Simplification?

[Tylerryan79]

I think we will get leaders and maps and scenarios via dlc, and then hopefully they will release expansions with new features and more leaders. If they completely get rid of expansion packs I will be very sad/upset.

Also if this game had as much complexity as noon wants, It would no longer be the franchise it is today. I am terrible at tts/simulation games, not because I'm stupid, just because I'm not willing. Civ has the perfect balance for me. I can take my time(never more than a minute anyways), there is just enough complexity and choices to make(if Im lazy I barely have to move a ringer), good atmosphere, and that allure of creation. The civ game truly is a game for all players. Civ V is just expanding on this. If you want more in your face stats etc we will be able to turn that on, or keep it streamlined and hidden until we need to see/do something. If you want a more old school 2d look, boom, click on strategic view, and play that the whole game. If your too lazy automate everything, if not then you can choose every option you'd like. This is still civ, just the next reincarnation. If your looking for Civ iv, then by all means, go play it. If your looking for a brand new civ experiance, with just enough new, and just enough old, then please join me to the next evolution. Or you can stay here and whine over how this isn't that, and this is gone, wah wah wah! If the game truly blows, and we still have two months to know that, then I'll join in the chorus. Untill then I will continue to believe this will be a great game, they always are.

 

[Disgustipated]

I sincerely hope the OP is wrong. 3 air units? That has to be a joke, or incomplete information. Simply put, I will not buy a game in such a state.

It's appearing my fears are coming true. I haven't given up all hope, mind you. If the reviews after it comes out say it's as complete a game as civ4 when it came out, I'll buy it.

This is the future of PC gaming folks. It happened with world of warcraft. They dumbed down an already dumb game so all you really have to do is press a couple buttons. Now they'll probably make civ5 where you only have to push 1 button and you win the game. Why bother with all the turns in between?

I suppose I can't complain too much. It's the way the market is now days. No one makes "small" but complex games any more. It's huge but simple games to appeal to the masses. I'd rather sacrifice some graphics for a more complete game like civ4 (I'm not asking for EU- that game already fills that niche). But it seems I'm in the minority. I just have to accept games are not made for smart people anymore.

 

[ShaqFu]

Everyone seems to be forgetting something hugely important:

Civilization IV shipped with only 4 air units: Fighter, Bomber, Jet Fighter, Gunship
Civilization V is shipping with at least 4 air units: Fighter, Bomber, B-52 Bomber, Gunship

The Airship and Stealth Bomber were added in expansions.

So, really, what's the crisis? If you claim you're not buying Civ5 because of the number of air units, I suspect that you wouldn't buy the game anyway, given that Civ4 (that bastion of incredibly complex gameplay) had the exact same number - and possibly less.

 

[bjbrains]

Not to mention that the presence of mechs and the apparent length of the tech tree (in terms of eras) indicates that we'll definitely have more modern air units.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

They're a commercial company, duh, of course they want to increase their sales. They don't exist for the sole benefit of making you happy.

I must disagree.

I'm a part owner of a small business. I do exist for the sole benefit of making you, the customer, happy. As long as we are able to do so and still generate a reasonable profit then that is exactly what we exist to do.

A commercial company increases their sales by making individual customers happy. It's that simple.

In the purest form individual customer happiness is everything. If a customer is convinced he will be made happy by a product (or service), then that leads to the initial product sale. If the customer is actually made happy by use of the product, then that leads to continued sales.

Many of us will give this company the benefit-of-doubt and purchase this Civ based on the happiness we gained by playing prior versions of Civ. Some of us will be more cautious and wait until user reviews are posted. Some customers are more frugal and will wait for a price drop or an edition that includes added content at a price that they find acceptable.

Every sale though will be made by a customer, for the sole benefit of making a customer happy.

It is of course impossible to make every single customer happy. But, if a company desires to increase their sales as you stated, then customer happiness is the goal. Find a way to make your customer happy while generating a profit and succeed. Fail at either of those tasks and perish.

History is littered with the shattered wreckage of once-successful companies that took their customer for granted and failed to remember they exist only for the benefit of making their customer happy.

