Paying customer satisfaction

[alvan]

I wonder sometimes why not everyone grabs their pitchforks and rally towards 2K Games and start making demands. I then realize that some people might actually like this simplistic almost-console game without a functional AI. But is it really that easy? I preordered the CE for roughly $105 and I must say that it was propably the worst product I've ever bought in my 27 years of life. My theory is that people who think its "fine" didnt actually pay good money for it or they dont notice the cost since they're well off financially.

So, I wonder what the populus of Civfanatics think of the game while also answering whether they pirated the game and/or if they're rich enough to not care about the price of the game.

 

[Fistalis]

I wonder sometimes why not everyone grabs their pitchforks and rally towards 2K Games and start making demands. I then realize that some people might actually like this simplistic almost-console game without a functional AI. But is it really that easy? I preordered the CE for roughly $105 and I must say that it was propably the worst product I've ever bought in my 27 years of life. My theory is that people who think its "fine" didnt actually pay good money for it or they dont notice the cost since they're well off financially.

So, I wonder what the populus of Civfanatics think of the game while also answering whether they pirated the game and/or if they're rich enough to not care about the price of the game.

Sadly the majority of people who bought this game are probably the "mainstream" that was targeted. Even if it were true that every hardcore civ fan hated civ V it would be moot because by targeting the mainstream they marginalized that audience.

 

[Lord Monkey]

So, I wonder what the populus of Civfanatics think of the game while also answering whether they pirated the game and/or if they're rich enough to not care about the price of the game.

Or people could just have.. a DIFFERENT OPINION. Dun dun dun. Is it really that hard to believe? Seems like you're mostly mad you got hosed for 105 bucks.

 

[alvan]

Or people could just have.. a DIFFERENT OPINION. Dun dun dun. Is it really that hard to believe? Seems like you're mostly mad you got hosed for 105 bucks.

Mostly mad? Thats the only reason why Im mad.

If the game was free I wouldnt be posting here. But the question to you though, is the reason of "being hosed for 105 bucks" not a good reason to get mad? Seems like you're trying to dismiss my arguement by implying that.

 

[MuonConspiracy]

How's about a "Bought it - Like it enough to keep playing but hoping complexity gets added back in" category?

BTW, hardcore veteran fan from Civ I here, don't let the low post count fool you.

 

[Lord Monkey]

I'm not dismissing your argument, I'm dismissing your biased poll.

Also, the game costs 50 bucks. You preordered it instead of waiting to see if it was worth it. You also paid a high premium for (imo) worthless extras like figurines. Wouldn't you be half as mad, numerically, if you'd just paid for the normal game?

I'm not saying it's right for Firaxis to make off with 105 dollars of your money and leave you unsatisfied, but I am saying you should realize this is nothing new in the gaming industry and be more judicious when you drop a C note on a preorder.

PS: No one is going to pick the piracy options, even if they had pirated it. Very much frowned upon in this place.

 

[alvan]

How's about a "Bought it - Like it enough to keep playing but hoping complexity gets added back in" category?

BTW, hardcore veteran fan from Civ I here, don't let the low post count fool you.

But then you fall into the category that doesnt really care since even if you payed for it, you dont mind handing out money on the hopes of a improved product. But maybe you're right, shouldve been a middle-ground without the money arguement perhaps, but done is done.

 

[eris]

I wonder sometimes why not everyone grabs their pitchforks and rally towards 2K Games and start making demands. I then realize that some people might actually like this simplistic almost-console game without a functional AI. But is it really that easy? I preordered the CE for roughly $105 and I must say that it was propably the worst product I've ever bought in my 27 years of life. My theory is that people who think its "fine" didnt actually pay good money for it or they dont notice the cost since they're well off financially.

So, I wonder what the populus of Civfanatics think of the game while also answering whether they pirated the game and/or if they're rich enough to not care about the price of the game.

I don't understand the impulse to buy the CE for $105 without knowing more about what you were getting. You mention people who don't notice the cost since they're well off financially. To me, you would fall into that category since I couldn't justify that cost in my gaming budget. I am not criticizing you, but trying to offer you the point that we have different views of well off financially and how we risk our gaming money. I think you took a risk that didn't pay off for you. I empathize with your anger and disappointment, but think you could have avoided it with some caution in your purchasing decisions.

I especially take exception to the statements about people who think its "fine". I did not pirate this game and I do care about how much I paid, enough that I didn't pay for the CE. I would like you to restate your conclusions to include people like me in your description. Otherwise, it feels like insults and yet more hate trolling to me.

