Jon Shafer joins Stardock to work on elemental

[DaviddesJ]

I think who enjoy the above are people not so smart... the same people that vote Berlusconi in Italy out of some stupid reason like: "he bought Ibraimovich and Robinho for Milan, i'm a Milan fan so i vote for him" or " if his TVs says that the best singer in Italy come out of a TV show like Big Brother or such on the same TV, it must be true, if the singer votes for Berlusconi than it must be right to vote him"...

And so on... If you are loaded with idiocracy by Media&Market, idiotic things became normal and popular and your statement became true... If i close up McDonald franchise, a lot of problems related will be solved, but because we are free to destroy ourselves, we defend the freedom of eating at Mc... We defend their money and the problems related that weight only us... It's a loop, because people is stupid, there is no reaction agaist who wants people stay stupid and at the same time makes money out of that (and damages us directly)...

I think there are people who think it's a stupid waste of time for you to sit around playing computer games rather than contributing to society or improving your life. I think there are even more people who think it's a stupid waste of time for you to sit around arguing on internet forums about the stupidity of people who play computer games you don't think are sufficiently deep. If you're really going to define stupidity by what other people think of your preferred recreations, I suspect you had better watch out for other people's judgments.

It seems simpler and better to just not throw stones until you do something about your own glass house.

 

[JLoZeppeli]

I think there are people who think it's a stupid waste of time for you to sit around playing computer games rather than contributing to society or improving your life. I think there are even more people who think it's a stupid waste of time for you to sit around arguing on internet forums about the stupidity of people who play computer games you don't think are sufficiently deep. If you're really going to define stupidity by what other people think of your preferred recreations, I suspect you had better watch out for other people's judgments.

It seems simpler and better to just not throw stones until you do something about your own glass house.

I'm an archeologist that works at university so i like playing strategy games on PC and on table in my spare time, the most time i spend on forums is in the dead moment while working.... Or late night like today while chatting with my friends about the weekend trip. I don't go to disco, don't drink don't smoke (or better i did it in my youth, but my girlfriend do), do fitness and read books (mostly specialistic, but i like '800 literature). I'm improving myself everyday...

That's stone can crumble at my feet, i will not notice it, i'm too busy with more important things...

 

[JohnnyW]

Huh? That's exactly my point. Civ 4 sold millions of copies, but only tens of thousands of those into the fan community, people who do things like participating in CFC, actively modding, etc. The vast, vast majority of those sales were to relatively casual players, the people who are now relatively pleased by Civ 5, whose views are reflected in the positive mainstream reviews of Civ 5, etc., etc.

So, if Civ4 sold millions of copies while not pandering to the masses, why did they think they had to for Civ5?

 

[DaviddesJ]

So, if Civ4 sold millions of copies while not pandering to the masses, why did they think they had to for Civ5?

That I don't know. I am not sure anyone has advanced a good theory. They could have had a tremendously successful game if they had just built on the strengths of the existing game, one of the best and most successful turn-based strategy games of all time. Instead they convinced themselves to make some more dramatic changes, which I personally don't think increased the mass appeal of the game very much, while significantly reducing its appeal to the fan community. This seems poor judgment, and I'm sure they wish they had made a game that had been better received by the fan community. No one in a position to know has offered any inside knowledge on why Firaxis would choose an inexperienced 24-year-old with no great record and set him loose to make some pretty fundamental changes. I think the reason is probably something that none of us can guess at.

That said, the important point is that there is no reason for 2K to view the game as the colossal failure that it's viewed as by many here. It's a modest success when it could have been a greater success.

 

[blind biker]

Oh... Well, if thats the case then he would make an ok consultant since he comes up with ok ideas, but more than that would only lower the quality of whatever project he's on.

Unfortunately, I think "chanta" is the word that describes him the best. Civ V is nothing but a blob of horrid ideas pasted together, in addition to bugs that affect stability and slowness.

 

[Tlalynet]

Yeah, I like that term.

He must have enough charisma to get him the job though, social skills are so much more important than actual skills its crazy.

 

[blind biker]

^^^So true.

 

[ridge]

So you haven't played BtS ^^?


Let's see what will happen with elemental. Hoping for the fans that it will be a good change.

