(Rising Tide) "Release Date" (Estimate based on info)

[poom3619]

Fun is subjective. Please stop using it as an objective measure of quality.

If we won't voice our own subjective opinion to say what is good and bad. Then why bother having discussion and speculation with so many people here instead of just waiting until the release date.

and didn't subjective quality of a game, if it exist, is come from collective measure of user's subjective opinion?

 

[NASAROG]

Civ:BERT comes out 10/13-17
XCOM 2 comes out Nov 2-10

Just my guesses here.

 

[Ryika]

like the moneymen care about consumers. yeah.

Well, as far as I know that's the official explanation. If you've got more information or an interesting assumption... go ahead.

by December 2014, civ:be lost 80% of its player base.
it was a wakeup call for Firaxis. in January 2015 they did a free2play weekend of civ:be. later civ:be's two gamedevs publicly admitted that "they were not audacious enough".

Okay. And what does that have to do with part of my post that you quoted? A "flop" is a situation where something is released and nobody is interested. Here something was released and people were interested. Yes, most people lost interest pretty quickly after they had started playing the game, I haven't seen anyone deny that. But that doesn't change anything about the fact that people seemed to generally be on board with the idea of Beyond Earth - it just didn't deliver what they had hoped for.

And this wasn't directed at me, but...

strawman. barely playable does not equal unfun. civ5 vanilla on release was fun to play. civ:be is not.
[/SPOILER]

...this strikes me as a very subjective experience. What exactly did Vanilla Civ5 have that Beyond Earth doesn't have that made you enjoy it?

Because for me it's the complete opposite. Sure, the Atmosphere in Vanilla Civ 5 was better, but other than that? Mechanically Beyond Earth is a lot more fun than what Vanilla Civ 5 was.

 

[Gorbles]

If we won't voice our own subjective opinion to say what is good and bad. Then why bother having discussion and speculation with so many people here instead of just waiting until the release date.

and didn't subjective quality of a game, if it exist, is come from collective measure of user's subjective opinion?

You can say what is good and bad, however "the game is fun" / "the game is not fun" is not useful feedback. It doesn't allow for discussion. It is an absolute that cannot be argued, because fun is subjective.

As an example, broken Workers are not subjective.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

1. I don't think Beyond Earth achieved what it was meant to, it's got a very low player number, while I cannot verify if Civ 5 had the same number the fact that a 5 year entry is still doing better than the new entry is already a huge question makr

They are aware they've screwed up and an expansion pack is an attempt at getting extra bucks out of something that has failed (Civ BE isn't that good, that I thought was established)

While Civ BE might've sold well, it wasn't because it was good but because of loyalty and expectactions that weren't met.

Also, since people seem to be missing my point, my release date isn't speculaction but actaul fact. It's getting released after the Firaxicon, as proved by this

 

[Ryika]

They are aware they've screwed up and an expansion pack is an attempt at getting extra bucks out of something that has failed

Well, by that logic G+K and BNW were just attempts at getting extra bucks out of something that has failed. Because Civ 5 also sold well and then got bombarded by bad reviews and angry comments.

But anyway... if those "attempts of getting extra bugs out of something that has failed - I'll finish that sentence for you so it actually makes sense - to provide an experience that is satisfying enough to keep a big part of the players who were first interested in the game... manage to turn Beyond Earth into a great game like G+K and BNW did for Civ 5, well... them I'm fine with that I guess.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: This thread is about possible release dates for CivBERT. Why do we seem to always turn these threads into the same old arguments about whether it is good, or not, whether it will be saved, or not, or if it even needs saving. Can we please try to keep these threads on topic.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[kipwheeler]

Also, since people seem to be missing my point, my release date isn't speculaction but actaul fact. It's getting released after the Firaxicon, as proved by this

In the image, I would point out the location of the prepositional phrase "prior to launch" appears just behind xcom2. It is grammatically ambiguous as to whether the prepositional phrase is modifiying xcom2 exclusively or modifying both it and Rising Tide through implied parallelism. Technically, we could read the sentence as stating that Rising Tide will be available for free play time at Firaxicon (but it might have already launched earlier) and xcom2 will be available for play time before its launch release.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure you're right, and the announcement is intended to suggest that both games will be available for pre-launch experimentation at Firaxicon, but I do want to point out that, given the sentence phrasing, it's possible to read it differently.

 

[Sherlock]

Doesn't matter to me, I won't buy it till it hits the fall steam sale end of November.

No way I'm paying for two games here, a retail game and a $29 expansion pack just to get one playable game.

