Jon comes back with a vengence

[TM Moot]

Do you really think, the AI would be able to handel a mechanic like this? I am afraid

er..civ2 managed it ok, i'm sure programming has come on since back then, so yes

 

[Louis XXIV]

Does anyone know if this game when completed will be on Steam???

My guess is it'll be released online, but it won't have the amount of demand necessary to require a distributor like Steam.

 

[Gucumatz]

Just posted this in the news thread, and figured it would be good to add it here as well!

- Jon

I want to wish you good luck on your game! I will 100% sure check it out. I think its marvelous that you seem to be taking criticism of Civ 5 and using it to learn and evolve your ability to create. Personally I love how Civ 5 is now (Could still be better). Civ 5 at release I agree had many lacking features.

But there is one thing I want to say. If you could get the AI to properly understand 1 UPT Civ 5 would have been/and would be a muuuuuuch greater success. 1 UPT is actually one of the most fun things about Civ 5. Its why multiplayer in Civ 5 is thriving. But as you said in your blog reflection, the AI was lacking. Here's wishing you good luck and on creating an AI that can support your grand visions!

 

[joncnunn]

er..civ2 managed it ok, i'm sure programming has come on since back then, so yes

Actually, the Civ 2 AI was terrible is this regard. Especially in combination with forts that the AI did not defend / roads & rails working for opponents. But given the Deity level production bonuses, people didn't feel too bad abusing the AI to kill them.

This is the main reason that SMAC went to only alien based stacks killed at once / for regular units collateral damage when a unit in the stack died & Civ III went further by eliminating unit death as a source of collateral damage.

 

[Matthew.]

My guess is it'll be released online, but it won't have the amount of demand necessary to require a distributor like Steam.

What of all the indie games that get released on Steam? It seems like Steam distribution would be a given. Honest question, 'cause I am far from an expert on Steam distribution--just seems like many smaller dev teams take advantage of the easy access to a relatively large portion of the market.

 

[DonQuiche]

I have to admit, Civ5 is nowhere near the game I wanted, but Civ5 isn't the moo3 a lot of haters pretend it is.

I totally agree. And one thing I certainly appreciate with civ5 is the risk taken: the developers could have just refined civ4 and labeled it "civ5" but instead they decided to innovate and deeply revisit its gameplay and UI. Some things did not turn out well (the AI is a failure on every level) but despite of that it is a good and enjoyable game with many good ideas, and a refreshing shot at the Civ franchise that will lay the ground up for its sequels.

As we often complain about stagnation and lack of risk and innovation in the video game industry, I will certainly not complain about it in civ5. If Jon Shafer is the one to thank for that, then I can only wish him the best luck for his new project and I will definitely give it a close look.

 

[Bechhold]

Just past the 60k mark.

 

[dashwinner]

I don't want to come off as a hater, truth is I never even played Civ4, and I really enjoy CiV...
But reading this, I couldn't help but feel like he listed a bunch of things that were in Civ4, that he purposefully took out for CiV, and now that he realized that it wasn't a good idea, he is reimplementing them back into his new game, flaunting them as new features, and congratulating himself for realizing what positive additions they bring to a strategy game...

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/jonshafer/jon-shafers-at-the-gates/posts/404789

 

[Atwork]

Original Post:

had firaxis just let shafer developed CiV in his own way. we might be playing CiV with what all (so far we know) he introduced in his new game at the gate?

Firaxis did let Shafer develop Civ the way he wanted. If you read the interview, a goodly portion of it is Shafer explaining the mistakes he made with Civ and describing how this new game learns from those mistakes.

I hope Firaxis developers intend to address some of the issues that Shafer pointed out about Civ....issues that Shafer is responsible for. Many of those issues are exactly what so many folks have complained about since the game's first release. Granted, the game is tremendoulsy improved from vanilla.

 

[Biz_]

it's funny how he rides the fail wave of Civ 5 and pretends that he will somehow magically fix the problems just by recognizing them

wasn't he saying the civ 5 AI was good before release?

this just sounds like more empty promises to be honest.

 

[joncnunn]

I wouldn't worry too much about Civ V for Civ VI; it appears that each version has always reverted at least one thing from the previous version in favor of the one two versions ago.

Mine Improvement on flat grassland (no resources):
Allowed in original civ; abolished in Civ II; restored in Civ III, and abolished yet again for Civ IV.

cash now mixed with per turn items for trades:
Allowed in Civ III (with trade-rep), abolished in Civ IV, allowed again in Civ V.

Buildings cost per turn maintenance:
This was the case in Civ II & III; removed in Civ IV, restored in Civ V.

Corruption of hammers:
Not present in Civ II (was gold only); added to Civ III; removed for Civ IV.

 

[Babri]

Disagree about 1UPT being superior.

Whatever the case, if you stack all your units together, your supply lines will become vulnerable. If they get severed, you are in danger of losing the whole force.

So, there is stacking but a strong incentive not to do so in At the Gates.

Seems fair to me.