 

[ShaqFu]

History is littered with the shattered wreckage of once-successful companies that took their customer for granted and failed to remember they exist only for the benefit of making their customer happy.

Sadly, that seems to be the path that a lot of publishers are taking. All one needs to do is listen to Bobby Kotick (CEO of Activision) to get a chill down one's spine about the direction the game industry is taking. The big push now by publishers is to charge $10 for the "privilege" of playing multiplayer, which is honestly distressing.

 

[Calouste]

I must disagree.

I'm a part owner of a small business. I do exist for the sole benefit of making you, the customer, happy. As long as we are able to do so and still generate a reasonable profit then that is exactly what we exist to do.

A commercial company increases their sales by making individual customers happy. It's that simple.

In the purest form individual customer happiness is everything. If a customer is convinced he will be made happy by a product (or service), then that leads to the initial product sale. If the customer is actually made happy by use of the product, then that leads to continued sales.

Many of us will give this company the benefit-of-doubt and purchase this Civ based on the happiness we gained by playing prior versions of Civ. Some of us will be more cautious and wait until user reviews are posted. Some customers are more frugal and will wait for a price drop or an edition that includes added content at a price that they find acceptable.

Every sale though will be made by a customer, for the sole benefit of making a customer happy.

It is of course impossible to make every single customer happy. But, if a company desires to increase their sales as you stated, then customer happiness is the goal. Find a way to make your customer happy while generating a profit and succeed. Fail at either of those tasks and perish.

History is littered with the shattered wreckage of once-successful companies that took their customer for granted and failed to remember they exist only for the benefit of making their customer happy.

The you in my post was solely aimed at the poster I was replying to, not in general. If Firaxis can increase their sales by making more customers happy by releasing their product in a certain way even if they piss off nooblett22 (and all the other whingers on civfanatics), they don't really do anything contradictory to what you say. If catering to the wishes of a small portion of there current customer base would prevent them from making a large number of their potential new customers happy, they surely would be wrong to cut away that small portion of their existing customers?

 

[Calouste]

Sadly, that seems to be the path that a lot of publishers are taking. All one needs to do is listen to Bobby Kotick (CEO of Activision) to get a chill down one's spine about the direction the game industry is taking. The big push now by publishers is to charge $10 for the "privilege" of playing multiplayer, which is honestly distressing.

I don't think that is disstressing at all. I don't do multiplayer, so I'd be happy if I don't have to pay for functionality I never use. People moan a lot about the price of games, but it is damn cheap entertainment on a per hour basis compared to cable TV or buying DVDs, specially with a game with the replay possibilities of Civ.

 

[civ_king]

For the amount of joy civ brings it is pretty cheap

 

[Tylerryan79]

What gets me is that so far we don't know a lot about the game, and people are making wild accusations. Sure we know how a civ game is played, but we dont really know all the specifics about civ v. From what little we do know though, people are stating it as the only truth. One user makes a statement, saying the tech tree is smaller, then everyone decides this guy has inside info, and uses it as fact to why the games terrible. When in reality we don't know. Or religions gone, so it's gonna suck. It did fine without it before, ands there's plenty of new stuff to take
it's place. Everyone has the same tired argument as to why the games dumbed down. They streamlined the interfaced, and brought back some helpful advisors for newbies, that's it. You can even turn on options to make the interface more like civ iv, with info gushing out everywhere! All the other changes are just a normal progression. When all is known, that's when we can say it's simplified or not, till then we won't know. I really doubt they started developing the game with the idea to make the worst game imaginable. As John Shafer said himself, civ v is for the pc, not consoles, and it's a big love letter/sloppy kiss to us from them.

 

[12agnar0k]

Source? I do not believe this to be the case.

We also don't know if city maintenance even still exists or not.

I do not remember the source, but I am reasonably sure (but not 100%) that they explicitly announced that vassals were gone in one of the early game magazine interview/previews.

Ah your right, I was simply assuming we would still have to pay maintanence on cities and units, we might not need the city maintanence with the "happyness" limits which will stop you from taking too many cities.
I have read everything, and I don't remember anything stating that vassals were no longer in the game, merely that a new option arrises when taking a city which is turning it into a puppet, when people first heard this without much information on the matter they assumed that this meant vassals are out but I don't think thats necessarily true.

