[NFP] Is Civ 6 doomed?

[AntSou]

Your point of reference is your own well being but there is a greater good than your own well being.

Could you expand on that? I don't understand what that's supposed to mean.

The reason why open dev exists is to help development and indirectly help build sales which is also necessary for development and especially necessary for the first ever company able to challenge Firaxis and improve the competitiveness of the market

Is this supposed to contradict me? I never criticised Open Dev.

(EDIT: and even worse not allowing modders to improve it for them). By not doing anything you are indirectly rewarding Firaxis for this laziness.

What do you mean by "not doing anything"? You mean by not pre-ordering the game?

 

[glider1]

Greater good means you sacrifice some of your own civ time to help the underdog developer iron out the bugs and features so that on release day the game is solid. This only applies for situations like this when there is a clear underdog that has significant barriers to become competitive.

 

[AntSou]

"Greater good" is an expression generally reserved for more philanthropic activities, not "help company B against company A". It's hard to conceive of many scenarios where an individual is under a moral obligation to help a private company succeed. I find such expectation immoral.

I do think that Open Dev is great and I like that Amplitude are engaging with their fans and willing to have them participate in the game developing process.

I had to recheck because you spoke almost as if Lucy is free to play. It's not, I'd have to pre-order the game or spend time watching their streams. I don't want to do either of these. If I do watch a stream it will be out of interest for the game.

Besides, I don't even think that "Firaxis are lazy", so I don't understand why you take your own beliefs as a starting point for how I should behave.

 

[glider1]

"Greater good" is an expression generally reserved for more philanthropic activities, not "help company B against company A". It's hard to conceive of many scenarios where an individual is under a moral obligation to help a private company succeed. I find such expectation immoral.

I do think that Open Dev is great and I like that Amplitude are engaging with their fans and willing to have them participate in the game developing process.

I had to recheck because you spoke almost as if Lucy is free to play. It's not, I'd have to pre-order the game or spend time watching their streams. I don't want to do either of these. If I do watch a stream it will be out of interest for the game.

Besides, I don't even think that "Firaxis are lazy", so I don't understand why you take your own beliefs as a starting point for how I should behave.

It isn't my own starting point. Monopolies are considered to be bad for consumers. So sometimes it is in the interest of consumers to vote with the wallet to prevent monopolies from forming. Do you realise how difficult it is to write a monumental size game like Civ from scratch?
EDIT: sorry I used the wrong word "lazy". I meant complacent. That is what monopolies tend to become.

 

[Bechhold]

The problems with CiVI are not hard to fix. They just don't seem to have any interest in fixing them.

So yeah, maybe 'doomed' is the right word.

From a Maps point of view I'd agree. As well as when it comes down to trade etc.

But who knows? Maybe the Engine they introduced during Civ V prevents having such depth like was seen in Civ IV. Would be a bizarre step to take if they knew it prevented such elements of gameplay that had been seen in previous civ games.

 

[ThunderLizard2]

"Greater good" is an expression generally reserved for more philanthropic activities, not "help company B against company A". It's hard to conceive of many scenarios where an individual is under a moral obligation to help a private company succeed. I find such expectation immoral.

I do think that Open Dev is great and I like that Amplitude are engaging with their fans and willing to have them participate in the game developing process.

I had to recheck because you spoke almost as if Lucy is free to play. It's not, I'd have to pre-order the game or spend time watching their streams. I don't want to do either of these. If I do watch a stream it will be out of interest for the game.

Besides, I don't even think that "Firaxis are lazy", so I don't understand why you take your own beliefs as a starting point for how I should behave.

Open Dev means at least the community will be listened to unlike Firaxis sphinx approach. The Red Shell debacle says it all about Firaxis.

 

[AntSou]

Open Dev means at least the community will be listened to unlike Firaxis sphinx approach. The Red Shell debacle says it all about Firaxis.

1. The software that was removed after people complained about it proves that Firaxis does not listen to fans. That makes no sense.

2. Firaxis is delivering monthly updates because the community constantly asked for more frequent updates.

3. NFP is mostly fan service.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

It isn't my own starting point. Monopolies are considered to be bad for consumers. So sometimes it is in the interest of consumers to vote with the wallet to prevent monopolies from forming. Do you realise how difficult it is to write a monumental size game like Civ from scratch?
EDIT: sorry I used the wrong word "lazy". I meant complacent. That is what monopolies tend to become.

This sounds similar to complaints that I hear about Pokemon. Then apparently Temtem was supposed to be the Pokemon Sword and Shield "killer." That didn't happen obviously. That's not to say that there are people that didn't enjoy both games.

I mean even if people said it was bad they still bought it and will most likely buy the remakes for nostalgia. I'm sure so many people that are saying Civ franchise is doomed wouldn't mind an enhanced Civ 4 remake with all the features in place.

 

[Bechhold]

But players have been asking for years for Firaxis to bring back what made Civ IV, to me at least, the pinnacle of the Civ franchise. Yet for two games in a row they have removed features etc.

Now were at the point where adding mythical heroes, and vampires is considered content in a semi historical type of game.

 

[The Civs 6]

Other than performance issues, Old World is straight up a better game.

 

[ThunderLizard2]

But players have been asking for years for Firaxis to bring back what made Civ IV, to me at least, the pinnacle of the Civ franchise. Yet for two games in a row they have removed features etc.

