My take on why Civ 6 will be a bad game, a 3 pt. podcast

[rastak]

Welcome to the Instant Gratification Generation! It's at the core of many issues, including this. Many people don't like to hear it, but it's true. Look around.

You guys are way overthinking this. A large section of society believes playing games is childish in and of itself.

Let's not take ourselves too serious here. We're talking games.

Bibor hates Civ 5, thinks Civ 6 sucks. Lots of people don't agree and some people taking passive/aggressive shots at them for that opinion. Everyone go play the games you like would be my advice, I don't waste time and effort on things I don't like.

 

[Bibor]

What's wrong with playing a game to feel good instead of "having a challenge"? Life is hard enough, games are for entertainment, not for self-gratification.

My focus is on entertainment, not self-gratification. Quality or intensity of entertainment can increase without going into the realm of twisted or complicated.

 

[Nikae]

Bibor my man, you are a paladín for those who still look for excellence in games and seek challenge in them, that are not contempted with freemium facebook games, sadly our numbers are running slim and the pronostics are grim. Anyways I hope that this disscutions put people to think what they were doing this last years, and what was the motivation for them to play civ5, actual challenge, or to think "I'm awesome"

Hmm, if only the syntax and lexicon were not so familiar, along with the identical message...

No, it must not be.

 

[presa]

Hmm, if only the syntax and lexicon were not so familiar, along with the identical message...

No, it must not be.

Suggesting that I am some kind of multiaccount? No mate, sorry to disappoint you. I'm from Argentina so sorry for the bad English but is the best I can do

 

[rastak]

Suggesting that I am some kind of multiaccount? No mate, sorry to disappoint you. I'm from Argentina so sorry for the bad English but is the best I can do

You speak perfect english "mate". You were inspired to sign up to a site devoted to fanatics of the civ series to say what you did? Welcome aboard. Surprised you found your way here.

 

[Aheadatime]

I agree that games in general are heading down more of a false choice/instant gratification path. To be quite frank, I think that's because people are gradually becoming dumber. Can't tell if it's due to an increase in our reliance on technology, dietary evolution, pollution, conspiracy theories, or if it's just an illusion based on my own extremely limited and biased exposure to the human race chronologically.

Yeah this post isn't that fleshed out. It's 1am and I'm sleep deprived (another cause of diminished intelligence btw).

 

[Bibor]

@Aheadatime
In a generation or two, a car mechanic will have to be both good with a wrench as with C++. Even today, people that cannot use a personal computer are considered illiterate and have trouble finding work.
We are not getting dumber, as much as the world is getting smarter. My friend's kid was using Android from age of 2 to find cartoons on youtube. Imagine what will he be able to do in 10 years.
We are using the plenty of today to become slack, instead of preparing for the future. The silent revolution is silent because internet memes, twitter wars and digital social life are so loud, obfuscating the reality that most of us are becoming obsolete in so many ways, both private and professional.

Computer games are also evolving. Rules of the game have changed. To Bethesda, CDPR happened. To Maxis, Colossal Order. To Philips LG, to Nokia Apple. This is going on for quite some time now, 20 years or so.

I'm surprised everyone is so surprised that my opinion is that an answer to iPhone isn't a new feature phone with a slightly different antena. Apparently Nokia was too. Or to be completely on-topic, Civ will have to reinvent itself if it wants to survive. For start, it should drop the pretense that it's smart, sharp and new enough to be appealing enough to the next generation. I have yet to see a "conqueror's plateau" level of discussion for even for Civ 5. And it has been 6 years.

@Nikae
Really, sir? Writing Paladin with an accent should've been a tell, as that kind of an accent can only have meaning in a romance language, which Hungarian and Croatian are not.

@Presa
Welcome to the forum, Presa. I hope you'll hang around and let the opportunity arise for us to disagree on something. Just to put Nikae's mind to peace.

 

[Ryika]

@Nikae
Really, sir? Writing Paladin with an accent should've been a tell, as that kind of an accent can only have meaning in a romance language, which Hungarian and Croatian are not.

