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

[Ryika]

It's a bit like a static maze game vs. a randomly generated maze game.

You can follow a step-by-step guide and solve the static maze, but just reading about the randomly generated maze won't get you to the finish line. You may learn a thing or two about how the algorithm generates the maze so you can make some informed decisions while you're working on the solution, but because it's different every time no amount of reading will actually allow you to solve your specific maze.

Civ 5, even with the random generated nature of the maps, was rather close to being a static maze on the strategical level, a very complex one, but ultimately a static one with general rules that were right "most of the time".

Civ 6 tries to be more the randomly generated maze, but we'll have to see how well it turns out in the end.

 

[Abraxis]

"Meaningful choices" is just marketing jargon. I understand you have a definition in mind, but in my experience any developer promising "meaningful choices" is only going to deliver false choices. If they need to make "meaningful choices" a marketing or development point, it's because the design doesn't inherently generate any of the genuinely meaningful choices you reference.

There is nothing enherent about any of it, this is not a baby they are birthing, it's a system they are designing, it is 100% deliberate.
Whether and how much their product will align with their philosophy is another descussion, but dismissing it as empty rhetoric comes off as the opinion of someone with no experience in design.

Or perhaps someone who's spent too much time listening to Todd Howard.

 

[KampfKorra]

Its true that dlc compatibility issues where a massive f-up. Well i consider the whole mp platform to be really badly made anyway.

On Blizzard, Overwatch is decent but lacks a bit in content. However said content is being introduced for free little by little.

Overwatch is AWESOME! It got 9/10 all over the board. And I agree with it. I am playing it 5 hours each day minimum. And the reason it doesnt have much content atm is that it is a new game. New map and hero coming soon, too.

 

[Atlas627]

It's a bit like a static maze game vs. a randomly generated maze game.

You can follow a step-by-step guide and solve the static maze, but just reading about the randomly generated maze won't get you to the finish line. You may learn a thing or two about how the algorithm generates the maze so you can make some informed decisions while you're working on the solution, but because it's different every time no amount of reading will actually allow you to solve your specific maze.

Civ 5, even with the random generated nature of the maps, was rather close to being a static maze on the strategical level, a very complex one, but ultimately a static one with general rules that were right "most of the time".

Civ 6 tries to be more the randomly generated maze, but we'll have to see how well it turns out in the end.

Yes, that is a good way of pointing out the differences between what 5 was and what 6 seems to be leaning towards.

Furthermore, if you don't read solutions on either, you and extend the lifespan of their "gameplay" (which is figuring out the maze/choices)

 

[LDiCesare]

I'm afraid 6's maps and terrain focus will not live up to the hype.
We know already that the developpers have changed the map scripts in order to make sure players don't restart too often, so everyone will start with some peak or water or whatever is deemed worth re-rolling nearby. The terrain bonuses that are presented, and the small tech tree (in particular its lack of width) make me think that you will never bypass a tech. You will prioritize a tech because you're near the coast so you get the bonus, as in preivous civs you prioritised the tech because it was useful to you. From what's been presented, terrain will imply a lot of micro to get the most benefits of adjacency bonuses, but it will have no strategic impact.
The strategic resources and presence of city-states are going to be again the most important map features. Strategic resources could be an interesting thing if there were alternatives (go one path if you have horses, go another one if you have iron) but it's not looking that way either.

 

[Nikae]

I. Will. Speak. Slowly. Please. Click. My. Youtube. Links. And. Check. My. Old. Thread.

Of course the whole thing is just clickbait. It is mighty pointless to argue over anything you say, you do not display opinion, you display conviction.

Perhaps you also might want to consider that with time you got older and more accustomed to the mindset of the game, hence decision making got faster and much more automated. I am really tired of 'give me my childhood back' threads, discarding every new game because they cannot offer you the same experience.

The best thing about this is that with all the wind the game is coming, your 'opinion' is really just a fart in it.

 

[Karmah]

Thanks , you convinced me that the game will be good !

 

[Bibor]

I. Will. Speak. Slowly. Please. Click. My. Youtube. Links. And. Check. My. Old. Thread. Of course the whole thing is just clickbait. It is mighty pointless to argue over anything you say, you do not display opinion, you display conviction.

Click. Baits. Are. For. People that actually care for view count. I don't.

Perhaps you also might want to consider that with time you got older and more accustomed to the mindset of the game, hence decision making got faster and much more automated. I am really tired of 'give me my childhood back' threads, discarding every new game because they cannot offer you the same experience.

You bash me for linking an old thread and creating a new podcast, me stating the same things in the same way, and then you criticize me for getting older and well accustomed to the game. The original thread was written shortly after Civ V vanilla launch. The new podcast/videos are made after 1000+ hours sunk into Civ V. You're making no sense.

The best thing about this is that with all the wind the game is coming, your 'opinion' is really just a fart in it.

Yes. We are getting new leader animations, unique units, new terrain graphics and adjacency bonuses. I'm blown away.

 

[Bibor]

It's a bit like a static maze game vs. a randomly generated maze game.

