Should Civfanatics just make one "Civ V Criticism Thread"?

[The_J]

I like how a mod posted on this very thread that this isn't going to happen and every subsequent post ignored him and continued to discuss the issue as if he had never posted.

Why don't we just close the topic then? Because this is for discussing.

Maybe here in this discussion a good solution can be found .
I can't think of one myself at the moment .

I like how a junior moderator who is obviously not impartial said that in his opinion would not work.

Not a matter of being partial.
One thread would probably lower my workload in some areas, so i'm not completely against it, but i seriously think it would not work.

 

[Senethro]

What would be nice is if there was as many criticism threads as people wanted and one rage thread where all the angry posts are sent.

 

[eb0]

My first post here was about this exact subject. I love this forum and am very glad to have found it, but everytime I want to read about something in any of the Civ 5 threads I inevitably have to flip thru 3 pages of why Civ 5 isnt Civ 4 and how they messed this up that up etc. Most of it has nothing to do with the subject contents and is just another thread for people bash in. They'll fix the game, its not that bad. If you hate it this much, stop playing Civ 5 play Civ 4 again and post in the Civ 4 forums how great Civ 4 is.

I'm not saying don't bash Civ 5 if you're disappointed with a particular aspect of it, just find the correct thread and bash within the subject of the discussion.

My 2 cents! Now I'm broke, spent all my money on the $4.99 babylon DLC

 

[JLoZeppeli]

My first post here was about this exact subject. I love this forum and am very glad to have found it, but everytime I want to read about something in any of the Civ 5 threads I inevitably have to flip thru 3 pages of why Civ 5 isnt Civ 4 and how they messed this up that up etc. Most of it has nothing to do with the subject contents and is just another thread for people bash in. They'll fix the game, its not that bad. If you hate it this much, stop playing Civ 5 play Civ 4 again and post in the Civ 4 forums how great Civ 4 is.

I'm not saying don't bash Civ 5 if you're disappointed with a particular aspect of it, just find the correct thread and bash within the subject of the discussion.

My 2 cents! Now I'm broke, spent all my money on the $4.99 babylon DLC

But i can understand that someone wants to read at least the news the general forum, that is more an opinion box...

For the real threads on the game i think there are a lot of other subforums of the Civ V section... Like Strategies and tips, or tech support, or multiplayer... I don't understand at all the utility of the general section in this way, if don't want ot share opinion on the game and the news, as well critics...


I'm starting to think that General Discussions is some sort of vodoo fetish for someone... As i say it's an opinion box, full of silly and meaningless things, as well some interesting discussions... But the game discussion you (and maybe others of the yes in the poll) are claiming are elsewhere in the Civ V section forum

 

[OneFootInThe...]

one thing is that Civ V is a major dissapointment to the majority of the players... and you can be happy that there are so main complainers, as that suggests that the hope for the franchise is still running high.

When you get a few positive and questin posts a day, that will be the moment the whole thing dies, and well... we will all be playing something else, or nothing at all... so be happy that there is a lot of complaints, as for many players that is all what is left from hope of playing an interesting game.

 

[Skwink]

one thing is that Civ V is a major dissapointment to the majority of the players... and you can be happy that there are so main complainers, as that suggests that the hope for the franchise is still running high.

When you get a few positive and questin posts a day, that will be the moment the whole thing dies, and well... we will all be playing something else, or nothing at all... so be happy that there is a lot of complaints, as for many players that is all what is left from hope of playing an interesting game.

Maybe a majority, but a lot of people like Civ V too: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=393840

 

[lschnarch]

Just from the last postings:

, and right now it's difficult even to carry on a conversation without it getting trolled by people who hate the game and have no interest in a constructive conversation about the game as it exists, or define a constructive conversation as one in which you talk about how to radically change the game from what's there.

I'd much prefer a split where the haters get split off from everyone else, not because their viewpoint is invalid but because the dead horse has been beaten and I just want to talk Civ V strategy or random stuff about the game without having the thread fill up with hate posts.

Labelling, anybody?

There are so many stupid threads here! I have to wade through tons of threads like: I hate this game, and This Game Sucks!" to find a good discussion.

Ok, point them out.
Come on, link the threads with such titles.

I like how a junior moderator who is obviously not impartial said that in his opinion would not work.

I would assume a "junior" moderatot to be a MODERATOR after all.
Minimising others fits exactly to what you already have displayed in this very thread.

