Is the next patch where Civ V should have started?

Agree completely.

My point was, with regards to the CiV discussion, that an argument I read over and over is that the game post-patch will now feel more 'balanced' or it has been 're-balanced' etc.

I very much doubt it. Experienced players will just find new ways to exploit the game post-patch, a new patch will be designed to counter this and the cycle is endless.

Perhaps we should focus on making the game more 'fun' and 'playable' instead?

I think the "Balance" thing is all about game mechanics itself, not really against AI, and a fun game must be a balanced game, and that is when I as a player can choose my own path and playstyle.

Pre-patch, I was forced into Theocracy, National College, etc, because they are clearly the optimal choice, so there is not really much choice in this game. I do not know if June/July patch will fix this problem, but it seems decent enough.

This game has already evolved greatly from its release state, and I am pretty confident that it will find a balance point when no more major upheaval in game mechanic will occur.
 
I think the "Balance" thing is all about game mechanics itself, not really against AI, and a fun game must be a balanced game, and that is when I as a player can choose my own path and playstyle.
But a common point of critique with CiV is the enhanced sensation that the player plays by an entirely different set of rules than the AI, and by the look of it it seems to be exactly the case. Some go as far as calling it essentially 2 different games playing out on the same map.

With this design approach, can game mechanics ever be refined into delivering a 'balanced' game experience? Personally I don't think so but would welcome to be proven wrong.

In some ways it's a bit like taking a chess board, fill it with Go pieces and ask a chess player and a go player to play against each other in the same game. I know - it's wildly over exaggerated but you get the idea... ;)
 
Just wanted to mention that Civ V is currently the seventh most played game on steam. Its the fourth non-valve game on the list and it beats Valve's Left 4 Dead 2. I see that showing that the game is good and it still has a lot of players even if how unfinished some people claim it to be. To me its the best version of Civilization games as I never was a big fan of Civ IV and I still remember how I liked Civ III better than it. I don't see this update as anything else than I have seen earlier patch that rebalances the game and I'm quite happy about it. It will make me change the playing style as now I usually did almost the same things in every game. I also have nothing against the DLC model. Its simple if you don't want to buy them then don't. Its just waste of time when certain people here state the same thing in every topic that somehow relates to DLC and thats how they hate the DLC system and would never buy them.
 
But a common point of critique with CiV is the enhanced sensation that the player plays by an entirely different set of rules than the AI, and by the look of it it seems to be exactly the case. Some go as far as calling it essentially 2 different games playing out on the same map.

With this design approach, can game mechanics ever be refined into delivering a 'balanced' game experience? Personally I don't think so but would welcome to be proven wrong.

In some ways it's a bit like taking a chess board, fill it with Go pieces and ask a chess player and a go player to play against each other in the same game. I know - it's wildly over exaggerated but you get the idea... ;)
Yes it annoys me as well. Sometime I wish they could at least hide their ridiculous Happiness and GPT, but well... AI will need that bonus to become a threat anyway, and as long as they threat me to make strategic choices, I am fine, and that's all a strategic game is about.

If AI can threat human without any significant bonuses, I would never ever play another strategic game... I have hoped for twenty years, so oh well...
 
Just wanted to mention that Civ V is currently the seventh most played game on steam. Its the fourth non-valve game on the list and it beats Valve's Left 4 Dead 2. I see that showing that the game is good and it still has a lot of players even if how unfinished some people claim it to be. To me its the best version of Civilization games as I never was a big fan of Civ IV and I still remember how I liked Civ III better than it. I don't see this update as anything else than I have seen earlier patch that rebalances the game and I'm quite happy about it. It will make me change the playing style as now I usually did almost the same things in every game. I also have nothing against the DLC model. Its simple if you don't want to buy them then don't. Its just waste of time when certain people here state the same thing in every topic that somehow relates to DLC and thats how they hate the DLC system and would never buy them.

If the game is that popular (and consequently, commercially succesful) it simply means the lack of support given the game's poor condition is even less acceptable.

I like the game as well - I've invested a ridiculous amount of hours into playing it - but that doesn't mean I won't recognize it had and has massive problems and that the support it's been given is completely unacceptable.

