your money. But - hey - keep an eye on the future! Because we'll give you more opportunities to give us your money... seriously - this release is for you... seriously - we'll have an expansion that you'll like.

 

[Clement]

They did that through the interface, which, despite being clunky as hell, is MUCH less intimidating for a new player than the Civ IV interface

I found the Civ 5 UI to be much more confusing than the old Civ 4 one, they even completely forgot to put information as vital as the luxury resource list on the screen, how much more confusing than that can it get? it most certainly confused me that's for sure.

 

[zonk]

Hilarious...

Dennis is lauding the mods and the amazement about all the neat new things available as mod downloads... Apparently, he's not aware that the overwhelming majority - if not all - of the existing mods are solely to fix the released debacle.

 

[DoubleAG]

Have you ever played Race for the Galaxy? I remember an interview with the developer, where he talked about having this grand vision for a great card game, but testing revealed that there were too many mechanics and too much to learn for people to pick right up and enjoy. So early on, he made the decision to have the original game be a "dumbed down" version stripped of some of the more confusing mechanics. He added those in each expansion, and right now it's one of the most incredible/rich/rewarding board games I've ever played. It worked brilliantly.

I'm HOPING that CivV evolves in much the same way.

Exactly! After a few patches or an expansion all the complainers will be running back to Civ 5. I'm not condoning their release of the game in the shape that it's in now but all the people declaring the death of civilization is being way too dramatic IMO.

 

[Pnutmaster]

Here's part of the transcript you guys wanted. No generalizing bias. I find it richly ironic (especially since I was only introduced to Civ IV last spring and was enticed by the complexity of the interface).

Interviewer: Now you guys took a lot of liberties with Civ V. The game feels like it's kind of a melding of Civ IV and Revolutions, like it's very--I don't want to say dumbed down--but it's very accessible to girlfriends and wives and things like that. Was the simplicity of user interface and tooltips and things like that, was that done on purpose to make it more accessible; or, what are your thoughts on that? Is that a reasonable expectation or were you trying just for something new here?

Dennis: No, it was a reasonable expectation and I'll tell you why: Civilization IV, obviously, a large portion of our fans, especially after BTS, considered that to be the most complete Civ ever. But it was hardcore; it was for hardcore fans and our hardcore fans loved it. But it wasn't something that somebody, for instance, who had loved Civ Rev can just go ahead and pick up. You already have to be kinda familiar with the game you want to pick up, a game like Civilization IV. What we wanted to do, because we were reworking so many systems in Civ V, is to really make it accessible.

We had the same UI designer who was on Civilization Revolutions. You do kinda have a familiar flavor there, but there's no reason why you can't have a game like Civilization, have an interface that's simple and clean. And since we reworked so many systems, if we didn't have the UI to go along with it, to help people out when they come into play, then you're just gonna keep dwindling your audience. Your audience gets smaller instead of bigger, bringing more people in to play it.

 

[zonk]

Exactly! After a few patches or an expansion all the complainers will be running back to Civ 5. I'm not condoning their release of the game in the shape that it's in now but all the people declaring the death of civilization is being way too dramatic IMO.

No- they'll be running back to VWarlords or VBTS or whatever.

That's markedly different from IV vanilla, where the mods were more "Wow, there's more - you guys spoil us". IV could and did stand alone as a fine game in its own right. Yes, the expansions were big improvements, but they were improvements on a core a that worked.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Here's the transcript you guys wanted. No generalizing bias. I find it richly ironic (especially since I was only introduced to Civ IV last spring and was enticed by the complexity of the interface).

That's enough down-the-middle that people can interpret it any way they want.

 

[Akka]

but there's no reason why you can't have a game like Civilization, have an interface that's simple and clean.

Considering how confusing, bothersome and unhelpful is the interface in the game, that is, in fact, richly ironic.

 

[dexters]

That's enough down-the-middle that people can interpret it any way they want.