Now were at the point where adding mythical heroes, and vampires is considered content in a semi historical type of game.

Civ V was a big let down from Civ IV BTS. The 1 UPT required a LOT of rethink for how combat would work and this clearly didn't happen. Even the lead dev said it was a mistake. Civ VI with the cartoonish graphics and even worse AI was a big step towards pandering to the casuals market rather than true Civ fans.

 

[Joch]

Now were at the point where adding mythical heroes, and vampires is considered content in a semi historical type of game.

...which is an optional feature, so players can choose to use it or not.

I am more of casual player who plays Civ 6 on and off every few months. I picked up NFP for the holidays and WHOA!, Civ 6 feels like a brand new game and I have been spending way too many hours playing it. All the new optional game modes really add a lot of replay value to this game.

Whenever I think the Devs have taken the game as far as possible, they still find ways to keep improving it!

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Now were at the point where adding mythical heroes, and vampires is considered content in a semi historical type of game.

I mean the fact that you call it a semi historical game, which it is, gives precedent for mythical heroes and vampires to join.

 

[The Civs 6]

Not to rehash that old debate, but yes, fantasy isn't totally out of place in Civ. But doesn't it suggest they are running out of ideas of stuff that is a better fit for the Civ aesthetic when they have to resort to that kind of stuff? It's not like it takes a lot of imagination to reimagine secret societies as something a little less cray cray either. It also reinforces my opinion that Civ 6 lacks a unifying design concept and is just a (very good) collection of mechanics and impressions about history.

 

[LMT]

Civ VI with the cartoonish graphics and even worse AI was a big step towards pandering to the casuals market rather than true Civ fans.

You mean, the people who actually buy most copies of Civ VI? If Firaxis only marketed to "true Civ fans," I'm guessing they wouldn't make much money.

Everyone who plays civ, no matter how hard-core they are now, started out as a neophyte.

 

[The Civs 6]

You mean, the people who actually buy most copies of Civ VI? If Firaxis only marketed to "true Civ fans," I'm guessing they wouldn't make much money.

Everyone who plays civ, no matter how hard-core they are now, started out as a neophyte.

Well just as a counterexample to this, a game like Spore shows how you can repackage a video game for a completely different market, alienating the original core of potential customers. Maybe Civ is going through a similar process?

 

[AntSou]

But players have been asking for years for Firaxis to bring back what made Civ IV, to me at least, the pinnacle of the Civ franchise. Yet for two games in a row they have removed features etc.

Can you be more specific?

 

[Bechhold]

Can you be more specific?

Vassalage, Corporations, a functioning Diplomacy/Trade system. Civ IV had all that. It also had random events that could affect relationships with other civs, none of that has been present in the two following games.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Vassalage, Corporations, a functioning Diplomacy/Trade system. Civ IV had all that. It also had random events that could affect relationships with other civs, none of that has been present in the two following games.

It seems like corporations will be in the game by the end of the month, if the info we found turns out to be true.

 

[Lobox]

exactly, it is what the market currently wants.



Hardly. Customers are not stupid, People do not play games they do not like. You can easily see games that are a bust, big numbers at the start which quickly tail off. Civ 6 numbers have been rising steadily since launch.

https://steamcharts.com/app/289070

and Steam numbers do not cover games played on consoles or phones.

The PC games market has totally changed over the past 20 years, tastes have changed, the market is younger, there is more appetite for casual games, PCs now only account for a small part of the market share, most consumers play games on consoles or phones.

Businesses have had to make a choice, either go for the mass market with products with a broad appeal or become niche players with a product marketed to a more hard core crowd. Civ has become a casual strategy game with nice graphics and a bit of action that you can play on basically any device. Perfect for the player who wants to be entertained for an hour with something not too difficult when they have some downtime. The owners have found the winning formula which is very profitable for them and their shareholders. They are not about to change it and you can expect any future expansion pack or new game to be more or less along the same line.

Now players can of course complain that Civ 6 is not the hard core, ultra realistic strategy game of their dreams, but that is not the game the Devs are producing and you are not their market.

So yes, the Civ series is "doomed" to follow the same formula and continue making lots of money for Take-Two and its shareholders.

PC gaming is worth around 36.9 billion U.S. dollars in 2020 and growing. I have been playing since Civ1 and always been an casual player (in difficulty, not in played time) but Civ6 is outright boring with bad AI and childish graphic. Humankind looks promising and if it is successful I think that an future Civ7 will sell less than Civ6 if Firaxis doesnt step up, at least I wont buy Civ7 if it is an "Civ6.2" and not radically changed. People here in Civfanatics are the market, pushing us away could have the same disastrous effect on the franchise as SimCity 2013 had on the SimCity franchise.

https://steamcharts.com/app/289070#All
Civ6 had over 162000 players on Steam at release october 2016 and did an sharp dive to little under 42000 players december 2016.

https://steamcharts.com/app/8930#All
When comparing Civ5 Steam charts Civ5 seems more successful. In over one year more people played Civ5 than Civ6 until februari 2018 when more played Civ6. Didnt last long though, in march 2018 again more people played Civ5.

https://steamcharts.com/cmp/8930,289070#All
Interesting chart comparing both games in one chart.