Poll; How many versions of Civ 5 will there be by Game Release?

[Tee Kay]

*** Fearmonger Alert ***

It's even worse than that... Most companies "OWN" all modded content created by modders. If 2K Firaxis becomes one of them (if they aren't already; unknown here), they could Sell content as DLC that users create! And it would not be required to pay the modder anything, and the modder would no longer own their creation (which they probably didn't to begin with).

Will it happen though? Probably not.

I think that is already the case.

 

[ZimbuTheMonkey]

*** Fearmonger Alert ***

It's even worse than that... Most companies "OWN" all modded content created by modders. If 2K Firaxis becomes one of them (if they aren't already; unknown here), they could Sell content as DLC that users create! And it would not be required to pay the modder anything, and the modder would no longer own their creation (which they probably didn't to begin with).

Will it happen though? Probably not.

By the way, this is exactly what Blizzard (or Activision, I should say) is doing with Battle.net 2.0.

They make this in-game mod browser sound so good in the interviews, but I don't like the implications at all if it ends up being the only way to use mods.

 

[Commander Bello]

If they properly balance the civs, then this isn't a problem.

The Praetorians problem was just imbalanced design; nothing to do with whether or not only some players can use a particular civ.

Exactly.

Now, who confirms that neither Babylon nor the D2D double pack civilization will not be imbalanced?

I am not saying that they will - but they could.
And in the latter case mp games might face some problems.

And that is the difference between what we have experienced up to now and what may happen in the future.
Up to now everybody knew what was available to the others.

In the case of DLC-civs you may not know it, because you haven't bought it. The features of that civilization are unknown to you.

 

[Ahriman]

They make this in-game mod browser sound so good in the interviews, but I don't like the implications at all if it ends up being the only way to use mods.

They have stated, repeatedly, that you will still be able to download and use mods from fansites as usual, you aren't restricted to using only the in-game mod tool.

Please don't move back to speculating about things they've already clarified.

Now, who confirms that neither Babylon nor the D2D double pack civilization will not be imbalanced?

How is it any more likely that there will be balance problems with Bablyon than with any other civ?

Balance problems are endemic to multiplayer; they aren't specifically related to DLC.

 

[Commander Bello]

They have stated, repeatedly, that you will still be able to download and use mods from fansites as usual, you aren't restricted to using only the in-game mod tool.

Please don't move back to speculating about things they've already clarified.

There is the technical aspect and there is the legal aspect, which you forgot to mention.
But that can better be discussed again in one of the Steam threads.

Now, who confirms that neither Babylon nor the D2D double pack civilization will not be imbalanced?

How is it any more likely that there will be balance problems with Bablyon than with any other civ?

Balance problems are endemic to multiplayer; they aren't specifically related to DLC.

For sure.
Yet, in the current civ releases, we all knew about the imbalanced civilizations (see above: Roman Praetorians) since they were available (in terms of: we could have played them before and could have learned about their strengths and weaknesses) to all of us.
With inventing DLC (and as it appears, there will be loads of DLC ['first' double civ pack...]), this knowledge may be reserved to the ones who have bought DLC.

Don't forget, we have been promised that each civilization will be unique.

 

[cybrxkhan]

I'm pretty sure some are just as confused as me, but besides the new civilization(s) and new map(s) for some of them, what exactly is the difference between all these versions?

 

[andrewlt]

They seem to be going for the Dragon Age business model for DLC. For an additional 10% of the price of the base game, you get an additional 1-2% of the content. Even Dragon Age's expansion pack had a terrible value. It was around 60-70% of the price of the original game for around 30% of the content.

 

[12agnar0k]

All I can say is if someone brought a DLC and got a slightly better say Roman civilisation than everything you had by not buying DLC then its not their fault, they paid for the benefit, if you want to pay for the benefit too then do so, otherwise play with what you pay for.

