New Expansion Speculation Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
What do you mean by that? Example: Fans on reddit hated Queen Seondeok's and Roosevelt's design. Both were redesigned. Okay maybe they would have been anyways but I think they check out that place like they do civfanatics.
I meant that Firaxis should check replies on Reddit as much as they do here or on other social media channels.
 
Then I guess you won't be disappointed when nothing changes. :rolleyes:
It seems pretty obvious to me that they are PAID to fix these problems while we are PAYING to have that problems fixed, it's totally legit to be disappointed if they are not doing their job while we pay them. I can help them if I want to, but I'm not supposed to do it, specially because tons of Civ 6 problems (as it was for Civ beyond earth and in some way for Civ V) are there simply because of lack of playtesting: just to give 1 or 2 example, it seems almost incredible to me that in the first version of the game nobody noticed that the AI was constantly hating everybody (destroying any diplomatic approach to the game) or that now the Kongo's ability TOTALLY doesn't work (they never get the "Founder's belief" bonus of a religion, even if it's in all their cities). I could give 1000000 examples (for real they didn't notice AI doesn't use airplane?? For real they didn't notice that in Civ V the AI could not move and shot in the same turn??) but this post would be too long.
I'm always ready to help a producer to develope a game I like, but saying that the Firaxis approach to the community and to the playtest is TERRIBLE seems pretty obvious to me, and everybody can be totally disappointed about it.


Edit: Paradox's approach to the community is totally different, they talk with us, they let us know the news in a really direct way, they answer to criticisms etc.... even if you don't like their game I think it's pretty objective that their approach is way better.
 
It seems pretty obvious to me that they are PAID to fix these problems while we are PAYING to have that problems fixed, it's totally legit to be disappointed if they are not doing their job while we pay them. I can help them if I want to, but I'm not supposed to do it, specially because tons of Civ 6 problems (as it was for Civ beyond earth and in some way for Civ V) are there simply because of lack of playtesting: just to give 1 or 2 example, it seems almost incredible to me that in the first version of the game nobody noticed that the AI was constantly hating everybody (destroying any diplomatic approach to the game) or that now the Kongo's ability TOTALLY doesn't work (they never get the "Founder's belief" bonus of a religion, even if it's in all their cities). I could give 1000000 examples (for real they didn't notice AI doesn't use airplane?? For real they didn't notice that in Civ V the AI could not move and shot in the same turn??) but this post would be too long.
I'm always ready to help a producer to develope a game I like, but saying that the Firaxis approach to the community and to the playtest is TERRIBLE seems pretty obvious to me, and everybody can be totally disappointed about it.
I didn't know Civ6 had a monthly subscription or patches for money. :crazyeye:
 
I played the game for 3551 hour, almost never attached anything to something and definitely never put a unit with attachment to sleep.
I won't blame them for not testing a worthless mechanics intended mostly for AI.

Speak for yourself. This "feature" is annoying. It's also annoying when you attach a general/admiral and it wakes up the unit you attach it to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xur
or that now the Kongo's ability TOTALLY doesn't work (they never get the "Founder's belief" bonus of a religion, even if it's in all their cities).
I played Kongo in the game before last, I was able to buy campus buildings with faithc and I'm pretty sure that was their Founders Belief. I'll try and remember to check when I get home tonight.
 
Also i hope they'll do something with B-52 and missile cruiser.

What's wrong with these units? They are the least problematic units (other than the AI not using bombers correctly). The gaps I find annoying. And the oil problem for tanks mentioned above. We'll just pretend it's renaissance fair all the time when we have knights in the information era.
 
What's wrong with these units? They are the least problematic units (other than the AI not using bombers correctly). The gaps I find annoying. And the oil problem for tanks mentioned above. We'll just pretend it's renaissance fair all the time when we have knights in the information era.
Why stealth technology gives you a non-stealth bomber? And missile cruiser is by no means a cruiser. It is a corvette at best if not a missile boat.
 
The B-52 is a strange choice. I guess they didn't want to run the B2 again, but given it's place on the tech tree (very late tech), they should have went with that again.
 
The B-52 is a strange choice. I guess they didn't want to run the B2 again, but given it's place on the tech tree (very late tech), they should have went with that again.
They could make a B-1 or Tu-160 at least. It won't be that silly.
 