The fact that you noticed the accent that looks very much like a normal i when casually reading the post of the account that randomly showed up on these forums and out of nowhere 100% agreed with you without ever taking part in any other discussions on this board is most astonishing.

Your attention for detail must be very, very high. Admirable.

 

[Bibor]

Your attention for detail must be very, very high. Admirable.

It is actually.

Fun fact: Have you ever noticed how the barbarian's shadow in the old civfanatics logo doesn't match the figure?

 

[Aheadatime]

@Aheadatime
We are not getting dumber, as much as the world is getting smarter. My friend's kid was using Android from age of 2 to find cartoons on youtube. Imagine what will he be able to do in 10 years.

Being technologically fluent =/= being intelligent. Memorizing UIs and sequences are things that a monkey could do. Read Tolstoy, Rousseau, Locke, or Emerson and compare their language, social awareness, intuitive creativity, emotional-intellectual relationship, and their general attention spans (evident through writing style and concept structure) to authors of today and tell me that we've become more intelligent. In fact, forget those authors. Head to any local museum (lol) that contains archived letters/memos of any 'non-genius' individual from 1800 to 1900 and compare their writing style, attention to detail, and language use to that of a common person today.

Here's an interesting article that links numerous studies suggesting our IQ has been slowly declining since the Victorian Era.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...uman-intelligence-victoria-era_n_3293846.html

Comment section? "You mispelled such-and-such". "You mispelled misspelled." As if grammar, obsessive compulsive attention to detail, and a coerced 'cleanliness' are equated to intelligence today. The general quality of thought and communication has been on the decline for generations now, which to me speaks volumes about the general intelligence said thought/communication stems from.

Prescription drugs have been on the rise steadily since my childhood, recreational drugs have become more legal and easy to access, our food has changed drastically in numerous ways (most noticeably an increase in sugar), the amount of wifi shooting around has increased exponentially, the general pool of music that is deemed popular has devolved into useless muttering, the arts have been de-funded heavily throughout the public schooling system, our air, water, and soil have been continually polluted, and the media has continually downgraded itself into a dishonest feeding frenzy of fear and propaganda based on the views of one or all of its' six owners.

So what if our children are more knowledgeable in the computer sciences? That just tells me we've become more machine-like, honoring our insignificant capacity to memorize and sequence.

 

[Staler87]

Being technologically fluent =/= being intelligent. Memorizing UIs and sequences are things that a monkey could do. Read Tolstoy, Rousseau, Locke, or Emerson and compare their language, social awareness, intuitive creativity, emotional-intellectual relationship, and their general attention spans (evident through writing style and concept structure) to authors of today and tell me that we've become more intelligent. In fact, forget those authors. Head to any local museum (lol) that contains archived letters/memos of any 'non-genius' individual from 1800 to 1900 and compare their writing style, attention to detail, and language use to that of a common person today.

Here's an interesting article that links numerous studies suggesting our IQ has been slowly declining since the Victorian Era.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...uman-intelligence-victoria-era_n_3293846.html

Comment section? "You mispelled such-and-such". "You mispelled misspelled." As if grammar, obsessive compulsive attention to detail, and a coerced 'cleanliness' are equated to intelligence today. The general quality of thought and communication has been on the decline for generations now, which to me speaks volumes about the general intelligence said thought/communication stems from.

Prescription drugs have been on the rise steadily since my childhood, recreational drugs have become more legal and easy to access, our food has changed drastically in numerous ways (most noticeably an increase in sugar), the amount of wifi shooting around has increased exponentially, the general pool of music that is deemed popular has devolved into useless muttering, the arts have been de-funded heavily throughout the public schooling system, our air, water, and soil have been continually polluted, and the media has continually downgraded itself into a dishonest feeding frenzy of fear and propaganda based on the views of one or all of its' six owners.

So what if our children are more knowledgeable in the computer sciences? That just tells me we've become more machine-like, honoring our insignificant capacity to memorize and sequence.

Have you ever even done any programming? I doubt it because being a talented programmer has very little to do with memorizing anything and a lot to do with problem solving.

