People are ALLOWED to criticize.

[Olleus]

All the people who like it ... stay in the "happy" threads.

All the people who dont like it.. stay in "unhappy" threads.

Problem solved.

Huh?

Your idea of a great discussion is people only listening to those with the same opinion as them? I hope you see just how flawed that logic is.

 

[CaptainBinky]

Also, since there's global happiness now it doesn't matter which side we're on we can post in either thread

 

[Gorey]

Huh?

Your idea of a great discussion is people only listening to those with the same opinion as them? I hope you see just how flawed that logic is.

it was tongue-in-cheek.

LOL alittle?

I'd really hate to see you guys in WW2OL's Off Topic forum. You'd have your feelings hurt very quickly haha.

 

[lemmy101]

@lemmy101

What you said apply to both sides. It is true that some of the people complaining about the game are not exactly polished in their rants , but a lot of the people that are defending the game either don't pass of the "Me likes, grunt!" or are spouting stuff that would be enough for a bar fight in RL ( don't like like it? go play civ IV and stop complaining ... or worse )

If people were civil, things would be so diferent ...

It's already been stated at length that the reason the fans have gotten so militaristic in our defence is to try and combat a MASSIVE slew of negativity that engulfed the forum not when the game was released, but from the moment they announced the game. If you're talking about a war between the lovers and haters, a momentary glance at the General Discussion forum tells us we need to fight back harder. So we fight. And we make no apologies for it.

But consider this. Would we all be fighting if everyone who had issues with the game discussed them in a level headed non-mental storm-in-a-teacup manner?

Or how about giving it a bit of time and perhaps giving a bit of benefit of doubt to some developers who have again and again released nothing but games we've played and loved for years?

Did you know this game has mod support? It's a marvellous thing. It means that people can take the game and craft it into exactly the game they want to play. Perhaps you should all start posting ideas for mods to make when the mod tools are released to correct the things you dislike, instead of ideas for staff dismissals and time travel murder victims?

Now THAT'S constructive. Literally.

 

[-axs-]

lemmy101, I agree that things would be much better if everyone offered constructive criticism, and constructive praise. It's been said a few times on this board that without feedback from customers, Firaxis wouldn't know what should be fixed. The vast majority of reviews for this game would give Firaxis the impression that nothing needed tweaking.

Don't be silly. Are you seriously telling me that $50 is worth more to you or ANYONE ELSE than 2-3-4-5 years of someone's life is to them? If it were, you wouldn't be spending any money on games, ever.

So the overworked, underpaid and underpraised game industry employee slogs away at their game for five years, may scrape up $50 of disposable cash every now and then, and can't criticise some one elses product?

 

[lemmy101]

So the overworked, underpaid and underpraised game industry employee slogs away at their game for five years, may scrape up $50 of disposable cash every now and then, and can't criticise some one elses product?

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say, here.

 

[lemmy101]

The vast majority of reviews for this game would give Firaxis the impression that nothing needed tweaking.

Nothing really DOES need tweaking. It needs tweaking for you perhaps, certainly for others on this forum. But guess what? The game wasn't made specifically for all the people here who don't like it. It was made for the Civ community at large, new players and old, and it's a shame that the new direction doesn't sit well with you. It's fine as it is for me. I love it. So did the reviewers, but of course it's their job to look at games in a level headed and objective manner, not to obsess and fury about one or two changes and give the thing 1/10 and call the developers idiots, just because it's not what they were used to / expected / felt they were owed.

 

[-axs-]

Nothing really DOES need tweaking. It needs tweaking for YOU. It's fine as it is for me. I love it. So did the reviewers, but of course it's their job to look at games in a level headed and objective manner, not to obsess and fury about one or two changes and give the thing 1/10 because it's not what they were used to / expected / felt they were owed.

Me? I haven't yet given my impression of the game. I also disagree that most game reviewers look at the games in an objective manner, but that's a discussion for a different thread.

 

[lemmy101]

Me? I haven't yet given my impression of the game. I also disagree that most game reviewers look at the games in an objective manner, but that's a discussion for a different thread.

Course they do. That's why they're hired game reviewers and not bloggers.