Unfortunately, as was mentioned, this direction seems to be where most developers/games are headed. There are just a few companies holding out and consistently delivering quality products: Blizzard, Valve and BioWare. Buying anything from these companies guarantees receiving a quality product out of the box. Games from practically anybody else is hit-and-miss - and Firaxis is unfortunately no exception.
 
Unfortunately, as was mentioned, this direction seems to be where most developers/games are headed. There are just a few companies holding out and consistently delivering quality products: Blizzard, Valve and BioWare. Buying anything from these companies guarantees receiving a quality product out of the box. Games from practically anybody else is hit-and-miss - and Firaxis is unfortunately no exception.

There are some exceptions here,like Minecraft,that hasn't gone out of the beta yet and still is a great success. most of the improvements that Minecraft receives lately came from the own community of the game. but because the company has no tradition at making games, a few people(probably no one) complains about the many bugs that minecraft has. With the exception of dlc exploit and the lack of honesty at telling the players that Civ 5 hasn't gone out of the beta yet, Firaxis is doing something similar to Mojang.
 
RE: Is the next patch where Civ V should have started?

I think this question is unfair.
Program patching is a process.
It seems Civ works well with this process.
In the end, the game is better.
 
or when walking into a resturaunt

"the food may or may not be an accurate representation of the item in the menu including product size, quality of ingredients, and freshness of the food. you hereby agree and declare complete liability for any damages accumulated while eating any food, or dining in any location of our establishment"

(thus your "quarter pounder" is actually a quarter pound sandwhich and not a quarter pound piece of meat being used.)

I'm afraid--without any written disclaimer or acknowledgement of it--that method of operating has already been going on for decades. I, for one, can't remember the last time I ordered any kind of fast food and receiving items that looked as good as the menu picture. You know, the one with the meat hanging out past the bun, the tomatoes all around, lettuce so green and lush that one might think it was going to overtake the rest of the food items on the sandwich...and so many french fries in the container that one wonders how it manages to hold them all without bursting at the seams...
 
I agree with Nyanko.
I like Blizzard-made games, but I've been happy to play CiV for the last year instead of waiting.

I've got to respectfully disagree. I'd have preferred to continue to play Civ4 for the next five years and get a proper sequel, rather than have Civ5 come out and be disappointing enough that I'll still be playing Civ4 for the next five years until a proper sequel comes out. At least in the former route, there's no disappointment.
 
With the policy buffs, better wonders, improved UAs (though US still needs a buff), combined with the other patches, it seems as though civ may be the most fun it ever has been for the casual gamer.

The problem is, it's been many months since civ was first released, and many fans of
civ 4 left this a long time ago. If the game had been released in its current state, would it have been better received? If this had been the starting situation, to be improved upon, I think it would have gotten a lot less flak from people.
It's a pointless question to ask, because a lot of the stuff in the patch is a result of feedback and testing. Balance issues in particular can be very hard to pin down without a large pool of testers.
 
I find it funny that people complain about DLC and yet praise "$15 a month to play WoW" Blizzard.

Yes Blizzard does take their time releasing games to work out most of the flaws (although they aren't perfectly balanced they patch their games more then anybody, WC3 is on patch 26.) However, I don't think anyone can rationally argue that 2k is horrible for DLC and yet praise a company that charges so much pay to play money for their content while still charging people to actually buy their game and expansions.

And don't even say that's just the nature of MMORPGs, because they are doing this at a time when almost all other MMORPGs are switch to a free to play model.

Besides, I don't think you can compare a RTS or MMORPG to a turn based game. It's just different circumstances and different communities. Blizzards games are designed with the intent of being multiplayer focused. They have to be very well balanced upon release or there won't be any players. Civilization has always and will always primarily be a single-player game. The single-player community doesn't worry about balance nearly as much and are mostly just looking for relaxing content to challenge themselves with.
 
There are just a few companies holding out and consistently delivering quality products: Blizzard, Valve and BioWare.

BioWare just delivered Dragon Age 2. Universally panned by fans who worship Dragon Age:Origins.

and you forget CD-Red Project and Piranha Bytes, among the few.
 
Back
Top Bottom