 

[Karmah]

Why is this thread is still here and not lost on the 100th page of the forum is beyond me

 

[Aheadatime]

Have you ever even done any programming? I doubt it because being a talented programmer has very little to do with memorizing anything and a lot to do with problem solving.

Please be more concise in your future posts towards me. You could have meant;

1. Because there are people in the modern world capable of problem solving, the argument in favor of diminished intelligence is weakened.

2. My comment on people being able to use technology fluently starting at a younger age being insignificant towards measuring a population's intelligence was somehow a denouncement of talented programmers.

3. A dead-end insult implying that I must not be a problem-solving individual.

 

[Browd]

Moderator Action: This discussion has wandered far afield of the thread topic -- the gameplay issues raised by the OP in his initial post and linked podcasts. If you have no interest in discussing those issues, please refrain from posting and allow this thread to fade away of its own accord.

 

[Bibor]

If it's on the topic of spirit of Civilization and what we think it should be, then I don't think, IMHO, that it's off-topic, even if it deviates sometimes from the main train of thought. Mobile gaming and wide visibility of games didn't change the game should work. It's still niche entertainment; the only thing that changed is accessibility. I doubt someone playing Farmville will accidentally buy civ6.

 

[Aristos]

If it's on the topic of spirit of Civilization and what we think it should be, then I don't think, IMHO, that it's off-topic, even if it deviates sometimes from the main train of thought. Mobile gaming and wide visibility of games didn't change the game should work. It's still niche entertainment; the only thing that changed is accessibility. I doubt someone playing Farmville will accidentally buy civ6.

I agree with this. Not everything that is not completely and directly aligned with the OP is necessarily off topic. Example: the previous post questioning the trend of the average intelligence of humans in the last decades. It has EVERYTHING to do with the trends in the markets, ALL markets, and can easily explain a lot of the mediocrization going on, from watching Ice Road Truckers in The History Channel to Shafer's Civ 5.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Have you ever even done any programming? I doubt it because being a talented programmer has very little to do with memorizing anything and a lot to do with problem solving.

It depends on the area of expertise actually. Modern programming is a lot about memorizing (especially with micropackages) and internet search skills. It's very rare thing for most programmers to face a problem nobody solved before.

 

[Aristos]

It depends on the area of expertise actually. Modern programming is a lot about memorizing (especially with micropackages) and internet search skills. It's very rare thing for most programmers to face a problem nobody solved before.

You are probably talking about yourself, and that's fair. But good programming is not about memorizing at all; he is right, it's about problem solving. Try solving problems from memory...

 

[stealth_nsk]

You are probably talking about yourself, and that's fair. But good programming is not about memorizing at all; he is right, it's about problem solving. Try solving problems from memory...

I'm speaking about 99% of programmers. Unless you're in some cutting-edge research you usually face some new problem not often in more than half a year. If you're applications programmer and face significant problems more often than 1 per week, this usually means you're very ineffective programmer due lack of memorizing and search skills as these problems are very likely to be solved by someone already.

 

[Staler87]

It depends on the area of expertise actually. Modern programming is a lot about memorizing (especially with micropackages) and internet search skills. It's very rare thing for most programmers to face a problem nobody solved before.

That is why I clarified by saying a talented programmer.

Although, it is almost a certainly though the programmer will be trying to do something better. If a program does nothing better than any program before it what is the point?

@Aheadtime

I don't really see how my statement could be interpreted any way other than what I meant it. You said that kids these days can't problem solve but are great in the computer sciences. I pointed out that the computer sciences are about problem solving. How could you interpret this as a personal insult? I think you may be confused about what computer sciences are. It has nothing to do with a kid learning how to google at 6 months, or really anything kids learn.

In fact many people would argue that we have a bit of a crisis because youth, on average, know nothing about computer sciences. In light of this I admit my comment did not serve as an effective rebuttal, although I still don't see how it could be interpreted as anything but, but it was largely because I thought you were using the term computer sciences as in: computer sciences. Not just knowing how to do random stuff with technology.