As to how I feel about the game itself. Well, it's not Civ 4, that's for sure. As for the rest, I am still learning and deciding. I find that an entertaining process so far. We'll see where that takes me in time....

 

[TheBlackHole]

My theory is that people who think its "fine" didnt actually pay good money for it or they dont notice the cost since they're well off financially.

Me personally, I preordered it and I'm still playing it, but I'm a little disappointed in the game -- not that I think it's a bad game, but far below my (admittedly high) expectations.

With that said, that is one HECK of a characterization to make of people who enjoy the game. Guess what, some people like it, some people don't... and that's fine, everyone has different tastes and reasons for liking or disliking something. Trying to create a "profile" of Civ 5 fans is not only like to wrong but can be quite insulting as well. Just because someone can enjoy Civ5 (even if they know it doesn't compare to Civ4) does not mean they're too stupid to know better, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean that people who enjoy Civ5 must have pirated it or don't care about money.

Some people like to play simple board games because it's a fun way to pass the time. Some people like to play extremely complex board games because... well, it's a fun way to pass the time. And guess what, some people can enjoy BOTH for entirely different reasons. There is NO profiling or characterization you can make between these various groups of people... we each enjoy things for entirely different reasons and that has no bearing on how intellectually, psychologically, or financially sophisticated any of us are.

 

[Mathochism]

I fall into the third category. I mean, I enjoy the the game a lot. Probably more than any other of the base Civ games, but, even if I didn't, I wouldn't care because I'm in a good financial situation and I've got enough patience to wait for issues to be fixed.

Same thing with Elemental but to a greater degree. I didn't get my money's worth at launch, but, down the road, I'm sure problems will be fixed so I don't think it was a waste. Even if they're never fixed, I'm in a position where I can throw away money on games I'll never play.

 

[Tokahfang]

If it were a static product, I would be disappointed, but I paid for it and am willing to wait for patches. I play Civ games on and off for years, the $150ish total with all expansions is about $30/year of enjoyment... good deal!

 

[alvan]

Me personally, I preordered it and I'm still playing it, but I'm a little disappointed in the game -- not that I think it's a bad game, but far below my (admittedly high) expectations.

With that said, that is one HECK of a characterization to make of people who enjoy the game. Guess what, some people like it, some people don't... and that's fine, everyone has different tastes and reasons for liking or disliking something. Trying to create a "profile" of Civ 5 fans is not only like to wrong but can be quite insulting as well. Just because someone can enjoy Civ5 (even if they know it doesn't compare to Civ4) does not mean they're too stupid to know better, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean that people who enjoy Civ5 must have pirated it or don't care about money.

Some people like to play simple board games because it's a fun way to pass the time. Some people like to play extremely complex board games because... well, it's a fun way to pass the time. And guess what, some people can enjoy BOTH for entirely different reasons. There is NO profiling or characterization you can make between these various groups of people... we each enjoy things for entirely different reasons and that has no bearing on how intellectually, psychologically, or financially sophisticated any of us are.

I said in the beginning that I realize that people like different things, so Im not trying to characterize people. That is why I pose the question (and also state my obviously biased theory) about the issue.

How one can enjoy BtS and then claim that Civ5 is equally as good or even better(!) is to me astonishing and beyond reason and requiers a certain mindset -->

Sadly the majority of people who bought this game are probably the "mainstream" that was targeted. Even if it were true that every hardcore civ fan hated civ V it would be moot because by targeting the mainstream they marginalized that audience.

I think this guy nailed it. The game was not made to appeal to the BtS audience (we would buy the game anyway) but rather to a new audience and frankly, that sucks but I guess its more bussiness then anything else.

Kudos to the devs for fooling me, but fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. What I mean by that is that I will try this game again when an expansion comes, but then I wont buy it, rather pirate it in a sort of trial period; and if I deem it good enough I will pay.

 

[jjkrause84]

I voted the 'troll' option as I think it's absurd to think that people will base their opinions on a game based on their yearly income.

 

[Wardancing]

The game was not made to appeal to the BtS audience (they would buy the game anyway) but rather to a new audience and frankly, that sucks but I guess its more bussiness then anything else.

I cant find the sources, and maybe i was reading what i wanted to hear?

Wasnt Civ5 stated to be for the hardcore civ'ers, that it wouldnt be like CivRev? I thought the whole 'more moddable than ever' was also a selling point in the article/interview im thinking of.