... I inevitably have to flip thru 3 pages of why Civ 5 isnt Civ 4 and how they messed this up that up etc. Most of it has nothing to do with the subject contents and is just another thread for people bash in. They'll fix the game, its not that bad. If you hate it this much, stop playing Civ 5 play Civ 4 ...

Seems to me that the most references to Civ4 are made by people who face problems if others don't agree with their opinion that Civ0.V would be a good game.
Funny as well is the remark that pointing out some messed up things would have nothing to do with the subject.

Conclusion:
Seems to me that many people have a problem with others not sharing their opinion.
Furthermore, I cannot remember any "poll" about concentrating "praising" threads into just one.
Actually, the so-called "haters" overall seem to be more civilized than the "non-whiners".

You may want to make your thoughts about this.

 

[SuperJay]

Just for kicks, I made a list of all the threads on Page 1 of the General forum right now, and did a quick breakdown by category. The amount of threads in each category is as follows. If you want details, let me know.

Total threads: 45
General gameplay: 11
Hatin: 2
AI: 2
Patches: 5
DLC: 5
Rating / polls: 4
Mechanics: 7
Reviews: 1
Help requests: 7
Steam: 1

So we have 2 "hate" threads out of 45. If you're curious, those threads are "Happy days are here! I was able to return Civ 5!" and "CIV 5 the worst letdown in PC gaming, ever." (The first one is debatable, but I left it in.) There were two other threads that expressed disappointment, but didn't go into full-out hating; the posts were generally not so exaggerated in tone or content, so I didn't include them in the HATE category.

This has no scientific value for about a thousand different reasons, but it was an interesting exercise given the complaints about constructive threads getting buried by hate threads, or members having to click through multiple pages of hate threads to find real discussion.

 

[JLoZeppeli]

Maybe a majority, but a lot of people like Civ V too: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=393840

You are right, but i think that you can understand this "majority", if we can call it in this way, that need a little time to cool down, because Firaxis screwed up their expectations, Civ V for the large part of them was a sequel on the same road of the other civs, not something so different...

So you could wait for a month, i think the forum will be more quiet, and if i can suggest you something, there are other subforums of the civ V section where you can discuss with other players liking the game as you...

 

[OneFootInThe...]

Just for kicks, I made a list of all the threads on Page 1 of the General forum right now, and did a quick breakdown by category. The amount of threads in each category is as follows. If you want details, let me know.

Total threads: 45
General gameplay: 11
Hatin: 2
AI: 2
Patches: 5
DLC: 5
Rating / polls: 4
Mechanics: 7
Reviews: 1
Help requests: 7
Steam: 1

So we have 2 "hate" threads out of 45. If you're curious, those threads are "Happy days are here! I was able to return Civ 5!" and "CIV 5 the worst letdown in PC gaming, ever." (The first one is debatable, but I left it in.) There were two other threads that expressed disappointment, but didn't go into full-out hating; the posts were generally not so exaggerated in tone or content, so I didn't include them in the HATE category.

This has no scientific value for about a thousand different reasons, but it was an interesting exercise given the complaints about constructive threads getting buried by hate threads, or members having to click through multiple pages of hate threads to find real discussion.

obvious conclusion is that we need more hatin' threads, two are just not representative enough

 

[charon2112]

There is absolutely no evidence to support this. and forum polls are garbage. This is your opinion.

one thing is that Civ V is a major dissapointment to the majority of the players...

 

[charon2112]

Yeah no...by my quick count:

10 threads were negative towards Civ V.
1 thread was positive towards Civ V.
about 27 were general gameplay posts, or unbiased polls.

Just for kicks, I made a list of all the threads on Page 1 of the General forum right now, and did a quick breakdown by category. The amount of threads in each category is as follows. If you want details, let me know.

Total threads: 45
General gameplay: 11
Hatin: 2
AI: 2
Patches: 5
DLC: 5
Rating / polls: 4
Mechanics: 7
Reviews: 1
Help requests: 7
Steam: 1

So we have 2 "hate" threads out of 45. If you're curious, those threads are "Happy days are here! I was able to return Civ 5!" and "CIV 5 the worst letdown in PC gaming, ever." (The first one is debatable, but I left it in.) There were two other threads that expressed disappointment, but didn't go into full-out hating; the posts were generally not so exaggerated in tone or content, so I didn't include them in the HATE category.