BtS? Bureau of Transportation Statistics? Sounds like.........fun.

 

[Grimberht]

So mass is stupid> the game is made dumb for mass>the mass buy the game>the mass is stupid and it's a neverended loop... Obviously the correct answer is that who made the game likes stupid masses, because he can sell a game with little effort and with big revenue...

The only reason the model business you describe worked is that it was build upon a solid franchise. It might have work short term, but it heavily damage the long term and even their possibility to "milk" profits out of the next one has it will be received with caution at best; even from the official critics who knows they looked bad on that one.

The time a player stay on one game aint some "lost" money. My praise has a player for several years sold copy on the long run. I still praise the game(CIV 4) and recommend it when the subject his brought about. My ~100$ i spent (behind a hardcore fan I bought every expansions basically on launch), came with the money I made others spent on it. Therefore.. they got a LOT more than just this 1 copy sold to one guy.

The 50$ they stole away from me with Civ V come with a heavy price for them, because I wont throw anymore money at them unless a miracle happens and I actively convince people NOT to buy it. I even convince a co Worker who bought it for a Christmas gift to turn it back before it ever got to the Christmas tree. So the unit they sold me come with a negative sold units for them, those I convince plus those they convince, etc... multiply by the number of people who like me still on fanatics forums several months after the launch who might have done similar things.

Making bad games is NEVER a good business model no matter if their stupid ambition is to sell to the so call "masses" which doesnt really exist except when we talk about it! The 60% in a poll we all answer without really caring.

Well mass market, fast sell or not... I really dont see how its a "good" business model. It might have done well from the get go. But CIV 5 will NEVER reach the 4M sold copies. No way. Therefore, they've hurt the franchise and therefore cant possibly think they can pull another one off like this one. Add everything up with the Bioshock fiasco and all those I dont know about and 2K deserve to go out of business which might come sooner rather than later. They might survive for some time, but no way they'll strive doing business like this...

If the US economy is so bad, its has something to do with people who think things like the "mass market" is stupid. What they dont realize: "its a lie", the market aint stupid and the market it bitting back. In fact, those who think the market is stupid are somehow considering themselves has such has they are, has individuals, part of it. You can sell crap for large profits for so long eventually people will call your bluff and go for the one who actually havent screw them over yet.

2K and dumb companies like it need to go bankrupt, period. The gaming industry, the gamers and the designers will all better for it!

 

[DaviddesJ]

Making bad games is NEVER a good business model

If most people like the game, then it's a good game, not a bad game. Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[RobAnybody]

This news is a bit... disturbing. I bought Elemental mainly because Civ V was boring & terrible & simple & I was looking for an alternative game to play. Suffice to say that I won't be buying any sort of Elemental expansions if Shafer is anywhere near the design role.

Or you could wait and see if the expansion is any good before pre-judging it. Unless you enjoy cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Yes, because there's nothing I enjoy more than buying games from people I think make terrible games over & over just because I like my nose. Holy False Dichotomy, Batman.

Granted it would've been more technically correct for me to have said "I won't be be buying any sort of Elemental expansions if Shafer is anywhere near the design role without waiting an extra 3-6 months to see how the community reacts". Satisfied now, Captain Semantics? Is my nose now safe in your view?

 

[Venereus]

If most people like the game, then it's a good game, not a bad game. Why is that so hard to understand?

Because the degeneration of mankind that it implies it's hard to accept.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Because the degeneration of mankind that it implies it's hard to accept.

Really? People who like simpler games than you are "degenerate"? Really?

When did the world get so full of snobs? No doubt there are any number of simple tastes that you have, that other people look down on. You ever go to a mainstream movie? Listen to popular music? Read genre fiction? Does this make you "degenerate" or "stupid"?

 

[Grimberht]

If most people like the game, then it's a good game, not a bad game. Why is that so hard to understand?

Oh dont worry, I'm totally bias on it. I dont like it, wont like it, I'm pretty sure they cant fix it and I'm not the only one.

If you want a real insight on how the game really stand from a gameplay and spirit of the franchise perspective, I suggest you read Sulla review. He put in it in depth and a thousand time better written then I could. And those are the reason why I consider it a bad game, every word of it. This game doesnt have the "one more turn factor".