Personally I think mixture of 1UPT & stacking would be best of both worlds when talking about civ series. So generally you have stack of units aka armies. But when 2 armies attack each other they go on a 1UPT type sub-game/map. (Somewhat similar to what we had in Sid Pirates.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

 

[Civking5]

it's funny how he rides the fail wave of Civ 5 and pretends that he will somehow magically fix the problems just by recognizing them

wasn't he saying the civ 5 AI was good before release?

this just sounds like more empty promises to be honest.

U r missing the bigger picture here, the whole article aims for advertising the new game; ATG rather than discussing civ5 shortcomings.

 

[Aristos]

U r missing the bigger picture here, the whole article aims for advertising the new game; ATG rather than discussing civ5 shortcomings.

Nope, I would say that the whole article aims at advertising the "new" game BY discussing civ5 shortcomings, implying that he now will truly make the new game shine by solving the shortcomings that he himself created. Only problem with that is that all "new" ways of solving said shortcomings have already been done, many of them in the previous incarnation of the Civilization series. So much for a "new" game.

P.D.: oh, and please do not cite "his" idea of supply system as one of the originalities of the article, has been done eons ago by the likes of Norm Koger (OpArt of War series), and more recently by Victor Reijkersz (Advanced Tactics series). So yes, some of us have the big picture pretty clear, my friend.

 

[Biz_]

U r missing the bigger picture here, the whole article aims for advertising the new game; ATG rather than discussing civ5 shortcomings.

he's just trying to convince people that he will be able to accomplish some design goals because he says he will. if he repeats it enough I guess you'll believe him...

like how bad of a gamer do you have to be to realize that civ 5 just doesn't function as a strategy game (no AI, no multiplayer)? how does someone go from complete noob to capable of developing strong AI in such short a time frame?

there's nothing of substance here other than "oh yeah. that kind of sucked. I'll fix it. I promise. gimme $$$"

 

[Txurce]

he's just trying to convince people that he will be able to accomplish some design goals because he says he will. if he repeats it enough I guess you'll believe him...

like how bad of a gamer do you have to be to realize that civ 5 just doesn't function as a strategy game (no AI, no multiplayer)? how does someone go from complete noob to capable of developing strong AI in such short a time frame?

there's nothing of substance here other than "oh yeah. that kind of sucked. I'll fix it. I promise. gimme $$$"

A lot of people obviously enjoy Civ 5 - just look at the threads. And as for ATG, there is enough substance there for him to smash past his threshold goal. I love playing Civ 5, can't imagine playing Civ with stacks of doom again, and look forward to playing ATG.

 

[Civking5]

he's just trying to convince people that he will be able to accomplish some design goals because he says he will. if he repeats it enough I guess you'll believe him...

like how bad of a gamer do you have to be to realize that civ 5 just doesn't function as a strategy game (no AI, no multiplayer)? how does someone go from complete noob to capable of developing strong AI in such short a time frame?

there's nothing of substance here other than "oh yeah. that kind of sucked. I'll fix it. I promise. gimme $$$"

Say whatever u want, I enjoy playing civ5 both single player and multiplayer games as much as I enjoyed playing previous civ games.

 

[DonQuiche]

how does someone go from complete noob to capable of developing strong AI in such short a time frame?

When working on a difficult task, if the result is a total waste, it does not necessarily mean that you're bad and unable to do it. There may be other reasons:
* Budget cuts and/or schedule changes and delays.
* A wrong approach (the general design, not the details or its implementation). Use another one the next time and you may achieve an excellent result. And, here, clearly, the diplomacy design was wrong because it was not understood by the players (and if the player fails at understanding a smart AI, he will deem it stupider than a stupid but predictable AI). Once you understand that, it is not that hard to avoid the next time.

Actually, did Jon Shaffer program the whole thing? I thought he was only responsible for the game design. Anyway it is hard to say who is to blame for civ5's mistakes and what it does say about those people, while we do not know the studio's intricacies.

 

[Atwork]

...the whole article aims for advertising the new game; ATG rather than discussing civ5 shortcomings.

What he is doing is promoting his new work by pointing out flaws in the design of his old work. It's sort of shameless. I'm assuming Firaxis requires its developers to sign Non-Disclosure Agreement and/or some form of a Non-Competition Agreement. I would also assume that the language in those agreements should prevent its developers from leaving Firaxis, building a competing game, and then promoting the new game by blasting on the old game. Perhaps those agreements have expired?

Anyways, it's good to hear a honest critique from the very person who was behind the fundamental design of Civ 5.

 

[damnyankees]

What he is doing is promoting his new work by pointing out flaws in the design of his old work. It's sort of shameless. I'm assuming Firaxis requires its developers to sign Non-Disclosure Agreement and/or some form of a Non-Competition Agreement. I would also assume that the language in those agreements should prevent its developers from leaving Firaxis, building a competing game, and then promoting the new game by blasting on the old game. Perhaps those agreements have expired?

Anyways, it's good to hear a honest critique from the very person who was behind the fundamental design of Civ 5.

I'm not intimately familiar with the practices of the gaming industry, but the general rule for non-competes is that they have to limited in time and scope, usually around 1 to 3 years. Civ V was released long enough ago that his non-compete may have expired, if he ever had one.