And yeah, we're in a war of opinions here. If you fire at the lovers we gotta assume you're a hater. ;D sorry if you're not.

 

[r_rolo1]

It's already been stated at length that the reason the fans have gotten so militaristic in our defence is to try and combat a MASSIVE slew of negativity that engulfed the forum not when the game was released, but from the moment they announced the game. If you're talking about a war between the lovers and haters, a momentary glance at the General Discussion forum tells us we need to fight back harder. So we fight. And we make no apologies for it.

But consider this. Would we all be fighting if everyone who had issues with the game discussed them in a level headed non-mental storm-in-a-teacup manner?

Or how about giving it a bit of time and perhaps giving a bit of benefit of doubt to some developers who have again and again released nothing but games we've played and loved for years?

Did you know this game has mod support? It's a marvellous thing. It means that people can take the game and craft it into exactly the game they want to play. Perhaps you should all start posting ideas for mods to make when the mod tools are released to correct the things you dislike, instead of ideas for staff dismissals and time travel murders victims?

Fight? Militaristic ? Oh dear ...

First, don't treat me like a noob Even if I was one, no one deserves to be treated like that i have my small share of modding work in civ IV ( some contributions for better BtS AI ) and will surely mod this game as well when I get it fully operational. And modding ability is never a proper excuse for bad game design ( not saying that civ V is badly designed, just pointing the general case )

Second, you are putting in the same bag anti game nonsense spout and non-prop critics. As others said, negative critics are needed to make the game better.

Third, have you considered what is the predictable reaction of people that post sensible negative critics and gets a wash of "get over it" , "go play civ IV" , "******ed", or other similarly refined and educated replies ? Yup, it will go balistic too most likely ...

I guess that this needs the same solution than the one that was used when BtS got out not so long ago: massive and liberal use of red cards by the side of the mods... if people can't comply with the forum rules, they shouldn't be posting here in the first place.

 

[lemmy101]

Second, you are putting in the same bag anti game nonsense spout and non-prop critics. As others said, negative critics are needed to make the game better.

I know not everyone is like this, but since they're in your camp we're the only ones combating this nasty nasty reprehensible stuff. They rile us up, and the innocent 'fair critics' of the game end up caught in the crossfire

Thanks for regurgitating my own point back at me and turning it into your argument

 

[bernlin2000]

Fair enough. I'm happy "enough" with Civ 5 - but in its current state I shouldn't have paid more than $30. That's all I'm saying!

That's ridiculous: there's a lot of game here, certainly worth the 50 dollar (60 if you got the deluxe edition I got) price tag. There are problems with implementation of all sorts of features, and some feel unfinished, but I've seen far worse games charge even more (read: most console games). Unlike most developers, Firaxis is always dedicated to improving the game after its release with patches, but it's fair to criticize them for putting out a game that needed patches just to re-introduce basic functionality that was in even CivIV vanilla (ex. being able to view unit paths, how many of a luxary resource you have).

 

[-axs-]

And yeah, we're in a war of opinions here. If you fire at the lovers we gotta assume you're a hater. ;D sorry if you're not.

That's cool, I haven't played it enough to form an opinion yet. There is a large space between lover and hater though and forcing a line to be drawn between the two will only serve to prevent people from signing up and expressing their opinion.

 

[r_rolo1]

@lemmy101

You misunderstood me ( or you are selctively quoting ). You are talking of militaristic stuff and fight the enemy with the same weapons ( or similar wording ), and whatever , but ..

Think on this: I post something about wanting to see the tech progress in the city screen like in civ IV, because that would allow me to see the influence of specs hiring in my tech pace along with the other intel that is city related. Then I get washed by a bunch of "******ed" , "go play civ IV" , "noob" ( like you called me indirectly some posts ago, btw ), or similar. There are three possible reactions: I continue to discuss civilizedly until my patience runs out, I go balistic and spout venom as well, or I go away complaining to myself about that fanboyism. See my point ? Going militaristic on this kills sensible criticism

As I see it , the job of killing anti game nonsense is not yours, is from the mods. we have rules in here and mods to enforce it, and almost all of that stuff falls under trolling or flaming, punishable by the mods with yellow or red cards. The thing that you should do is to push the report button, explain your reasons to the mods, and save your time and energy for responding to the critics that actually have something to say... otherwise, if you go eye by eye, you are also infringing the forum rules