You can follow a step-by-step guide and solve the static maze, but just reading about the randomly generated maze won't get you to the finish line. You may learn a thing or two about how the algorithm generates the maze so you can make some informed decisions while you're working on the solution, but because it's different every time no amount of reading will actually allow you to solve your specific maze.

Civ 5, even with the random generated nature of the maps, was rather close to being a static maze on the strategical level, a very complex one, but ultimately a static one with general rules that were right "most of the time".

Civ 6 tries to be more the randomly generated maze, but we'll have to see how well it turns out in the end.

I really liked civ4 for being a chess-like game in a sense that it had different "openings" (like Pyramids or axe rush) and "decision chains" (Cavalry beeline), but still had to be adapted to a specific map and circumstances. This provided elasticity to an otherwise rigid system.

Civ5 (all expansions included), for the most part, took this away, and replaced it with a playstyle that would be best described as carpet-weaving. You can make a few changes here-and-there, but in the end, all strings end in the same knot.

I think most people, especially in this tread, have trouble making a distinction between visible and invisible changes. Visible changes have often very little effect on how the game plays. The whole is more than the sum of its parts.

Take for, example, the forge. In Civ4, the forge added +25% production. The only equivalent to this in Civ5 would be the Railroad connection effect. Setting aside the game era difference, these two mechanics appear to be identical. +25% is +25%. However, in Civ4, the +25% also affected whipping and had a huge impact on whip effectiveness.
Or take for example the fish resource. In both games it provides lots of food, especially with lighthouses. On the surface, it remained almost unchanged. However, in Civ4 cities grew faster and, again, had the whip mechanic. In Civ4, A 1-tile island city with a single fish resource could a valuable addition to the empire. In Civ5, you wouldn't consider it. Ever.

 

[Nikae]

You say you do not care for view count, Youtube does however, it directly influences your revenue. So for the not care side we have only your word and for the care side we have a valid motivation. At any rate, written is a lot more comprehensible, yet you chose this one, for some mysterious reason.

I am bashing you because you evaluate designers based on 'I think's, presenting your opinions as facts and using Youtube in a quite low way. I am stating that the game does not change enough with new entries in the series to remain interesting for you, and you blame the game for it, without considering that the problem may be not in the game. You might want to do other things than play a game you have such a well evolved profound bad opinion about...

I get why it is important to have posts like yours. They have to exist in order to make developers realize that there are multiple angles for gamers. I cannot however respect Youtube viewer hunt, personal attacks on designers and stupid comparisons like the Blizzard ones.

See Zakh's videos for example on how to this right. And anyway, it is pointless to argue, as I said, you do not like it, you can choose not to play it.


On your civ4 comparisons, things that enhance base production in civ5 are workshops, windmills, factories, railroad, religious beliefs. With 1000+ hours spent in the game, I do not believe you did not know this.

A snowball or 1 tile city with a single fish can be grown with internal tarde routes. Whipping instead required slavery, the civic that literally everyone used up until endgame. Many choices, right?

Civ4 had very overpowered and exploitable strategies (military beeline, overpowered wonders), civ5 does not. I managed to win several culture games in the renaissance era and one in the medieval, far before hotels or even archeology comes into play.

All in all, civ4 had more difference between different approaches, but also was a lot more exploitable if taken to the extremes.

 

[Bibor]

You say you do not care for view count, Youtube does however, it directly influences your revenue.

What revenue? I'm not Arumba or Quill18, mate. I don't believe in the gaming-for-money business, because its extremely hard to grow, thus not profitable on the long run. Not that I didn't think about it. My magyar kolléga is monetizing probably, even with his accent, kudos!

I am bashing you because you evaluate designers based on 'I think's, presenting your opinions as facts and using Youtube in a quite low way. I am stating that the game does not change enough with new entries in the series to remain interesting for you, and you blame the game for it, without considering that the problem may be not in the game. You might want to do other things than play a game you have such a well evolved profound bad opinion about...
I get why it is important to have posts like yours. They have to exist in order to make developers realize that there are multiple angles for gamers. I cannot however respect Youtube viewer hunt, personal attacks on designers and stupid comparisons like the Blizzard ones.

You can bash my thinking, you can try and fail to bash me for thinking. Opinions are like holes, everyone has one. I happen to think I have an educated opinion. I don't care if it doesn't reflect the opinion of the 99%. And in some ways you're right. I sunk so many hours into gaming that it almost counts as a professional approach. As I said, my podcast left much to be desired, though, I agree on that.

See Zakh's videos for example on how to this right. And anyway, it is pointless to argue, as I said, you do not like it, you can choose not to play it.

I can. Just as a person can choose not to vote for an ultra-radical party. And what happens if and when that party wins? Do I leave my country? Civ games have been a part of my life for just too long for me to just abandon them.

On your civ4 comparisons, things that enhance base production in civ5 are workshops, windmills, factories, railroad, religious beliefs. With 1000+ hours spent in the game, I do not believe you did not know this.

I was extracting one single mechanic and compared to another single mechanic. Not all production mechanics.