 

[Red Menace]

if it is released after Firaxicon which is most likely, it still wouldn't mean it will be released LATE OCTOBER. Firaxicon is the 3rd to the 5th] it seems more likely that it will be released early to Mid October. hopefully they will have a REAL release date by the time of Firaxicon

 

[Hail]

Well, by that logic G+K and BNW were just attempts at getting extra bucks out of something that has failed. Because Civ 5 also sold well and then got bombarded by bad reviews and angry comments.

civ5 has glowing reviews.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure you're right, and the announcement is intended to suggest that both games will be available for pre-launch experimentation at Firaxicon, but I do want to point out that, given the sentence phrasing, it's possible to read it differently.

a strange decision to release BERT only a month before XCOM 2.

 

[Ryika]

civ5 has glowing reviews.

Professional Reviews, yes, but so has Beyond Earth. Player Reception was not much different than what Beyond Earth has. In fact, on a scale 1-10 scale Civ5 was only 1 above Beyond Earth in both, professional as well as player reception.

But anyway... judging from what we've seen in the gameplay footage so far I'm actually fine if it turns out as a late-october or even later release. There's still a LOT of balancing and polishing to be done and I'm pretty certain that the product must be stable and fun at release if they want to turn around the public reception.

 

[Gort]

Civ 5 was received far better than Beyond Earth. In the month of its release, Civ 5 had an average of 27,448.5 players on Steam playing it. BE had 28,464.

Ten months after release, Civ 5 had 21,436. Ten months after release, BE has 2,116.

So it looks to me like similar numbers of people bought both games, but Beyond Earth had around 10% of the staying power, because it's an inferior product. That's not necessarily as damning as it sounds - Civ 5 is a classic game. Most games don't have more people playing them three years after release than they did when they first released. But it does mean that Firaxis have so far failed to improve on their previous efforts, which is disappointing.

 

[Ryika]

Or maybe people just had the option to go back to the now massively improved Civ 5, while there was no "almost the same but better!"-Version of Civ 5 that people could have gone back to, given that the changes from Civ4 to Civ5 were rather drastic. So you're comparing apples to oranges and drawing conclusions that don't really follow from that, but instead needs a ton of extra-assumptions... all while you're ignoring the numbers that can be used to draw a direct conclusion (Review Scores by Players and Critics).

If we stick just with reviews, or even the problems that have been brought up at the time of their releases, then both games look very similar. (Which still doesn't excuse the fact that BE repeated many of the mistakes that Civ 5 already made, but is just the way more realistic conclusion.)

 

[Halbbruder]

Professional Reviews, yes, but so has Beyond Earth. Player Reception was not much different than what Beyond Earth has. In fact, on a scale 1-10 scale Civ5 was only 1 above Beyond Earth in both, professional as well as player reception.

But anyway... judging from what we've seen in the gameplay footage so far I'm actually fine if it turns out as a late-october or even later release. There's still a LOT of balancing and polishing to be done and I'm pretty certain that the product must be stable and fun at release if they want to turn around the public reception.

You mention "stable" and I immediately think of multiplayer. In my opinion, multiplayer is the best way to guarantee positive reviews as people gradually move from SP to MP, but it's possible that SP would keep some of us satisfied for some time.

On another matter, I also have one question that may or may not have been raised earlier: what does this mean for the Starships addition to the seeding options? I remember Ryika posting about a way to unlock them without getting the Starships game but will CivBERT just release them normally anyway?

 

[Gort]

Or maybe people just had the option to go back to the now massively improved Civ 5, while there was no "almost the same but better!"-Version of Civ 5 that people could have gone back to, given that the changes from Civ4 to Civ5 were rather drastic. So you're comparing apples to oranges and drawing conclusions that don't really follow from that, but instead needs a ton of extra-assumptions... all while you're ignoring the numbers that can be used to draw a direct conclusion (Review Scores by Players and Critics).

If we stick just with reviews, or even the problems that have been brought up at the time of their releases, then both games look very similar. (Which still doesn't excuse the fact that BE repeated many of the mistakes that Civ 5 already made, but is just the way more realistic conclusion.)

Yeah, I'll take hard numbers on the size of the playerbase over review scores any day of the week, thanks. Especially when we're talking games with long-term appeal such as strategy games. However you decide to rationalise it, Beyond Earth has lost 90% of its playerbase since launch. Civ 5 saw nothing like that kind of drop in the same time frame.

Regarding the, "But people could go back to the superior Civ 5" argument, perhaps they shouldn't have made a game so similar - yet inferior - to their previous game, then?

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Moderator warning ignored, thread closed.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889