More people equals a good game thing, well when they'll pile up numbers like CIV IV did, I'll be incline to change my mind and admit that I was wrong. But you need to come up with something REALLY convincing to make me think that CIV V will even come close to those numbers.

You're number equals goodness is flawed in yet so many ways, but hey it's way to late to get into that .

 

[DaviddesJ]

More people equals a good game thing, well when they'll pile up numbers like CIV IV did, I'll be incline to change my mind and admit that I was wrong.

That seems a pretty high bar---is Civ 4 the best-selling turn-based strategy game of all time? There are an awful lot of games that aren't "bad games" but aren't #1 in their category, either.

But I'm pretty sure that Civ 5 is selling at a comparable pace.

At least you accept that if the game is well received by the public then it is a success. Some people here seem not to understand that concept.

 

[Grimberht]

That seems a pretty high bar---is Civ 4 the best-selling turn-based strategy game of all time? There are an awful lot of games that aren't "bad games" but aren't #1 in their category, either.

But I'm pretty sure that Civ 5 is selling at a comparable pace.

At least you accept that if the game is well received by the public then it is a success. Some people here seem not to understand that concept.

True... for now. It has sold a lot of copy on marketing plus anticipation alone, no denying that. The 4m bench mark is a bit high.. true! But I'm pretty convinced that CIV V did hurt the franchise and future business to be made with it.

And If those early sale are made to people like me, the "success" wont last. It was fast cash, what I understand about the context in which it was launch (to hyped up the publishers numbers in the last quarter) it was a "short term" success.. no doubt.

If their goal is to cash in short term with marquee name is their ultimate goal... fine the "model" is a "success"... but its doesnt make it a "good" business model.

My point is... quantity for the initial sales was guaranteed by the success of the franchise which rely on the quality aura it has won over the years and scorching it for a fast money aint good business.

 

[Venereus]

Really? People who like simpler games than you are "degenerate"? Really?

When did the world get so full of snobs? No doubt there are any number of simple tastes that you have, that other people look down on. You ever go to a mainstream movie? Listen to popular music? Read genre fiction? Does this make you "degenerate" or "stupid"?

I wasn't even serious. Anyway, I'll explain myself. People are getting used to decreasing levels of quality and increasing levels of mistreatment from corporations. Some bussiness models outright abuse people's ignorance and lack of commitment for profit, and the smart guys on top are realizing this is a desirable state. Couple that with fierce lobbying and an already uneven educational system, and boom, we're all screwed.

Yeah, it's tinfoily and far-fetched. I'm not surprised I was misunderstood. Civ V is not just a bad game, it's release stinks of evil.

 

[Aristos]

Good post. Jon Shafer will thrive at Stardock.

Totally different atmosphere from Firaxis.

I'm not so sure, neighbour... time will tell.

 

[tom2050]

I wasn't even serious. Anyway, I'll explain myself. People are getting used to decreasing levels of quality and increasing levels of mistreatment from corporations. Some bussiness models outright abuse people's ignorance and lack of commitment for profit, and the smart guys on top are realizing this is a desirable state. Couple that with fierce lobbying and an already uneven educational system, and boom, we're all screwed.

Yeah, it's tinfoily and far-fetched. I'm not surprised I was misunderstood. Civ V is not just a bad game, it's release stinks of evil.

Evil businesses. You forgot about evil governments; those are far worse than any company has ever been throughout history. The murder / genocide of countless millions by governments is just the start. Business owned by individuals have never done that. But, oh how evil they are.

And Civ 5 is evil? So I guess it has a soul and is in league with Satan to corrupt mankind. Hmmm, great post. Very well thought out. Please, tell us more.

If Civ 5 is evil, is the game boxes going to hell? Does this mean Steam is evil also?

 

[Aristos]

So, if Civ4 sold millions of copies while not pandering to the masses, why did they think they had to for Civ5?

I have a possible answer for that:

They were just a MEDIOCRE team. As simple as that.

They just lacked the abilities to make something better than BTS, starting with the leadership. All those fancy stories about the evil suites imposing streamlined visions on the poor, defenseless genius that was running the show are just plain BS...

The most likely truth is that they just lack abilities. After all, Soren was not really a normal ocurrence... or Brian before him.