1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

should they skip Civ 5 Xpacs and go straight to Civ 6?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by hussar, Nov 14, 2010.

?

Should Firaxis start on Civ 6 or Civ 5 Xpacs?

  1. Firaxis should work on Civ 6

    29.9%
  2. Firaxis should work on Civ 5 expansions

    54.7%
  3. Firaxis should work on something else

    4.1%
  4. I like fruit loops

    11.3%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hussar

    hussar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Messages:
    76
    Ok so we are divided on wether Civ 5 will be playable with Xpacs (expansion packs) or not. e.g. Warlords did not make Civ 4 better, but beyond the sword did. There are a large % of us that wont even play civ 5. so should Firaxis cut their losses on civ 5, pack it up and get it in the $5 bargain bin and work on Civ 6, or should they stick to their guns and round out a couple of xpacs for it first?
    I think it's a moot point because they will deffinitely hit us up for xpacs because they are basically just mods that they can spin for more dollars. (Mods I must say that are often inferior to the free ones that can be downloaded from this and other sites).

    But what would you like? I say they try for civ 6.
     
  2. Skwink

    Skwink FRIIIIIIIIIITZ

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,659
    Sorry, but MANY people like Civ V. So, they will keep going on it.
     
  3. Tatran

    Tatran Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    4,184
    With the current not so talented (read: highly incompetent) development team?
     
  4. Putmalk

    Putmalk Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,623
    Location:
    New York
    Civilizations V has potential to be a great game.

    Giving up on it would piss me off severely. I spent money on the game, and so did many others, and working on Civ VI before CiV's lifecycle has expired would destroy all faith I have in Firaxis. It would also reek of greed.
     
  5. the343danny

    the343danny Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    There are a large number of people that did not play Civ 4. What do you mean Firaxis should cut their losses? They are profiting off Civ 5. Lets just ignore all those haters because they dont add anything to the series and clog up the forums when there are actual game discussions to be had. And if Civ 6 was released, expect the very same reaction, and possibly another person just like you who posts a poll to see how many wants Firaxis to move on to Civ 7.
     
  6. LordTC

    LordTC Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    241
    Location:
    Toronto
    They'll make XPacks.. and they might actually fix the game somewhat.. I think that with most of the coastal civs missing from the game (only England is there and people would be shocked if they weren't) we'll probably see a coastal/naval/colonization type expansion for the first expansion...

    The Spanish, Portugese, Phoenicians, and a few other good options.

    I highly doubt they'd scrap Civ 5 and go straight for 6.. these days expansions and DLC's often make as much money as the game, and the work involved is far less. It also lets you bundle expansions with the game to sell it for a longer period of time.

    And in all honesty Civ 5 has some dramatic improvements over previous civ games.. the options to buy tiles is nice, not having to micromanage a slider that everyone played identically anyways is a plus. Also forcing people to end up having surplus gold makes the game much more interesting because instead of always converting gold to research you have difficult decisions about how to spend it. The ability of cities to provide some natural defense is a huge plus, no more scouting kills (warrior finds empty city because the also sent their warrior exploring and gg (AI doesn't do this but in MP it was often annoying, because in any game with huts (or even most without) everyone sends warrior exploring). The main annoyance for Civ5 is that a few things are done very poorly, in particular the social policy trees are not well balanced.

    For multiplayer Civ 5 is the least military oriented civ in a while, as with balanced starts some build oriented strategies are very good, provided you put up enough of a defense (easier with the cities providing that extra bombard. The main issues are clickfests, particularly relating to the implementation of ranged attacks, but also some issues with getting two shots in or not being able to move away, etc...
     
  7. Mad Hab

    Mad Hab Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    São Paulo, Brazil
    I voted "Firaxis should work on something else" and sell the Civilization franchise to a company capable of creating deep, yet accessible strategy games (instead of shallow, buggy, poorly tested and accessible games, like Civ5).

    Cheers,

    Mad Hab
     
  8. dprkforum

    dprkforum Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    USA
    I like Civ V, but then again, I am not the best gamer out there.
     
  9. ezysquire

    ezysquire Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2010
    Messages:
    183
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Definitely work on Civ V. The switch to hexes and single unit per tile framework is a big step and more time is needed to adjust it. It is better to iron out the problems with civ V before jumping into Civ VI and having a new game with the same problems as the last...
    There is also some great work being done by some modders to make it right.... don't waste their efforts this soon!
     
  10. lschnarch

    lschnarch Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,296
    Just forget about all these whining fanbois who claim Civ5 to be a decent game. It is just not, and due to the design set up most probably can't be made a decent game, regardless of the effort you will put in.

    Just stop any attempts of reanimating this rotten corpse.

    Dismiss the current developer crew and find a somehow experienced designer (a good AI programmer wouldn't be a bad idea, either).
    Take the best of Civ4 and Civ5 (well, of the latter there isn't so much to be taken, actually) and go for a brand-new Civ6.
    Check with some of the most popular Civ4 mods to see what fans really like and learn something from it.
    Moderator Action: Trolling is not allowed here.
     
  11. Rexflex

    Rexflex Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    313
    Well it didn't take long for a Civ 5 hater to get nasty with the name calling simply because people don't necessarily hold the same opinion.
    Moderator Action: Insults are not allowed here.
     
  12. lschnarch

    lschnarch Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,296
    I agree.
    The whining fanboi kiddies bunch is a nuisance.
    Moderator Action: Trolling is not allowed here.
     