I played Kongo in the game before last, I was able to buy campus buildings with faithc and I'm pretty sure that was their Founders Belief. I'll try and remember to check when I get home tonight.
It's a follower belief, not a founder's, so it's normal. Even if you were not Kongo that would have worked
 
Point is, you are not entitled to anything. Buyer's remorse won't change that.
If I pay for a Ferrari and they told I would have received a Ferrari and I receive a bike I can say what I want. I don't even understand how any customer could not agree with this, and you are even assuming that if we don't help for free people paid to do their job we can't say that they did a bad work... I totally don't agree with your point, and for sure if the majority of people have your idea next Civ games will have even more troubles than Civ VI (and they will stop fixing it), perfect :crazyeye:
 
If I pay for a Ferrari and they told I would have received a Ferrari and I receive a bike I can say what I want. I don't even understand how any customer could not agree with this, and you are even assuming that if we don't help for free people paid to do their job we can't say that they did a bad work... I totally don't agree with your point, and for sure if the majority of people have your idea next Civ games will have even more troubles than Civ VI (and they will stop fixing it), perfect :crazyeye:
You paid for a playable game and you got a playable game. You not being happy with it is irrelevant. For that matter, steam even has the option to return it within a certain time/played time, lol.
In theory, patches are only a courtesy of the developers, though I guess it is in their favour to keep the player base happy. But still, no entitlement.
 
Edit: Paradox's approach to the community is totally different, they talk with us, they let us know the news in a really direct way, they answer to criticisms etc.... even if you don't like their game I think it's pretty objective that their approach is way better.
Agreed, it's a superior system. But Firaxis is an American business under totally different laws than the Swedish Paradox, I'm afriad...
 
You paid for a playable game and you got a playable game. You not being happy with it is irrelevant. For that matter, steam even has the option to return it within a certain time/played time, lol.
In theory, patches are only a courtesy of the developers, though I guess it is in their favour to keep the player base happy. But still, no entitlement.

?? I didn't paid for a general "playable game", I paid for a very specific game with some presumed features. If I buy a Ferrari and they give a really bad (and sometimes broken) car it's not "ok" just because I paid for a car and I received a car. In that case I could rightly say that I'm disappointed even if I don't help them to fix my bad and broken car (and with Civ 6 I can even say that they lied, because 90 % of the problems in Civ 6 are so evident that it's impossible they didn't even noticed before the game arrived to us).
Patches are not "courtesy", it's something they do to increase the love in the franchise hoping you will buy their next game, but it's also a way to fix what they promised you: anyway a game should not be so broken to need so many patches as Civ 6, I think everybody noticed that this game received more fix (also in the gameplay) than 99 % of single player game.
I still find pretty ridicoulous that some people didn't get this and probably that's why they will never fix the major problems of Civ 6: people defend the franchise anyway, so they will never pay money to do a "courtesy" to you. They will never care if in Civ 7 the AI will not use airplane, because people will buy the game anyway saying "it's ok because it didn't work even in Civ 6", even if probably for a programmer fixing this problem is pretty easy.
I'm totally against this mentality.


Agreed, it's a superior system. But Firaxis is an American business under totally different laws than the Swedish Paradox, I'm afriad...

It's possible that the style is different because of their country, but I think they could at least try to get closer to the Swedish system anyway. It seems they totally ignore us, but this is costing them a lot.

Maybe @Cerilis can think this is a coincidence, but if Civ V is still more played than Civ VI (even by Youtubers) I think there's a reason. If Civ V got over 95 % positive reviews on Steam while Civ Beyond earth and Civ VI got TERRIBLE reviews I think there's a reason. And if they keep with this policy Civ 7 will be the start of their end.
I hope this new expansion just fix the biggest problems in the game, that would be enough to me even if they don't add new special mechanisms
.
 
He and Gitarja will get on just swell. :mischief:

Gitarja would be everything I'm looking for in an islander civ if Indonesian units (or at least scouts and settlers) could sail the open ocean before Cartography. If I could arrange a diplomatic marriage between her and Harald I'd be all set.

I'm more interested in what new units we could get in this expansions. I think there is a serious gap between knight and tank. Also i hope they'll do something with B-52 and missile cruiser. I know chances are low but this cannot stop bothering me, i don't know what were they thinking.

Speaking of large gaps between unit upgrades, I feel we need an Explorer unit to bridge the gap between Scouts and Rangers.

I meant that Firaxis should check replies on Reddit as much as they do here or on other social media channels.

Let's be honest, half of the posts on the Civ subreddit are nothing but inane pictures of Petra yields and "canal" cities. There's meaningful discussion to be found, but it's not as prevalent or concentrated as it is here.
 
Point is, you are not entitled to anything. Buyer's remorse won't change that.

I agree that some complain too much; but to say "you are not entitled to anything" ignores future sales. It's fair for any customer to strongly suggest that they won't be a return customer based on their expectations vs the reality. Of course many who say that kind of thing are being dishonest about it; but it's a fair part of the equation.
And it's also fair to expect ongoing support for the current itineration of Civ until they move on to a new one. That pattern is pretty well established.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom