Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Balkans, Oct 24, 2016.
It's human nature, I wouldn't take it too personally.
Almost 2 decades? I've been playing Civ almost 3 decades.
but when the game is so easy and there is no competition at all, whats thought provocative? Where is the challenge? Where is the discovery? (Oh yeah discovery is just a theme, we never thought of actually implement it as a mechanic). I've played all the Civs up until now and adapting to a New iteration was Great fun. i must say i actually enjoyed BE more than this 1. It had at least some freshness and the atmosohere was quite nice. It was a short lived enjoyment though and i never bothered picking up the expansion.
I've played Civ VI for 32 hours already. Im sure others have played for longer.
I agree, lots of stuff still to test but... Do players have enough time under their belt to form an opinion about the game? Absolutely.
Mods will take care of that if future patches don't. More will likely be added in future expansions, and then mods will add even more to that. The best thing about any of the Civ games since Civ IV have been the awesome mods.
Fall From Heaven, for instance, is probably the best mod that has ever been made for any of the Civ games, and it created such a wonderfully unique experience that I still miss it several years later. If you haven't gotten into mods yet, I recommend that you take a look.
This has been my experience in most of the computer games I have purchased in the last several years. I have no issue with it. Those that do, however, should probably not be buying games at release.
So, you are using game-breaking exploits and complaining that the game is too easy? That is actually kind of laughable.
Nah, the AI in Civ6 actually manage to smartly surround cities. They just refuse to attack and don't build enough ranged units. These are two things easily dealt with in a patch. I don't expect genius AI. I expect an AI that puts up some kind of fight.
You don't need one month of testing to see that AI is plain stupid...
Grurgh. Make me feel old will ya? I started playing civ 1 in the early 90s. I've played all of the iterations. So that's 20+ years of civ experience. I'm also a huge pc strategy & boardgame nerd which amounts to thousands of hours worth of gameplay and game mechanics analysis. I've spent 31 hours this weekend playing civ. Based on the experience mentioned, I would claim that I am quite capable of analyzing the mechanics and dynamics of a game after playing it a few times. And I'm a lightweight compared to some of the number crunchers you'll find out there. Have I made a final judgment yet? No. But I have made some observations:
The game is neat. It has some core mechanics which are highly flexible, potentially very dynamic and interesting/fun. This is good. The series has taken a step towards more complexity and depth, which is in my opinion also good. (Something I would criticize civ5 for not doing). The bad is as follows, the game lacks polish. Quite a lot of polish. Tiny annoyances with the UI that should have been improved pre-launch and a few balance issues and exploits that could and should have been tweaked before launch. That is what the open beta is for, I thought.
My opinion of the game, it has potential to be really great, but it lacks polish and playtesting for balance. That I can tell from 31 hours of play. The core mechanics are good and the potential for very interesting gameplay is present. A lot of people have to re-learn civ because of changes, and that is not a bad thing. Also, the AI diplomacy is despite its improvement related to agendas, poorly polished, which leads to all civs hating the player and each other. This needs tweaking. Also, the AI needs to learn to fight. I fear no AI, no matter the size or tech level. This should be fixed.
So in conclusion, I can tell already that civ6 is a good game according to my criteria, provided that the issues mentioned are fixed.
you have to put things in perspective. Basically, 25-50 posters account for most of the posts in the negative threads. Even for this forum, that is a fringe element.
If you want to know what the "community" actually thinks, look at Steam Charts:
Civ6 is the 3rd most popular game, with up to 100,000-160,000 players at any one time. 11.5 million hours have been played. Assuming every owner played an average of 5 hours (which is probably too high), you get around 2,000,000 copies already sold.
99% of Civ players will never visit this forum, they vote with their wallets. Watch how many are still playing the game in 6 months. That will determine how many patches, DLCs and expansion packs Civ6 will get and more importantly whether there will be a Civ7.
I only visit this forum to get useful info, i.e. bug fixes, gameplay tips, useful mods. The rest is just "white noise".
potential is great. but as one philosopher said, we will all die in the long run
I can't help myself. I have many video games where I do not have the option to use exploits. I still play Nintendo games on my LED/LCD TVs with the original controllers, box, and games. Mike Tyson's Punch Out at least 4 times a week and Tecmo Bowl for sure along with Excitebike and some others almost every day for a half hour or two. Those games are still a good time for me and I can't really exploit them. Now this game comes along with all the other Civ games that I play and every time they have so many exploits throughout the game I can't help it. It isn't my fault that I can sell my army for thousands of pieces of gold or that I can steal unprotected settlers or roll the AI in the first 30 turns. I always say that if they don't want me to do these things... make the game correct! Don't they have players who come in and find these exploits like trade the AI for lump gold and DOW afterwards? If these guys are going to make this game so broken I am going to break it every time! I am not going to play like others in the past with 15 rules that they won't do when they play. I see a worker/builder/settler in the open they are going to be captured. They give me 100% bonus to build Horsemen I am going to build Horsemen. I see an AI with warriors when I have Artillery they are going to get destroyed.
what is laughable is someone who thinks its ok to have exploits and that we all think we are fine with them. D- on common sense to this quote
:So, you are using game-breaking exploits and complaining that the game is too easy? That is actually kind of laughable.
when a human sees an exploit, he uses it. its pretty common bro.....
I think it was CivIII that came with the "minor issue" that it crashed my PC when I tried to fire it up.
Only the selling off of horsemen for profit is an actual exploit. The rest are just bad AI, and not really something you have to go out of your way to 'abuse'.
If your issue is primarily with the AI, however, then I can only commiserate. I'm kicking the ass of a rival civ that is a full era ahead of me because it never commits to killing my units. The only unit deaths I have experienced were the result of foolish over-extending on my part.
If someone goes out of your way to abuse an exploit like mass producing horse units as Scythia for game-breaking profit, he shouldn't go around complaining about the game being to easy. He should recognize that he is abusing an unintended flaw in the game design (that will likely be fixed in the first patch), and either abuse the **** out of it for lols or play the game without making use of the exploit.
Common sense: If a broken exploit is killing your fun, don't use it.
The terrible AI behaviour, however, is a legitimate complaint. Hopefully a quick fix will allow the AI to actually go for the kill when they have you by the balls.
Never happened to me. Was this a common issue? Anyway civ3 was miles ahead of civ6 at release and at least gave me a real challenge! It had more the feeling of a complete and thought through game design.
Games used to be complete when they were published. I played the original civ, civnet, civ II all without patches. I don't quite remember but I believe that Alpha Centauri and Civ 4 were in great shape when they were released. I don't know about civ 3 or 5 but if I had to bet I would guess that civ 3 was in great shape upon release.
I haven't formed a final opinion yet, but I can state that I am quite disappointed in Civ 6 upon release. The AI isn't good to put it politely, diplo is goofy and basically sucks, WM penalties are too high (likely to compensate for an AI that can't punch its way out of a paper bag). The UI could be considerably better and provide more info to the player. etc etc.
I'd hope that the just one more turn feeling would be back, but alas it isn't for me.
The trend of seeing supposedly great 4x games released in what generously could be called late-beta stage is depressing. This started here with Civ 5, and has also infected other game companies, for example GalCiv 3.
.. neilkaz ..
I guess planning your cities around districts wasn't novel enough for you. City defense against Barbarians likewise requires a different strategy. Building and making effective use of roads: different, etc. etc.
I'm guessing you are playing on immortal and not having to adjust your game at all?
It was, at least in my humble opinion.
I'm not sure where you're heading with this, but yes i have been playing on immortal.
Separate names with a comma.