About vassels etc, vassels are out. Puppet states are in. You do not pay maintainance on puppet states. It was said that puppet states build what they want, and you have no control in it(units/buildings). The reason you don't pay maintainance is simple, instead of capturing the city, and having to pay maintainance and having higher unhappiness, you turn it into a puppet state and have no maintainance and less unhappiness, but the disadvantage is you can't choose what they build. You do get all their gold and science, also I think rescources but that I can't remember. If you don't believe me fine, hunt down the info for yourselves then!

If maintanence is in the game then you will still pay it on a puppet city, it will just be less than annexing a new city.

There is no information stating that vassals are out, atleast none that I have seen or remembered seeing, if you know such information exists then be a dear and point it out.

Yes you still get the resources from a puppet.
No you can't choose production.
Yes you still get all science/culture/gold from the city
Yes you don't get the large unhappyness deficit that normally comes with annexing a city which can crumple your empire.

 

[AlpsStranger]

I must disagree.

I'm a part owner of a small business. I do exist for the sole benefit of making you, the customer, happy. As long as we are able to do so and still generate a reasonable profit then that is exactly what we exist to do.

A commercial company increases their sales by making individual customers happy. It's that simple.

In the purest form individual customer happiness is everything. If a customer is convinced he will be made happy by a product (or service), then that leads to the initial product sale. If the customer is actually made happy by use of the product, then that leads to continued sales.

Many of us will give this company the benefit-of-doubt and purchase this Civ based on the happiness we gained by playing prior versions of Civ. Some of us will be more cautious and wait until user reviews are posted. Some customers are more frugal and will wait for a price drop or an edition that includes added content at a price that they find acceptable.

Every sale though will be made by a customer, for the sole benefit of making a customer happy.

It is of course impossible to make every single customer happy. But, if a company desires to increase their sales as you stated, then customer happiness is the goal. Find a way to make your customer happy while generating a profit and succeed. Fail at either of those tasks and perish.

History is littered with the shattered wreckage of once-successful companies that took their customer for granted and failed to remember they exist only for the benefit of making their customer happy.

I absolutely agree. The missed step is the assumption that a super-hardcore forum community represents the largest collective of customers accurately.

Absolutely keep your customers happy, but if a small camp of your customers wants, for instance, so much micromanagement that the game resembles Hearts of Iron by the time you are finished... is that really keeping your "customers" happy? The plural is the key, and certain people on these forums need to remember that ten or twenty of them barely qualifies as plural in the grand scheme of things.

 

[12agnar0k]

Is maintanence in the game / Puppets have been confirmed to not give maintanence costs

Ok I just watched the end of the closed demo where he captures a city and explains the puppet process to his audience.

He doesn't once mention maintanence at all.

He mentions that annexing will cause unhappyness, but using the puppet state option will still give you the city and all of its science/gold/culture/resources, but you don't get to control its population, the benefit is that you get less unhappyness.

Maintanence isn't mentioned at all, so we can't make any assumptions on it.
Unless ofcourse you have a source you want to bring up that states otherwise.

A business must make its customers happy

Actually this isn't true, while it is true that it is a "Business Strategy", If you keep your customers happy by providing a good product or service then repeat business is more likely. Which generates profit.

Another "Strategy" exists where by you can advertise your product with a fancy cinematic video and show nothing of your actual product but the advertising works and you get sales, when the customers get the product or service they realise it was a piece of crap, that you the developer spent 10 minutes putting it together and several months working on the advertising to sell it. So no repeat business here, but lots of sales to first time buyers and hardly any overheads due to no man hours on the product = "lots of profit"

Either works fine as a business practice to make profit, which is at the end of the day all a business exists to do, to make their shareholders happy, ofcourse eventually with the "make the customers angry" method you will lower your "customer base" to which to sell too, so its more of a short term profit dealio. If you want to sell to millions of customers in the long term you will need to keep your customers happy, but that does not neccesarily mean thats the only thing you can do to stay in business. Making customers unhappy can still generate profit.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

I absolutely agree. The missed step is the assumption that a super-hardcore forum community represents the largest collective of customers accurately.

