[GS] Rock Band Discussion

[Human Crouton]

There are two reason that I really hate the rock bands, and those reasons are great musicians and faith.

If I'm generating rock bands through faith, then what do my great musicians represent? Who are these great musicians, and why am I making them if we get another gameplay mechanic that replaces whatever abstraction great musicians were meant to represent? If we are going to use music as a victory condition then shouldn't I be encouraged to cultivate a civilization that excels in music? I've got buildings, wonders, and government policies that generate great musicians and hold their works; but they don't matter. Whether I have zero music buildings or ten music buildings, I can create rock bands all the same.

Since great musicians and rock bands are different entities in the game then what different real world analogs are great musicians and rock bands meant to represent?

The other issue is faith purchasing. The civ team seems to use faith as their currency to purchase aspects of the game unrelated to faith just to make the faith currency more useful. I'm going to use national parks as the example. I could see a very faith oriented civ using their faith to purchase a national park because I can assume the faith currency represents the desire of the people to create a national park for religious or moral reasons. The issue is that faith is the only way to purchase a national park. What is the rationale for that? Does the game assume that atheistic societies would have no desire for national parks?

The reason national parks and rock bands are purchased with faith is because the faith currency would be otherwise useless to a civilization that has not developed a religion. The players aren't building holy sites unless they are playing religious civs, and instead of changing the religious game to encourage non-religious players to build them, they instead tied arbitrary game elements to faith, and made faith the sole way to experience those elements.

 

[steveg700]

Neat idea, but rock bands are more 20th century than 21st. They don’t make money from albums anymore either because of the internet, except for the top three. Kind of an age tell from the dev team And actually Ed’s not correct about art music (classical) concert touring, that is allive and well, so the old system of having a great musician tour still works.

Rock bands seem to emerge in the modern era, which is late Well, most hings in Civ stick around for more time than their historical counterparts. If you're okay with Chopin and Stravinsky going on tour in the 21st century, then rock bands touring should prove no great anachronism.

Suffice to say, the whole thing is plenty dumb, and at best should be a stand-alone DLC that can be turned off selectively. Put another one in the goofy column, between mounties and golf courses.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Rock bands seem to emerge in the modern era, which is late Well, most hings in Civ stick around for more time than their historical counterparts. If you're okay with Chopin and Stravinsky going on tour in the 21st century, then rock bands touring should prove no great anachronism.

Suffice to say, the whole thing is plenty dumb, and at best should be a stand-alone DLC that can be turned off selectively. Put another one in the goofy column, between mounties and golf courses.

Yeah, such "goofy" things were never intended to be in civ. It goes against the super serious nature of the games.

Next thing you know all the entertainer specialists will be Elvis impersonators.

 

[Navelgazer]

Since great musicians and rock bands are different entities in the game then what different real world analogs are great musicians and rock bands meant to represent?

I doubt I'll satisfy you with this answer, as I love the concept of rock bands but also see where you're coming from, so...

Great musicians represent the cultural aspects of a Civ, and thus are achieved through promoting such culture and fostering it. You build opera houses not just to hold great works but to train and foster great musicians. People will travel to your lands in part because of the culture represented by such great works. This Stravinsky and Satie and Phillip Glass continue to be performed by those who continue their culture. They exert a continuous amount of culture internally and tourism externally.

Rock Bands are flashes in the pan, not creating any great works (though that would be an interesting promotion) but bought via faith (which as Ed et. al. described in the livestream represents a sort of passion and inspirational spark of a culture) and creating bursts of tourism only for as long as they can manage to remain relevant. You might create The Rolling Stones or the Grateful Dead, touring for seemingly centuries, or you might create Lou Bega or Eiffel 86.

 

[Disgustipated]

The current reason why you would want a unit like the rock band is that you are in a later game winnable scenario, and there's one or two Peters on the map resisting your tourism and putting a really long clock on the win and they wanted a more active way to close out the game.

This is how I expect them to be used. Won't be useful against most civs. But if you got Pericles, Pedro, or Peter in the game, you are a probably going to want to use these to speed the game along to conclusion. If you have no massive culture civs in the game, you can probably get by without them. I have one current game that have no big culture civs in, my culture win will be super easy.