No I'm going to agree. It's "dumbed down" if your umoving standard is just adding more complexity to Civ. And that's what a handful of people are raging about.

But I think Civ5's issues are not that, fringe opinions gain credence here because so much of the game right now is buggy and broken.

If SP is fleshed out, exploits, especially with ICS and Maritime CS is patched and diplomacy is fixed, the game will play quite well. It won't stop the dumbed down crowd from insisting it till Civ6, where there will be something else to rage about
"omg city states are gone!"

They need to fix the game first before promising fans to expect stuff from expansions.

I think they'll do it, but that's my take. Obviously, people can be pessimistic and say it won't happen.

 

[Becephalus]

"There are many things that aren't in there that our fans wish were. All I can say is keep your eyes on the future"

Translation...

You hardcore suckers -- we knew we would get your money no matter what we did... so we went after the wargamer and the Wii'ers. Cry all you want, but we got your money. But - hey - keep an eye on the future! Because we'll give you more opportunities to give us your money... seriously - this release is for you... seriously - we'll have an expansion that you'll like.

Wow and apparently another video game forum is slowly reintroduced to the concept of economics. These are businesses, not your personal entertainment slaves. This happens in every industry.

Ever seen how absolutely atrocious most sports reporting is? That is because the broadcasts and articles are for the casual fans because the serious ones will watch no matter what so their concerns can be annoyed.

Personally I am happy they streamlined the game, it was badly needed and the old core was getting badly overburdened with too many features. Some things espionage in particular, were horribly implemented.

Anyway decent interview.

 

[Thormodr]

*Sigh* It's what we all knew already but there is the confirmation.

cIV was near perfect and was for hardcore fans. Complex with many strategies and also richly immersive.

Shirk has pretty well admitted that they made Shafer 5 with the very intention of basically ignoring the hardcore fans and chasing after the mass market by making it more like Civ Rev.

Really, there is no question anymore that Shafer 5 has been dumbed down for the mass market. It's a sad day indeed.

Certainly Shafer 5 apologists will argue till they are blue in the face that it isn't so but that was the final nail in the coffin.

It's a sad day for Civ...

 

[zonk]

That's enough down-the-middle that people can interpret it any way they want.

Well - I think it would have been (but still would have raised alarm bells and "pre"-complaints) if the statement had been made prior to release.

But - we've had the game for a month now... Greg2K or someone from Firaxis is free to extend and clarify those remarks and explain why we're misreading it, but when you add to what we've seen and the complaints thus far -- I don't think it's at all unfair to say it's (euphemism)ed down.

I mean - Shanghai himself says dumbed down before catching himself... that's not a situation where one misuses a term when they mean another -- it's a "whoops, that's inflammatory, let's say accessible".... He can say "No, people just say that because the UI is similar and we DID use the same UI designer".

Like I said, extend and clarify --- but this is from the game's producer so I have to assume he's pretty plugged into the Firaxis vision for Civ V.

 

[Becephalus]

No I'm going to agree. It's "dumbed down" if your umoving standard is just adding more complexity to Civ. And that's what a handful of people are raging about.

But I think Civ5's issues are not that, fringe opinions gain credence here because so much of the game right now is buggy and broken.

If SP is fleshed out, exploits, especially with ICS and Maritime CS is patched and diplomacy is fixed, the game will play quite well. It won't stop the dumbed down crowd from insisting it till Civ6, where there will be something else to rage about
"omg city states are gone!"

They need to fix the game first before promising fans to expect stuff from expansions.

I think they'll do it, but that's my take. Obviously, people can be pessimistic and say it won't happen.

Well said. I agree almost completely. The game badly needs a better combat AI and a better balancing, but once those are done it will be a great game, and a great platform to add a bit more content.

Personally I think Civ 4 was overstuffed with too much content to the point of pointlessness. Much of it was badly implemented, useless, ignorable, and outright ignored by the AI.

