Maybe I *have* been thinking of Civ5 the wrong way!

[Aristos]

There are two groups, yes. People who like it and people who don't.

Only it has become a sport for some veteran civ players to bash CiV by saying its become for the masses and doesnt have any depth and bla bla...
<snip>

Well, if that made you feel better about yourself...good for you.

I could easily rise the opposite argument: convincing yourself that civ0.5 has some depth makes YOU feel better because "look, I now play the deep strategy game that everyone referred to as hardcore, now I'm one of them!OMGOMGOMG!"...

Which, then again, may explain the harsh, almost irrational defense of civ0.5 by some...

Oh, the beauty of counters...

 

[Aristos]

Regarding the topic: I would like to see civ6 shipped out with 2 discs: one designed for civ veterans, one for beginners.

Or a "starter package" is sold as well as the additional "veterans package", which would be more expansive but actually would provide strategic depth.

But they don't need to do that. The model to follow is Paradox's Victoria II. The first Victoria game was a complexity beast, only for the truly pacient, intelligent micromanagers, but put many away. The second Victoria is even more complex, adding more rich features to the gameplay (not stripping them, hear me Shafer?), but at the same time including automation of all actions as an option. So, the micromanager can disable automation for each and every decision he/she wants to manage themself, and the "casual" can leave automation on and focus on the big picture only (or on some aspects).

The model works very well, AI is pretty good at doing almost everything, so the game appeals to a wider market without dumping its hardcore fanbase into the trashcan of memories...

 

[Guru-Meditation]

Your thinking is now in line with a large number of people.

This "Civ" if I can even call it that was made for the casual gamer. It was not intended to be deep, engaging or challenging. It was not designed for the long time Civ fan that loves immersion and deep and rich game play. This is not your daddy's Civ so to speak. Shame...

The fact that Firaxis and 2K Games lied about the game being designed to satisfy hardcore Civ fans is a huge slap in the face that won't be forgotten for a long time if forgotten at all.

They should be ashamed of themselves but I'm sure they aren't.

/This

Was goona type something similar, but why when its already there.

I feel cheated, because they used False Advertising. If they had called it Civ Tactics or so, like another offshot of the Civ franchise like Revolutions, but they positioned it like a sequel, so i came to expect sequel like changes, not offshot like dumbing down for the wide market. (and i´m completely ignoring the fact that it was released in a late-beta stage form)



At least there is still Paradox left when i want to have a immersive grand strategy game, and a company i can actually trust not to screw me over for a quick bug. Although their games are reaaaaaaaaaly complex.




P.S.
And i will NEVER-EVER preorder any game any more. EVER.

 

[alpaca]

At least there is still Paradox left when i want to have a immersive grand strategy game, and a company i can actually trust not to screw me over for a quick bug. Although their games are reaaaaaaaaaly complex.

And, usually, in a beta state on release because P'dox doesn't have enough money for good QA

I tend to wait a few months before picking up most games. Didn't wait with Civ5, but it would probably have been a good idea.

 

[SuperJay]

Just out of curiosity, what are you planning to move on to? Maybe I could find some solace as well if I had something worth while to play as an alternative. I'm thinking of giving this Victoria II that everyone is talking about a try.

I play various games for different reasons - from RPGs to shooters - and Civ has always been the go-to franchise for turn-based strategy / empire building. I haven't tried Victoria II myself, but that might be worth a shot. I also can still get a lot of mileage out of Civ 4, given that I haven't touched some of the major modpacks out there, like Fall From Heaven; so for TBS goodness, I'll probably try that out next. I guess that'd be more akin to moving back than moving on, but you get the idea.

You were the one who brought up harry potter!!

But regarding Civ5, and I'm not saying I enjoy the game, I think it was fairly poorly designed - I'm merely stating whether a game is complex or not is not directly proportional to how enjoyable it is - CivIII for example was arguably more "complex" then Civ2 - does that mean a majority of Civ Fanatics would preffer it to it's predecessor?

I guess I didn't make my points very clearly, but I never literally claimed that "complex automatically equals better" or that I was part of some kind of cool-kids "majority" on this site or elsewhere, or that my views are right and somehow better than anyone else's. Apparently Harry Potter was a bad example as a few folks seemed to think I was making a direct comparison between the two.

In a nutshell: I'm trying like hell to find some way to value Civ 5 and stop being fed up with the game and with 2K Firaxis. The attempts to play and enjoy it myself fell flat after a few weeks. Now I'm trying to consider it as an entry-point for others rather than a continuation of the gameplay I personally enjoy. I hope it does succeed in bringing more new players to the franchise. I look forward to more people enjoying the games that I've been so interested in for 20 years. I'm a pretty casual player myself (I've never beaten Civ 4 on the highest difficulties) but I appreciate depth and don't find it in Civ5. I'm not here to rehash all the arguments or provide a litany of complaints that have been posted elsewhere by far more articulate and informed Civ players - just trying to get over my own disappointment, basically.