Absolutely keep your customers happy, but if a small camp of your customers wants, for instance, so much micromanagement that the game resembles Hearts of Iron by the time you are finished... is that really keeping your "customers" happy? The plural is the key, and certain people on these forums need to remember that ten or twenty of them barely qualifies as plural in the grand scheme of things.

With respect to the OP, I want to avoid getting too bogged down on specific issues related to the gameplay, like what level of micromanagement is optimal, and try to focus on the launch in general as the OP concern appears to part of a larger issue. Rhye is a major contributor to Civ (Thank you!) and yet none of the 2K corporate PR reps have responded to his thread.

We are all familiar with the Civ series and are fans of it. The site is after all called civfanatics.

Based on our love of the game this should be a Civ-friendly environment. So is it unreasonable to ask why is there so much unhappiness on this forum? Shouldn't we be ecstatic about a fresh new version of our beloved game? Is it unreasonable to ask why there is so much confusion? Stating the facts about the launch and how game support will work really isn't that complicated. So why are there still so many recurring questions about Steam, mods, game versions, DRM, patches, price-gouging, DLC, multi-player compatibility, etc?

At my business I actively solicit feedback from our customers. Rarely do I receive an honest answer. Many people consider complaining to be impolite. Many people are simply non-confrontational personality types and don't want to cause a fuss. Many people believe that if they voice their concerns that others will mock them and call them names like "whiner" or "complainer" and convey that they are not welcome to express their opinions. See this forum for numerous examples of such name-calling. Shame on any of you who tell others they don't have a right to express their concerns about Civ on a Civ forum.

I welcome complaining. I welcome whiners. Have a gripe? Yes sir, please tell me all about it. On the unusual occasion that I do have a customer willing to honestly critique our product/service I view this as a valued chance to learn. Why? It's not because I personally enjoy being told of our shortcomings, it's because for every customer that does do us the courtesy of taking the time to complain there are usually uncounted other customers that very likely have the same complaint, but didn't express themselves to us and so we may very well not even know we had a problem or that we have an area that needs focus and improvement.

How many unhappy customers can you count on this forum? How many confused customers? Each unhappy or confused customer can easily end up as a lost sale. If they tell others of their experience then they can cause many more lost sales.

IIRC there are three 2K corporate PR reps on this forum. Unhappy customers should have their issues addressed and their complaints (and suggestions) taken very seriously. Confused customers should have their issues addressed and answered until their confusion is changed to understanding.

@ 2K Greg-
Sorry, but you started your "Civilization 5 Steamworks questions/concerns for inclusion in the FAQ" thread two months and 43 pages ago, yet there's still no FAQ at all. How much unhappiness and confusion could you have prevented? How many sales have you lost? I was initally planning to purchase at launch, but the more I read this forum and the more I see important questions sit unanswered the more I'm convinced that waiting until after launch until I see some user feedback is the best course of action for me. I hope you value my customer feedback as much as I would value yours.

 

[Le Sage]

Sakuhnder. Thank you kindly for that above post. I've been called all sorts of things myself for my complaining and whining. They even say I'm trolling and then they do that debate-mistake of trying to get personal by insulting me personally. Talk about trolling then.

I have a whole long list of things that make me unhappy, but I don't dare publish it, because they might call me a troll again. Weird situation, since I am just using my Democratic Rights when pointing out stuff I don't like. And I will be buying Civ5, I will be playing it, I will mod it and I will indeed enjoy it. Because I've done that with every Civ since 1991. And this time around it's just the names on the box, "Civilization" and "Sid Meier", that has me buying it.

 

[lietkynes]

Complexity is not always good. Civ4 had some features that added complexity but were poorly implemented (espionnage especially).

 

[Wolle68]

I absolutely agree. The missed step is the assumption that a super-hardcore forum community represents the largest collective of customers accurately.

Even if it did, it isn't clear that the majority in this forum thinks that Civ 5 is "dumbed down". I haven't seen any evidence of that claim yet.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Based on our love of the game this should be a Civ-friendly environment. So is it unreasonable to ask why is there so much unhappiness on this forum?