 

[Rusty Edge]

I wonder sometimes why not everyone grabs their pitchforks and rally towards 2K Games and start making demands. I then realize that some people might actually like this simplistic almost-console game without a functional AI. But is it really that easy? I preordered the CE for roughly $105 and I must say that it was propably the worst product I've ever bought in my 27 years of life. My theory is that people who think its "fine" didnt actually pay good money for it or they dont notice the cost since they're well off financially.

So, I wonder what the populus of Civfanatics think of the game while also answering whether they pirated the game and/or if they're rich enough to not care about the price of the game.

I voted "grow money", because that's what my investments are supposed to do, and if I can afford the bloodbath of the finacial collapse, I can afford the collector's edition.

The way I see it, V is a departure from IV Complete (The greatest game of all time, board, computer,console and arcade titles included .) At this point V feels incomplete to me, but it shows promise as a multiplayer strategy game, & if it is truly the most modable civ ever, and there is no legal oppression towards fan mods that compete with pay for DLC, Civ V will also become one of the greatest games I've ever played.

Even though completing a wonder or winning the game has an "Eh" feel to it without movies, Dan Quayle comparisons and game replays, Even though I've had hangs due to routing conflicts, Even though it's more tactical, Even though I feel like I'm being crowded into a playstyle like a cow in a chute in V, rather than the civ series' traditional planning, preparing , and then being encouraged to improvise, adapt , and overcome a challenge, sometimes even pursuing a different victory condition.... The game still feels epic! I still have that one..more...turn.. feeling because I want to see what happens next!

150 Hours of one... more... turn gameplay so far for $100 is pretty good entertainment value as I see it. Already way better than any other computer game I've ever purchased , excepting other versions of Civ, Sid's Pirates!, and Rome Total War. I got a 150 hour vacation from my struggles IRL for $100! That doesn't even place a value on the delightful artbook, or the CDs I've been listening to in my car ever since I got them, which I enjoy more than sattelite radio.

 

[TheBlackHole]

How one can enjoy BtS and then claim that Civ5 is equally as good or even better(!) is to me astonishing and beyond reason and requiers a certain mindset -->

Are you seriously saying that labelling Civ5 fans as "beyond reason" and of a "certain mindset" not a way of trying to characterize people as having a certain psychological or intellectual makeup?

Again, I've already stated I was a little disappointed in Civ5, hopefully the implication is clear that I love Civ4 (and BtS, in particular). Nevertheless, there is no reason to paint Civ5 fans with a such a broad brush. Civ5 has things that most people see as favorable (e.g. hexes, 1upt, and some other things). Civ5 has things half the people think is good, half the people think is bad. And of course, Civ5 has things that most people simply hate. At the end of the day, civ5 fans simply find that the things that ARE good are good enough that it outweighs the things that are bad. It is not "beyond reason" that some of the changes are things that some people have been waiting a long time for. It is not "beyond reason" that some people simply like having a new game to play and a new world to conquer, even if it doesn't match up to one of the greatest TBS games of all time (cIV BtS).

Trying to say that these people are of a "certain mindset" (which, from your general tone seems to me to be implying an inferior or simplistic mindset) is insulting. You don't have to use pop psychology to try to figure out why people like the game. Are you also going to muse that people who like shooters must be violent people or some fascination with killing? Are you also going to try to paint a picture of people who enjoy Adam Sandler or Jim Carrey movies (as opposed to heavy-handed dramas)? People enjoy the things they enjoy for reasons that are far too varied to even begin to list... there is no need to attempt to figure out what type of person they must be to enjoy what they happen to enjoy.

 

[alvan]

Are you seriously saying that labelling Civ5 fans as "beyond reason" and of a "certain mindset" not a way of trying to characterize people as having a certain psychological or intellectual makeup?

Again, I've already stated I was a little disappointed in Civ5, hopefully the implication is clear that I love Civ4 (and BtS, in particular). Nevertheless, there is no reason to paint Civ5 fans with a such a broad brush. Civ5 has things that most people see as favorable (e.g. hexes, 1upt, and some other things). Civ5 has things half the people think is good, half the people think is bad. And of course, Civ5 has things that most people simply hate. At the end of the day, civ5 fans simply find that the things that ARE good are good enough that it outweighs the things that are bad. It is not "beyond reason" that some of the changes are things that some people have been waiting a long time for. It is not "beyond reason" that some people simply like having a new game to play and a new world to conquer, even if it doesn't match up to one of the greatest TBS games of all time (cIV BtS).