 

[Aristos]

And, usually, in a beta state on release because P'dox doesn't have enough money for good QA

Maybe, but that is the cost of NOT renouncing to their principles and core values, a cost that I gladly pay for the long term reward of playing an intelligent game for intelligent people.

 

[Aristos]

Apparently Harry Potter was a bad example as a few folks seemed to think I was making a direct comparison between the two.

No, brother, it was a good example. You just need to understand the "levelling down" phsycology behind this whole debate...

Basically, you can sum it up to something like "I want to be a part of this group without doing the same brain effort" mentality... when you accuse one of their "tools" to achieve that "elitization" (quotes because all those thoughts are in their minds) of being dumbed down, they take it personally, because when you say that Harry Potter is a "light literature" example, they hear you saying "you are to dumb to read Shakespeare" or something like that.

In other words, it all boils down to the increasing lack of self-esteem syndrome...

(and now you will see them shooting at me and accusing me of that syndrome, you'll see... ).

 

[Zydor]

........(and now you will see them shooting at me and accusing me of that syndrome, you'll see... ).

Defend yourself against this evil

I'll join you

If we can get another four to join us - we can take over the world, Continents shall tremble in our wake

Regards
Zy

 

[KingMorgan]

Capital of West Germany (off top of my head) was Bonn.

Harry P is a good example and vaild comparision, the first HP book was rather slim, the next book in the series was a little thicker till the monster sized book at the end, the reason it was so sucessfull was that it bought the reader along, advancing as the reader aged, so the inital 11 yr old was a 20 odd yr old when the last book was released. It bought the fans along keeping pace with their development. I see direct paralells to the Civ franchise, only (sadly) the latest installment is merely an amlagmation of the some of the aspects of the series with a pretty GUI.

It's no wonder that folks who are long time players are dispointed, expections have been set so high by the quality of the prevoius installments.

Just imagine if JK Rowling had sold out like Civ 5 has, i'm pretty sure she'd be in hiding - just like Jon and 2k Greg seem to be.

 

[gilmore606]

OP hit it on the head and the Civ 5 fans definitely don't want to admit it. Maybe it's time to start a thread on designing our own Civ 5. Hell, I'd play a Civ roguelike with ASCII graphics (think Dwarf Fortress) if it had the complexity and depth we were hoping for.

 

[Aristos]

Just imagine if JK Rowling had sold out like Civ 5 has, i'm pretty sure she'd be in hiding - just like Jon and 2k Greg seem to be.

don't be so sure about that... I mean, they are hiding, obviously, but they may be not so far... judging by the almost irrational defense of the creature by some in this very forum, I cannot avoid the suspicion that they are here, disguised... responding, naming the evil complainers as "haters" and such...

come out, little John... I'm looking for you...

 

[Aristos]

Defend yourself against this evil

I'll join you

If we can get another four to join us - we can take over the world, Continents shall tremble in our wake

Regards
Zy

I don't need to defend myself. Their mouths are my best defense. The more they "speak" (write), the more evident the quality of civ0.5's target market is, and the more my point is proven... refer to my signature.

 

[Markstar]

don't be so sure about that... I mean, they are hiding, obviously, but they may be not so far... judging by the almost irrational defense of the creature by some in this very forum, I cannot avoid the suspicion that they are here, disguised... responding, naming the evil complainers as "haters" and such...

come out, little John... I'm looking for you...

I doubt they are "hiding", neither do I think that they regard Civ5 as a failure. It is clear that they wanted to target a more casual audience and that they achieved and there are quite a few people, even on this forum, who like that change.

Commercially and critically, Civ5 was a success and if you look at the reviews, it also did rather well. That many of us consider Civ5 a step in the wrong direction probably does not really concern most of the people who were involved in the making of Civ5, since after all, it's all about making money.

Personally, as a true addict who has thought about Civ EVERY SINGLE DAY since 1991 (but not really played in years), I have given up on Firaxis and do not expect them to ever produce a game that could even come close to what I think Civ should be like (and I'm not talking about a complexity-orgy à la AND or Hollywood-like special effects).

 

[Zydor]

The move to mass market format is clear, and they have the right to do so, they own it. I have a niggle about the way they decided to "inform" what was about to happen, clearly if they said it straight, load and clear, initial Sales would not have supported the game development. The days of developed games hitting the shelves first release are long gone, and they need initial sales cash to make the game playable. Standard formulae these days no surprises there.

To those that enjoy it - great stuff, have fun with it - to the new arrivals to the Franchise that the new format has attracted, welcome to a long standing Franchise, have fun.

But emphatically, remove the label "Strategy Game", it is no longer a Strategy Game, and to continue to pretend it is, is wholesale deception aimed at new Franchise Arrivals.

Regards
Zy

 

[fed1943]

"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left that must be added,
but when there is nothing left that must be taken away" would be the true translation.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The move to mass market format is clear, and they have the right to do so, they own it. I have a niggle about the way they decided to "inform" what was about to happen, clearly if they said it straight, load and clear, initial Sales would not have supported the game development. The days of developed games hitting the shelves first release are long gone, and they need initial sales cash to make the game playable. Standard formulae these days no surprises there.