 

[steveg700]

Yeah, such "goofy" things were never intended to be in civ. It goes against the super serious nature of the games.

Next thing you know all the entertainer specialists will be Elvis impersonators.

I don't know what you're going on about, but I should guess this is some sort of absolutist straw man and proceed from there. Sorry if that's not the case.

Some cutesyness and winking at the camera is all good and well, but a little goes a long way. This is not a little. Giving a graphic an Elvis haircut is not in the same vein as an endgame with rock-band spam. That joke mechanism punctuated with a butt-rock guitar riff is going to get stale real fast, even for those who currently think such a notion to be all "rock bands lolz".

 

[Kurtbob]

What was was wrong with CivV's implementation of great musicians (and great writers/artists for that matter)? I dont get this addition at all considering my artists, writers and musicians just sit around until I can catch up in infrastructure to store their great works...I WANT a secondary ability for these great people and instead we get rock bands...I just dont understand the Devs decision...

 

[steveg700]

This is how I expect them to be used. Won't be useful against most civs. But if you got Pericles, Pedro, or Peter in the game, you are a probably going to want to use these to speed the game along to conclusion. If you have no massive culture civs in the game, you can probably get by without them. I have one current game that have no big culture civs in, my culture win will be super easy.

They seem like some kind of spy-apostle hybrid, and we have seen the AI churn out a bit of those.

 

[leandrombraz]

Idea: Using a rock band on your territory give you culture instead of tourism, making it possible to use use rock band defensively if the player or the AI isn't pursuing a cultural victory. Alternatively, to avoid rock band being spawned to progress fast through the civic tree, using a rock band in your territory could directly generate domestic tourists.

 

[Disgustipated]

Idea: Using a rock band on your territory give you culture instead of tourism, making it possible to use use rock band defensively if the player or the AI isn't pursuing a cultural victory. Alternatively, to avoid rock band being spawned to progress fast through the civic tree, using a rock band in your territory could directly generate domestic tourists.

Agreed. I'm not sure why they didn't go for this. I would like to use them defensively. After all, we use spies defensively.

 

[Gorbles]

I don't know what you're going on about, but I should guess this is some sort of absolutist straw man and proceed from there. Sorry if that's not the case.

Some cutesyness and winking at the camera is all good and well, but a little goes a long way. This is not a little. Giving a graphic an Elvis haircut is not in the same vein as an endgame with rock-band spam. That joke mechanism punctuated with a butt-rock guitar riff is going to get stale real fast, even for those who currently think such a notion to be all "rock bands lolz".

* for you. The point of immersion is everyone has their own levels and what they prefer and / or can't even tolerate.

Like others have said, there are plenty of endgames in Civ, and the fact that Firaxis are shaking up stuff with a brand-new kind of unit is really hopeful. You don't have to like it, but that doesn't make it bad.

 

[Human Crouton]

What was was wrong with CivV's implementation of great musicians (and great writers/artists for that matter)? I dont get this addition at all considering my artists, writers and musicians just sit around until I can catch up in infrastructure to store their great works...I WANT a secondary ability for these great people and instead we get rock bands...I just dont understand the Devs decision...

That's my thought as well. Artists, writers, and musicians all had different purposes in V, if you wished to use them in that way. In VI they are just three different buckets that all hold the same thing. Instead of changing that, they just skirted around it and make it an even more glaring design flaw.

 

[Navelgazer]

It is weird that in Civ VI, the WGAM distinction is most felt within Great Artists, where Religious Art and Sculpture have, at least, slightly separate mechanics for some Civs (notably Kongo.)

 

[steveg700]

* for you. The point of immersion is everyone has their own levels and what they prefer and / or can't even tolerate.

Like others have said, there are plenty of endgames in Civ, and the fact that Firaxis are shaking up stuff with a brand-new kind of unit is really hopeful. You don't have to like it, but that doesn't make it bad.

Yes, yes, "different people have different opinions, so no idea can actually be bad". Fire all the art school teachers, because how can anyone assign a grade to a scribble of a sad clown? Pish and tosh.