 

[StrideColossus]

Sorry but what a load of tripe, without being a fan-boi how on earth is the OP telling everyone else on these forums that the game is going to be rubbish without a single concrete reason? If the game crap on release fine then people can have a gloat, otherwise save your porridge.

 

[Nikae]

Youtube as far as I know pays you on a basis of viewer count. It does not matter what you say you believe in. Hard to grow businesses are not profitable in the short run, long is usually the opposite. By accent, you must mean lexicon since you have not heard me speaking. Last but not least I live in Hungary but am not Hungarian, and everything I do does have no connection to monetization.

I do not attack you because of the way that or the fact that you think. The style and way you present it leaves too much to be desired, especially considering that you invested quite an amount of time in both the game and your opinion.

One thing I feel is important to add though, I thought civ5 at start was way worse than civ4, I had not played it until GnK came, and with BnW I am leaning heavily towards 5, I still play Rhye's however. This is an attitude the developers recognized, thankfully. Also, the quality difference between 4 and 5 was much smaller compared to between 3 and 4 at the first glance, that and the barebone nature of civ5 at start left many players sad and salty. It would really be high time to move on after so many years.

 

[Atlas627]

You need many thousands of views to notice any sort of income from a video. That is clearly not a driving force behind these videos.

I don't agree with him either, but you have to be able to come up with something better than "you only believe this because you want an excuse to click bait people for money". Not only is that insulting, but its obviously false.

 

[Nikae]

I did definitely not say that is the only reason, but is a part of a larger profile, it is clickbait for attention in fact. What I wanted to do is taunt by insults in order to get the real motivation behind it. Primitive false accusations are a great way to achieve that.

What irks me about the whole thing is that it is a personal attack on developers without doing anything for the game, combined with a highly subjective partial comparison of the two games, leaving the phrase 'in my view' or 'I feel' completely out. Also, he himself stated that he says the same things the same way over again, it was not me.

I agree that games need criticism but trying to resurrect a dead argument with no game even released in the same bitter way as the old one is anything but constructive. Also there are tons of people who are still stuck in the civ5 release days and simply refuse to acknowledge how much the game has evolved since then. Many of them did not stop and put the game aside, instead continued spewing bile about what a mess it is. I am thankful because their opinion contributed to said evolution. Now on the other hand development admitted they made a mistake with civ5 release, and its small number of features, it would be fair play to at least wait to see what the release looks like before starting the doom and gloom campaign.

I am a developer, not for civ6 obviously, it discourages me to see that players can be so short sighted, narrow minded and ignorant. One day we stand up from the desk and you will be left with nothing to complain about.

 

[Bibor]

Youtube as far as I know pays you on a basis of viewer count. It does not matter what you say you believe in. Hard to grow businesses are not profitable in the short run, long is usually the opposite. By accent, you must mean lexicon since you have not heard me speaking. Last but not least I live in Hungary but am not Hungarian, and everything I do does have no connection to monetization.

Here. Happy?

Spoiler :

Yes, I crave for attention. That's why I sit in front of my PC for thousands of hours doing work or playing games. Also, when I'm not at my PC, I go out and drown kittens in public and smash in windows at random. Yes, I do want draw attention, but not to myself. I have plenty of that in that fictional world called "outside civfanatics". In here, I was hoping to draw attention to Civilization. And gameplay. And the hundreds of thousands of hours people spend playing these games. Making them even 1% better is a far bigger victory than the ego boost people during (futile) attempts at humiliation.

We are not talking about a startup game company here that's struggling with salaries. This is big business, tens of millions of dollars in profit. Letting them get away with stuff like Civ5 civilopedia is our own fault.

And when you wake up and realize on how trivial and cheap things they are cutting corners, like the metioned civilopedia, or having a menu to change keyborad shortcuts (in a PC-only game!) or just plain and simple beta testing for longer than like 5 seconds before release, you can just imagine how the whole workflow looks like (disregarding the graphics and animation section).

We are talking about tens of thousands of hours of players' time spent in a buggy or flawed game, because some random millionaire schmuck decided to pocket $5000 more.

If you're fine with this. Fine. Nothing to see here.

 

[migalhone]

We are not talking about a startup game company here that's struggling with salaries. This is big business, tens of millions of dollars in profit. Letting them get away with stuff like Civ5 civilopedia is our own fault.

Excuse me for this particular question: Exatly what have they done with the Civ5 civilopedia that is bad? Could you explain this?

 

[Nikae]

And we finally got it, it's the evil greedy corporations argument. You still fail to realize that the message would be worthwhile if you were not appearing as a sad and bitter kettle of acid?

You can continue to disregard large parts of what I write, I got to know what I wanted to know.

 

[Bibor]

Excuse me for this particular question: Exatly what have they done with the Civ5 civilopedia that is bad? Could you explain this?

And thus my slow but steady descent into madness begins.

 

[wiggawuu]

Hey Bibor, I'd probably spend more time hanging out in Tisno chasing women than playing civ.

That's just me.