  13. Vordeo

    Vordeo King

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    719
    That's pretty much 99% of what he's done on the rest of the threads here, actually. I think he actually thinks he's being funny.

    And to the OP: Firaxis is going to be working on expansions for CiV, no doubt. Not doing so would be giving up money and pissing off people who've bought the game. At the moment their priority is probably patching things, but they'll definitely be doing expansions and DLC once that's done. In fact, alot of software vendors base their business models on profits from DLCs and expansions nowadays (moreso than base games), AFAIK.

    However, I do like Froot Loops.
     
  14. PawelS

    PawelS Ancient Druid

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,803
    Location:
    Poland
    If the 'f' word is skipped, it makes sense ;)

    About the poll question: The fact that you don't like Civ5 shouldn't be the reason to deny its expansion packs to those who like it. This idea would be good for a really bad game, but those often get their xpacks too (HoMM4, for example).
     
  15. Steamwerks

    Steamwerks Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    101
    This is just flat out wrong.
     
  16. The_J

    The_J Say No 2 Net Validations Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2008
    Messages:
    32,018
    Location:
    DE/NL/FR
    Moderator Action: Guys, stay on topic, and stay civil.
     
  17. the343danny

    the343danny Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    And no, I'm not insulting people who dont like Civ 5. I just want them out of the Civ 5 forums, if all they were going to do was complain. Past two months have been nothing but the same talk on why somebody doesnt like Civ 5.
    Moderator Action: Don't discuss the people, discuss the topic.
     
  18. tm01xx

    tm01xx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2010
    Messages:
    34

    Potential? Everyone, everything has potential. All the 6 billions people on earth have their own potential to become great.

    I don't like potential and I don't pay my real money to something just potential. I want to see real thing with my real cash. Or I just use my potential money (supposed to have in 5 years to pay at that year's time) to buy the game? :confused:
     
  19. Vordeo

    Vordeo King

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    719
    Actually, pretty much the only time it'd be a good idea is if there's going to be little to no demand for expansion packs.

    I've said that before, and was called a Nazi who wanted to ban free speech. Good luck to you.
     
  20. LordTC

    LordTC Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    241
    Location:
    Toronto
    First of all I'm not a fanboy.. I played Civ competitively a lot during Civ 3, and some early on in Civ 4, but Civ 4 lost my interest and I didn't end up getting all the expansions. For the most part I like Europa Universalis variants a lot better because the multiplayer is less exploit oriented. For the Glory for instance is really well done, and plays well. I also really don't mind being restricted to one world map with the AI designed specificially for it, as opposed to throwing in any type of map under the sun even if the AI doesn't understand how to play on it (Archipelago players know what I'm talking about!)

    My biggest frustrations with civ is the way combat works. I hate the time scale that wars play out on. Multi-turn battles in this game in the ancient era mean fighting over 100's of years. I also hate the fact that units don't have a supply range. A unit that is 100 years of movement away from your territory should never reasonably be considered part of your civilization (part of this is time-scale again). Also I think way too much effort is put into making the map look really "pretty" at the expense of being able to run quickly in multiplayer or being able to support larger size maps more easily. For once in Civ I'd like to see a playable world map.. and by playable I mean a Europe that could actually support say a capital and a 2nd city for the 10 or civs that most people would base there. With many of those civs not available in this game I'd like to be able to see France be able to have most of its major cities actually fit on the map, along with the same for Germany, England, Rome and Greece. I'm not talking about having to fit say 30 cities for each of them, but it doesn't feel like Europe if these civs only have 2-3 cities each. It also feels a little silly that it sometimes takes several hundred years to build a single city improvement. Also a lot of the guessing about future techs feels quite lame. I would prefer a game that replaced the Alpha Centauri space ship victory with a tech victory by say being the first civ to land on the moon. The slightly compressed time scale might also allow for a bit more depth in the eras of the game before the outcome is already decided.

    While Soren has gone on extensively about the problems with Total War (complex interface, then once you learn it you can crush the AI too easily) Civ has much of the same problems. First of all the interface is buggy, and a lot of the click options lag or freeze up forcing you to click off to get them to respond. Secondly, the AI in Civ is only competitive at levels where it cheats heavily, and the player has no control over how the AI cheats. In games like Total War, there are ways to control what advantages the AI gets, so for instance if you want to play a challenging build oriented game, you can give the AI bonuses in combat so that you have to outbuild them and beat them with better units. In Civ, you are almost reduced* to playing a strategy involving some sort of early game attack at Deity because you will not catch up to the opponents start without it. My usual solution to this problem was to find strategies that didn't work at deity but were particularly good in multiplayer and in Civ3 I was on top of one of the Case's ladder (which was good back then) for some time doing this, but I insisted on turn-based play, which just isn't an option anymore. Click-racing is a huge problem that ruins multiplayer for me and many others, especially when all the bells and whistles they've put into the game lag it substantially, and even more so when your pre-moves are executed at end of turn instead of at start of turn! I really think Civ needs a real-time mode that basically fixes the economic times, and does unit movement in pieces so that you can't move entirely at the end of one turn then entirely at the start of another. Most games have gone to something like this for MP as it works better than turn-based (issues with length of game) or simultaneous turns (issues with exploits).

    * most of the other tricks to beating the AI involve abusing the decision making in the diplomacy window. For instance, the AI is far too likely to accept loan deals, even as you gather units on their border.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page