I'm sorry, but such propositions are equivocal, sophomoric, and lacking in incisiveness. They effectively rebutt nothing, since they fallaciously treats all matters of opinion as governed by unsupportable personal preference, akin to opining one's favorite color or least favorite vegetable. In actuality, green is sometimes a better choice than red, and consulting a color wheel can objectively tell you what compliments or clashes. Sure, some people might like brown polka-dot ties with blue plaid jackets. Those people have bad taste. Go ahead and paint your house using such a scheme, but don't be surprised when it's on Instagram as an eyesore.

Worse still, such propositions are usually offered as some sort of counter to negative opinions, and they fail even at that. If everyone has a right to like anything because quality is so utterly subjective and impossible to hold to a standard, people also have a right to loathe anything just as vociferously.

 

[Stringer1313]

What was was wrong with CivV's implementation of great musicians (and great writers/artists for that matter)? I dont get this addition at all considering my artists, writers and musicians just sit around until I can catch up in infrastructure to store their great works...I WANT a secondary ability for these great people and instead we get rock bands...I just dont understand the Devs decision...

Yes x 10000

 

[Gorbles]

Yes, yes, "different people have different opinions, so no idea can actually be bad". Pish and tosh. Fire all the art school teachers, because how can anyone assign a grade to a drawing of a sad clown?

Such propositions are equivocal, sophomoric, and lacking in incisiveness. They effectively rebutt nothing, since they fallaciously try to treat all matters of opinion as being as governed by personal preference akin to one's favorite color. In actuality, green is sometimes a better choice than red, and looking at a color wheel can objectively tell you what compliments or clashes. Sure, some people might like brown polka-dot ties with blue plaid jackets. Those people have bad taste. Go ahead and paint your house using such a scheme, but don't be surprised when it's on Instagram as an eyesore.

Worse still, such propositions are usually offered as some sort of counter to negative opinions, and they fail even at that. If everyone has a right to like anything because quality is so utterly subjective and impossible to hold to a standard, people also have a right to loathe anything just as vociferously.

Bit of an amusing strawman (after claiming that exact thing from someone else) to take my post and say therefore "no" idea can actually be bad. And a good red herring to refer to, uh, the teaching of the arts? That's a fun discussion, but ultimately off-topic.

In this case, it absolutely is personal preference. Someone else might be incredibly put off by little Elvis dudes appearing on a screen. It's one of the largest aesthetic breaks from form for that game, which is either good or bad depending on how you value it (I think it's funny, but that's besides the point). You can either reconcile your opinion with the validity of others, or not. I'm just pointing it out. If you want to actually try a qualitative analysis of why some kind of Rock Band-themed "endgame" play in Civ 6 is actually bad, go for it. You haven't actually done so, and instead relied on the incredibly personal and subjective "a little goes a long way".

 

[SupremacyKing2]

It is kinda amusing that with all the anachronisms in civ, it's a great musician from the 18th century performing a concert in the 20th century (in-game) that makes the devs go "This is unacceptable! We got to create a brand new unit to fix this". I think Ed just thought it would be cool to have rock bands in a civ game and came up with a reason to do it.

 

[steveg700]

I think Ed just thought it would be cool to have rock bands in a civ game and came up with a reason to do it.

Indeed, it's a great game design idea to have while listening to "Dark SIde of the Moon" and watching "The Wizard of Oz".

 

[Scaramanga]

I like the interactions with the map.

A lot of rock has Gospel/Hindu/Pagan influences so I guess faith-buying makes sense. There is the great band The Cult after all.

That's my thought as well. Artists, writers, and musicians all had different purposes in V, if you wished to use them in that way. In VI they are just three different buckets that all hold the same thing. Instead of changing that, they just skirted around it and make it an even more glaring design flaw.

I don't know about being the same thing. They all require different building slots and are affected by different policy cards.
I like that the rock stars are more volatile in that their performances can really stink.

 

[Human Crouton]

I like the interactions with the map.

A lot of rock has Gospel/Hindu/Pagan influences so I guess faith-buying makes sense. There is the great band The Cult after all.

I don't know about being the same thing. They all require different building slots and are affected by different policy cards..

Having slightly different requirements to do the same thing does not change the fact that they all do the same thing. They all create an item that sits in a room and makes culture.