Trying to say that these people are of a "certain mindset" (which, from your general tone seems to me to be implying an inferior or simplistic mindset) is insulting. You don't have to use pop psychology to try to figure out why people like the game. Are you also going to muse that people who like shooters must be violent people or some fascination with killing? Are you also going to try to paint a picture of people who enjoy Adam Sandler or Jim Carrey movies (as opposed to heavy-handed dramas)? People enjoy the things they enjoy for reasons that are far too varied to even begin to list... there is no need to attempt to figure out what type of person they must be to enjoy what they happen to enjoy.

There is nothing inferior with having a simplistic mindset, alot of people are Do'ers while other are Thinkers. Thats not the problem, the problem is when I buy a PC Strategy Game I expect to get a PC Strategy Game (and not a button-pushing builders, console game). A builders game? Yes, this is not a strategy game because waging war is like picking on the at school (sad and underwhelming) and I can honestly not see anyone being satisfied when they win a war or take a city.

Then we have diplomacy (which is next to 0) and trade (also 0) and micromanagement (z to the ero). So we're left with building cities and making your empire look nice (and waiting for next turn).

Civ5 is a Sims game, but on an imperial scale. I didnt buy The Sims, I bought Civ (or?)

 

[Pantastic]

I preordered the CE for roughly $105 and I must say that it was propably the worst product I've ever bought in my 27 years of life. My theory is that people who think its "fine" didnt actually pay good money for it or they dont notice the cost since they're well off financially.

I'm kind of confused here - do you consider yourself well off financially by this standard or not? You clearly consider yourself a "thinker", not a "doer", so you must have thought before making the decision to buy. So what non-simplistic thought process did you go to to decide to not only buy the game sight-unseen, but also to pay extra for non-gameplay frills in the CE?

There is nothing inferior with having a simplistic mindset, alot of people are Do'ers while other are Thinkers.

So you you claim that people who like Civ5 don't think and have a simplistic mindset. But you also admit that you paid an amount of money that is enough for you to 'notice the cost' without checking reviews, or the demo, or waiting for a month or two to see other people's response? I think that shows a serious lack of thinking and a very simplistic mindset.

If the price of a game is a significant financial burden to you, then you should non-simplisticly think about deciding to A. not buy the more expensive collector's edition and B. Wait for feedback on the game before purchasing it.

 

[Vlade Divac]

How's about a "Bought it - Like it enough to keep playing but hoping complexity gets added back in" category?

I'm in this camp. Flawed poll. This is the General Discussion forum though so I keep forgetting either you have to love it beyond anything you've ever experienced in your life or hate it as it crushed every fiber of your being and you couldn't possibly go on (The Death of CIV).

 

[alvan]

I'm kind of confused here - do you consider yourself well off financially by this standard or not? You clearly consider yourself a "thinker", not a "doer", so you must have thought before making the decision to buy. So what non-simplistic thought process did you go to to decide to not only buy the game sight-unseen, but also to pay extra for non-gameplay frills in the CE?



So you you claim that people who like Civ5 don't think and have a simplistic mindset. But you also admit that you paid an amount of money that is enough for you to 'notice the cost' without checking reviews, or the demo, or waiting for a month or two to see other people's response? I think that shows a serious lack of thinking and a very simplistic mindset.

If the price of a game is a significant financial burden to you, then you should non-simplisticly think about deciding to A. not buy the more expensive collector's edition and B. Wait for feedback on the game before purchasing it.

Oh you

But ok, Ill bite. I bought the CE mainly because I enjoy showing my support to those who deserve it, clearly the guys behind Civ have deserved the support up until now. It also boils down to propability, never could I imagen this cluster of a game to be released in this condition, never could I imagen that atleast half of the things that made BtS so awesome was completly dumbed down. I've never made a purchase in my life that I regretted before, Im very conservative with my economy when it comes to video games. Sure I wont starve or wont be able to pay my rent but its still an annoyance that I was fooled. A thinker can still be fooled, and as I said previously the lesson is very much learned. It wasnt really as much of an impulsive purchase as I trusted the brand too much.

If I buy a mercedes I expect to get a mercedes. If I buy a pizza at my favorite pizza place I expect to get a pizza. If I buy a Civ game I expect to get a Civ game. Ect, ect. Propability!

As far as reading reviews, everyone pretty much praises the game and that is propably due to some subtle fanboyism and a willingness to say what the people want to hear rather then an awkward truth on how much of a failure the game actually is.