 

[EmpireOfCats]

Here's the transcript you guys wanted.

The interesting part starts after about 22 minutes. In addition to what you posted, there was also the question So you were trying for more of a mainstream audience with this?, and the answer is something to the effect of (there is a lot of stammering at the beginning):

Yeah. And one thing to keep in mind is that this is what we call the "vanilla version".

He then goes on to say that they didn't want to introduce too many new things at once, and compared it to the way that Civ IV added stuff.

My feeling is a) yes, it was dumbed down for a mainstream audience and designed as a step-up from CivRev, and they fully knew that this was going to make us hard-core fans friggin' furious; b) however they are trying to assure us that complexity will be added in later DLC the way it was with BtS.

 

[Antmanbrooks]

So, now it's official: Civ V was intentionally dumbed down.

Yeah, but according to the interviewer that makes it more accessable to women. How chauvinistic.

 

[Pnutmaster]

The interesting part starts after about 22 minutes. In addition to what you posted, there was also the question So you were trying for more of a mainstream audience with this?, and the answer is something to the effect of (there is a lot of stammering at the beginning):

Ahh, I see. Not the ideal person to transcript a podcast when I have an Arabic exam in three hours.

 

[Vlade Divac]

*sigh* it's what we all knew already but there is the confirmation.

Civ was near perfect and was for hardcore fans. Complex with many strategies and also richly immersive.

Shirk has pretty well admitted that they made shafer 5 with the very intention of basically ignoring the hardcore fans and chasing after the mass market by making it more like civ rev.

Really, there is no question anymore that shafer 5 has been dumbed down for the mass market. It's a sad day indeed.

Certainly shafer 5 apologists will argue till they are blue in the face that it isn't so but that was the final nail in the coffin.

It's a sad day for civ...

The Death of Civ

I hope somehow, someway you can pick yourself up and go on with life. Thoughts and prayers...

 

[zonk]

My feeling is a) yes, it was dumbed down for a mainstream audience and designed as a step-up from CivRev, and they fully knew that this was going to make us hard-core fans friggin' furious; b) however they are trying to assure us that complexity will be added in later DLC the way it was with BtS.

AARGGGHHH!!!!

No, No, No -- BTS didn't re-add any features from II or III that were killed in IV vanilla. They added entirely new features!

An expansion should not be a "mega-patch" (Paradox did that with Semper Fi, and no argument from anyone exists that it was a really crappy thing to do).

An expansion should not be a "here are the features we killed that you wanted back".

An expansion should be new content and new ideas.

 

[Thormodr]

No I'm going to agree. It's "dumbed down" if your umoving standard is just adding more complexity to Civ. And that's what a handful of people are raging about.

But I think Civ5's issues are not that, fringe opinions gain credence here because so much of the game right now is buggy and broken.

If SP is fleshed out, exploits, especially with ICS and Maritime CS is patched and diplomacy is fixed, the game will play quite well. It won't stop the dumbed down crowd from insisting it till Civ6, where there will be something else to rage about
"omg city states are gone!"

They need to fix the game first before promising fans to expect stuff from expansions.

I think they'll do it, but that's my take. Obviously, people can be pessimistic and say it won't happen.

You can give a pig a bath but it'll just go back in the mud.

You can add expansions to Shafer 5 but you can bet your bottom dollar that they won't add anything complex to an already now admitted dumbed down game. Why would they want to chase off their new found mass market fans with new things that would tax their brains too much?

I can understand why you are still fighting and arguing because to backtrack now would make you look foolish but the battle is over. Shafer 5 is going to remain the nadir of the series. It's a sad day for Civ.

 

[EmpireOfCats]

Yeah, but according to the interviewer that makes it more accessable to women. How chauvinistic.

Yeah, I wondered about that line with "girlfriends", too. Let's hope 2K Elizabeth didn't hear that, or he's going to be in trouble.