 

[Gurd]

Sorry to derail (or rerail?) the thread but:

I'm not sure I get the original poster's point at all. You're allowed to criticize and make suggestions, yes, but perhaps you should consider where you do it? And why wouldn't people be allowed to disagree with you and tell you why? Is your opinion more valuable than the opinion of others, just because you've played Civ from the first instalment? Are those people not allowed to share their opinion?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to say Civ5 is perfect since I don't even have my copy yet (one... more... day...), and I have no clue what transpired in your 'Earth map' suggestion thread, but I do feel the need to point out that you're posting on a fan-ran public forum, not your own domain. You're bound to the rules of the place and are going to have to accept you're not above them. If you feel you're not doing anything wrong yet others are crossing the line, go ahead and report it - I'm sure there'll be moderators around to keep flamers and trolls in check.

Secondly, I have to disagree with your Starcraft 2 statement. Living up to the hype? Not really, if you see all the complaining and whining about it. Balance issues, disappointing campaign, lack of options, over simplified controls, etc. etc. - at least if you believe things everyone spouts. And those people are often told they're whining and should stick to Starcraft 1, for example. It's doesn't differ much from Civ5 so far; a lot of people will be happy, a lot of them won't be. I myself, from playing the demo, and quite excited by the direction Civ5 is heading and will be looking for way to help to improve the game by being constructive in my criticism instead of just ranting away when I come across something I don't like.

So in conclusion, yes, you're allowed to have an option and share it with the world. Just keep in mind how you and where you do that. And then be warned that people will disagree with your opinion and will tell you all about it. It's how the internet works.

 

[Corvak]

...If they werent allowed to criticize, their posts would be removed by CFC staff.

People are also allowed to disagree.

The problem is that some are honestly criticizing, and others are hating on Civ5 purely to incite an argument.

 

[Mivo]

TvZ is balanced when Zerg players learn Mutalisks don't work against Thors and build Infestors once in a blue moon.

Mutalisks work well again Thors (see "Magic Box"). But I'm not surprised that a Terran player would enjoy the "more accessible" Civ5, nor that he doesn't know anything about SC2 strategy. After all, all you need to do as a Terran is make a MMM ball and then a-move.

 

[lemmy101]

That's cool, I haven't played it enough to form an opinion yet. There is a large space between lover and hater though and forcing a line to be drawn between the two will only serve to prevent people from signing up and expressing their opinion.

That's a good point. Sadly we've been pushed into the extreme as I said above:

Are there negatives in Civ 5? Course they are. I have a good list of things I dislike about it. Why haven't I posted about them? Perhaps I would have. I'd like nothing more to have posted my dislikes in the playthru thread I did.

Why didn't I? There's way too much hate around here, I don't want to add to it by being negative. As such I find myself being forced into a bias for the positive and end up coming across like a completely unobjective fan boy.

You guys did that to me. I do love the game a lot, but have no problem with discussing likes and dislikes, but when people start just wantonly stomping their feet and saying 'THIS IS A DISGRACE THEY SHOULD BE A SHAMED THE BUNCH OF ****'S' it just militarises the fans.

We've been pushed into the situation we feel we have to become one extreme to make our support heard.

As for my choice of lots of military terms to describe this disagreement, it does seem a valid metaphor, and I have been playing Civ 5 all night, so leave me alone.

 

[Gurd]

Mutalisks work well again Thors (see "Magic Box"). But I'm not surprised that a Terran player would enjoy the "more accessible" Civ5, nor that he doesn't know anything about SC2 strategy. After all, all you need to do as a Terran is make a MMM ball and then a-move.

I'm pretty sure that has nothing to do with whatever race you're playing. Unlike what most people think, not every Terran is a drooling monkey and not every Zerg is an high-skilled progamer, only held back by racial imbalance.

But good trolling regardless.

 

[bhavv]

because then anyone who bought ever bought a PC game may end up typing their multiplayer CD key in and getting told it's 'already in use'. Surely it's obvious why PC games are an exception to the rule?

If there was no DRM in single player games, then this wouldnt be a problem for a game like Civ V.