To those that enjoy it - great stuff, have fun with it - to the new arrivals to the Franchise that the new format has attracted, welcome to a long standing Franchise, have fun.

But emphatically, remove the label "Strategy Game", it is no longer a Strategy Game, and to continue to pretend it is, is wholesale deception aimed at new Franchise Arrivals.

Regards
Zy

The move to "mass market" involved a LOT of design choices that don't exactly appeal to a mass market. If that's their goal their actions don't align well with it...it is very important to accurately target your primary demographic. If they wanted mass appeal, they should have put up a game with average strategic depth, GOOD game balance, smooth controls with a UI that allows you to potentially play quickly, and strong MP compatibility. They'd have also made the game run more quickly so that casual players could get into games w/o spending hours on end.

Trying to appeal to both audiences is obviously going to create a lot of strife. The mod community would not have been happy with a smoother running but less-mod-able game, but right now the mods don't work as well as advertised anyway so relatively few players are happy given the state of the core game. Trying to do too much with too little budget/time can result in outcomes like this.

 

[Poorly deluded]

I would agree with you TheMeInTeam. As you try to broaden your market your product invariably becomes blander. The problem with that is each individual has different tastes and so you end up with a product that people will often complain about but will generally accept. Economicaly this is a reasonable approach as you can maximise your profits against the cost of production and logistics.

It would be great if 2 variants could be produced to meet the 2 market sectors at the sametime, however I guess realistically this would be too difficult and possibly too costly to do. What you could do is have 2 strains of effectively the same game though 1 version under a new guise that could have 2 differing strategy levels. All you would need to do would be to ensure that the community is aware of which version is which.

SuperJay I would like to congratulate you on a superb discussion thread that has enabled some very interesting opinions from people. It has been good to read and digest the thoughts of others.

To give you some ray of hope, I think that should the franchise continue in the direction it is then some other company will pick up on the fact that there is a market sector desiring something more and that an alternate product will be developed to assuage that desire.

 

[Canpolat]

Okay! Here is how you actually will be able to like Civ5!

First; what is the Problem?

Right! Civ5 kinda is ..well not so good as its predecessors.

Reason?

They called this game "Civilization 5" which makes it an official sequel to one of the greatest and most addictive games of all time. Very very big shoes to fit in.

Solution?

Dont call it Civ5! Call it "Civilization Arcade". Make it a new Genre. Civilization for the WiXbox generation and bring out the REAL Civilization 5 with deep gameplay, historical accuracy, challenging adult entertainment.

Benefit?

Thinking that way makes the game fun on its own. Since it has not to compete with its overly prominent predecessors. It also allows to be more merciful with its shortcomings since you can then say "Hey! its Civ Arcade...whaddya expect?"

 

[lschnarch]

Solution?

Dont call it Civ5! Call it "Civilization Arcade". Make it a new Genre. Civilization for the WiXbox generation and bring out the REAL Civilization 5 with deep gameplay, historical accuracy, challenging adult entertainment.

Benefit?

Thinking that way makes the game fun on its own. Since it has not to compete with its overly prominent predecessors. It also allows to be more merciful with its shortcomings since you can then say "Hey! its Civ Arcade...whaddya expect?"

I agree.
Unfortunately, it is too late now to do so.

People already feel cheated, confidence already has been lost.

 

[SuperJay]

The move to "mass market" involved a LOT of design choices that don't exactly appeal to a mass market. If that's their goal their actions don't align well with it...it is very important to accurately target your primary demographic. If they wanted mass appeal, they should have put up a game with average strategic depth, GOOD game balance, smooth controls with a UI that allows you to potentially play quickly, and strong MP compatibility. They'd have also made the game run more quickly so that casual players could get into games w/o spending hours on end.

Trying to appeal to both audiences is obviously going to create a lot of strife. The mod community would not have been happy with a smoother running but less-mod-able game, but right now the mods don't work as well as advertised anyway so relatively few players are happy given the state of the core game. Trying to do too much with too little budget/time can result in outcomes like this.

Agreed - I think they tried to kind of put a foot in both worlds (insofar as we can oversimplify it down to just two audiences) with Civ 5, and ended up with a game that's a little light for a strategy title, but not as accessible as most casual titles.

That said, I don't want to keep turning this into an "us vs. them" situation. People like the game. Lots of them. That doesn't make them the enemy. They're just as "good" at strategy games as anyone else is. I'm not here to troll those folks just because they enjoy it. IMO, it's not that the game is dumber, it's just more shallow at this point; there's just not much to do and the playthroughs seem depressing similar. Some folks probably don't think so and/or don't mind it as it seems a lot of the comments from fans say things like "I'm glad esionage is gone, I never used it anyway." And nothing wrong with that, it stands to reason that most folks wouldn't miss something they never used.

Hopefully that lack of depth will change if future patches add more layers. (Core mechanics are another story; who knows if Firaxis or modders will be able to update the nuts and bolts of the game without causing more imbalances.) Time will tell, of course - but I do wonder how confident longtime fans will be in future offerings from Firaxis.