Most people who simply consume and enjoy the Simpsons don't mind the Armin Tamzarian episode, and yet about 60% of online Simpsons fanboys consider it a slap in the face. Most people who simply enjoy RPGs and tabletop gaming in general love D&D 3/3.5, yet the hardest of the hardcore D&D fans hate it and stick to AD&D 2. Gamers in general really like Team Fortress 2, but hardcore fans of Team Fortress absolutely hate it. Most FPS fans like Counter-Strike Source, but many hardcore counterstrike fans swear by the older versions. Need I go on? Vocal forum-dwelling fans fracture into camps far more radically and easily than 99% of your customers.

Shouldn't we be ecstatic about a fresh new version of our beloved game? Is it unreasonable to ask why there is so much confusion?

See above.

Stating the facts about the launch and how game support will work really isn't that complicated. So why are there still so many recurring questions about Steam, mods, game versions, DRM, patches, price-gouging, DLC, multi-player compatibility, etc?

Assuming they have the ability to guarantee any of it. Perhaps a large amount of that kind of information is still up in the air.

The industry at large doesn't consider DLC price gouging. Most "1999-ist" PC Gamers do. Your average customer will buy the game and some, but not all, of the DLC. This forum is *not* representative of feelings on DLC in the wider world.

At my business I actively solicit feedback from our customers. Rarely do I receive an honest answer. Many people consider complaining to be impolite.

I complain *constantly* on most game forums that I am on. I simply see nothing to complain about with Civ5 so far. Just the other day I posted a pretty harsh complaint over in the Elemental beta forums. I was ruthlessly critical of Pirates of the Burning Sea when I still played it. I was thrown out of my guild for complaining in the Vanguard beta. You are speaking to someone who has no issue with complaining. The Civ5 complaints are unreasonable and largely unwarranted.

Shame on any of you who tell others they don't have a right to express their concerns about Civ on a Civ forum.

Yeah, you guys DO need to shut the hell up. Moderator Action: No, this is up to the moderators, not to you or anyone else. Not because you don't have the right to complain, but because your complaints are moronic. Your "suggestion" to Firaxis is laughable. "Hey Firaxis, make us a niche game and pretend it's 1999-2001 ok? Kthxbye."

I welcome complaining. I welcome whiners. Have a gripe? Yes sir, please tell me all about it. On the unusual occasion that I do have a customer willing to honestly critique our product/service I view this as a valued chance to learn. Why? It's not because I personally enjoy being told of our shortcomings, it's because for every customer that does do us the courtesy of taking the time to complain there are usually uncounted other customers that very likely have the same complaint, but didn't express themselves to us and so we may very well not even know we had a problem or that we have an area that needs focus and improvement.

I think 80% of the people that are strongly upset about Civ5 are posting on this forum. I think 99% of the people that will simply buy it and enjoy it are *NOT* posting on this forum. To me it is that simple. Unhappy customers are far more likely to be vocal on a forum.

 

[12agnar0k]

The game isn't dumbed down, just different, if people cant see that then thier is no hope for them.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

...I have a whole long list of things that make me unhappy, but I don't dare publish it...

There's nothing to be afraid of.

What did your parents tell you was the best way to deal with a bully? Stand up to him and show you are not afraid and they will move on to easier victims. The same holds true for a bully on the internet. State your case and either ignore the insults (do you even care what they think?) or if the attack gets personal then report it to the mods.

One of the good things about CFC is that the mods are good at keeping order here and aren't shy about swinging the ban hammer when appropriate. Go ahead and start a thread, they've got your back.

Helpful suggestions:

Yes - Include why you believe you aren't the only person unhappy about your issue:
"My opinion is that somebody must reflect the feelings of lot's of Spanish Civ lovers, when they buy Civ V and discover that Spain is (unjustifiably) not included in the game."


No - Don't just post your opinion without any reasoning, support or basis:
"Realistically, America should never be put in."
Instead say that you believe that the Songhai have had a far greater influence on history of the world than America has, including culturally, militarily and economically and thus deserve their place on the civilization roster much more than America does.