 

[Commander Bello]

All I can say is if someone brought a DLC and got a slightly better say Roman civilisation than everything you had by not buying DLC then its not their fault, they paid for the benefit, if you want to pay for the benefit too then do so, otherwise play with what you pay for.

Which doesn't change anything for the possible mp conflicts.

"Hey, hanging around here for a good mp game."
"Great, me too!"
"Ok, shall we start one?"
"Of course, be prepared for the worst! <evil grin>"
"Forgot to tell you: I've bought the Romans lately..."
*quits

 

[ColdFever]

"Forgot to tell you: I've bought the Romans lately..."
*quits

Such a joke would get stuck in our throat if it would become true. We now probably know, why the once previewed Mongols suddenly disappeared from the standard Civ5 feature list. They may re-appear now on the D2D feature list or as an extra DLC:
Mongols DLC! The Civ-crushing Civ! Become a dangerous multiplayer! (10$)

 

[Hafnia]

They seem to be going for the Dragon Age business model for DLC. For an additional 10% of the price of the base game, you get an additional 1-2% of the content. Even Dragon Age's expansion pack had a terrible value. It was around 60-70% of the price of the original game for around 30% of the content.

At the risk of going off-topic, this was in part due to the fact that the length of the original content in DAO was amazing. It easily took 80-100 hours to complete a playthrough if you weren't rushing it.

It's not fair to use the length of the original as a yardstick by which you measure the DLC/expansion. Awakenings clocked in at a good 25-30 hours for $20 - I've seen others charge a full $50 for games of that length. Similarly, if you look at the DLC in terms of value for money (1-2 hours of gameplay for the price of a good cup of coffee), then I think the pricing is reasonable.

Will be interesting to see how the pricing of the Civ5 DLC is done - how much would people be willing to pay for a "2 Civ + map(s?)"-pack (I'm assuming from the D2D offer that this is how the DLC will be structured) ?

 

[Hafnia]

Such a joke would get stuck in our throat if it would become true. We now probably know, why the once previewed Mongols suddenly disappeared from the standard Civ5 feature list. They may re-appear now on the D2D feature list or as an extra DLC:
Mongols DLC! The Civ-crushing Civ! Become a dangerous multiplayer! (10$)

I hope they'd resist the temptation to make the DLC Civs overpowered.

Also, for multiplayer I assume you will only be able to play with the civs that all players have. If, in the example above, I haven't bought the Mongols, then I would be unable to initiate diplomacy with them, as I do not have the leader (or indeed, unique unit) graphics installed.

 

[ColdFever]

Also, for multiplayer I assume you will only be able to play with the civs that all players have. If, in the example above, I haven't bought the Mongols, then I would be unable to initiate diplomacy with them, as I do not have the leader (or indeed, unique unit) graphics installed.

Hmm, IMHO it would be a shame if extremely interesting/unique Civs (Mongols, Vikings etc.) would be unplayable in MP because of a DLC only release.

Alternatively, all content could always be installed via Steam on each installation/version, but the Steam DRM would disable the active playing of DLC that has not been purchased. This way the DLC Civs would be playable in MP for all, but actively selectable on game start only for purchasers.

The 2nd approach would also help modders, because all game data is always available for modding, as in former versions. However, in this case I wonder how T2 would prevent the free-for-all distribution of DLC Civ mods.

 

[Hafnia]

Hmm, IMHO it would be a shame if extremely interesting/unique Civs (Mongols, Vikings etc.) would be unplayable in MP because of a DLC only release.

I didn't mean to imply that they would be unplayable in MP, just that they would be locked for MP battles unless all participants have them.

 

[Commander Bello]

I didn't mean to imply that they would be unplayable in MP, just that they would be locked for MP battles unless all participants have them.

Which easily can mean the same thing.

 

[Johnny Be]

There will be 11!! Because it's one louder!!

ops... sorry, wrong flick

 

[civ_king]

for $2000 I'll make you one that goes up to twelve!
J/K

There could be many if we consider all combinations of DLC with these