This has no scientific value for about a thousand different reasons, but it was an interesting exercise given the complaints about constructive threads getting buried by hate threads, or members having to click through multiple pages of hate threads to find real discussion.

 

[SuperJay]

Yeah no...by my quick count:

10 threads were negative towards Civ V.
1 thread was positive towards Civ V.
about 27 were general gameplay posts, or unbiased polls.

So you consider any and all criticism to be "hating?" Better yet - which 10 threads? Can you list them?

The polls evened out, in my estimation. There were more than four polls, but only four that were polls regarding the quality or satisfaction with the game. One was "Best Civ version ever" and one was "Worst Civ version ever;" the other two were neither pro or con.

Like I said, I can provide details if you so desire.

 

[Palfouri]

So you consider any and all criticism to be "hating?" Better yet - which 10 threads? Can you list them?

The polls evened out, in my estimation. There were more than four polls, but only four that were polls regarding the quality or satsifaction with the game. One was "Best Civ version ever" and one was "Worst Civ version ever;" the other two were neither pro or con.

Like I said, I can provide details if you so desire.

Redundant polls and criticism should be in negative.

 

[masterminded]

I like how a junior moderator who is obviously not impartial said that in his opinion would not work.

Was this necessary? I find it ironic that many of the people claiming that all the critical posts need it to be compiled into one thread because some critics have bad manners have among them those who will snark like this and are just as untoward.

I never said that the issue was settled, but that a mod commented and everyone ignored it, both supporters and detractors of the proposed policy. This behavior seemed to be an exercise in tunnel vision, so I pointed it out. The statement itself was non-partial.

It seems to me that defenders of the game are just as likely as critics to engage in bad behavior. I strain to think of a post I've written that hasn't been mischaracterized by an over-eager defender who completely misrepresents me in an attempt at refutation. This problem is not endemic to any one controversy, but to the entire endeavor of forum posting. Just because some people have bad manners, does not mean that all people of a similar persuasion should be censored.

And censorship is what it ultimately is about, whether proponents of this policy realize that this will be the effect or not. As the mod suggested and I have remarked along a similar vein in the past, the criticism is too broad. There is just too many variation in this regard. Relegating all critical posts to one thread, whether it be about AI, bugs, meta game, victory conditions, etc., has the ultimate effect of marginalizing speech because one thread cannot facilitate such a large number of conversations. The result is that this speech will not happen and a subtle form of censorship ensues.

Of course, the mods can choose to censor the forums. It is privately managed and not a public forum, but I don't think it's healthy for the community to do so. I, for one, would stop visiting this site, as I would imagine many others would.

 

[C~G]

Individual "reviews" of game shouldn't maybe have their own thread each whether they are negative or positive.

There could be one "review" or "this is my opinion about Civ V in general" thread.

 

[Stormbolt]

I doubt it would all fit into one thread, but I wouldn't mind having one board for pure gameplay discussion and one for issues/critiques/criticism/etc.

 

[SuperJay]

Redundant polls and criticism should be in negative.

I don't think any of the polls I counted were redundant - but again, I wasn't looking into the entire history of the General forum, just the 45 threads on the front page at that moment.

However, for the sake of discussion, let's say I lumped the "negative" polls in to the HATE category; that raises the number of HATE threads to 4 from 2, out of 45 total.

I didn't create categories for "criticism" or "praise," because I don't think that's relevent to your complaint; most threads contain both, and only the two "hate" threads I mentioned were so inflammatory as to provide little constructive discussion. Some of the remaining 43 threads on the front page at that moment may have been threads you personally disagreed with, but they generally contained both praise and criticism.

 

[lschnarch]

I doubt it would all fit into one thread, but I wouldn't mind having one board for pure gameplay discussion and one for issues/critiques/criticism/etc.

Can you tell me how to avoid having "critiques" in "gameplay discussions"?

Let's have an example:
"Last night I was playing a game as Alexander and waged war when the AI stupidly moved workers through my lines"

What does this remarks constitute?
A description of observed behaviour?
Criticism of the observed behaviour?

Is it already "bashing" the "beloved" game and therefore unjustified in such a thread?
Does it call for immediate action of at least 3 moderators?
Maybe some "harsh punishment"?

 

[afa2000]

How many culture points do we need to unlock the "freedom" policy and create as many criticism threads as we want ?