Simplification?

[Sahkuhnder]

@AlpsStranger-
Slow down. I'm not interested in taking a side in the detailed discussions. I have my opinion and I respect your right to have yours.

...Need I go on? Vocal forum-dwelling fans fracture into camps far more radically and easily than 99% of your customers.

No need to go on. There wasn't this level of unhappiness or confusion when I was lurking before the launch of Civ4. I'm just pointing out the existing unhappiness and confusion.

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.

There is a lot they do know that they could be doing a much better job of posting information about. Like I said, "So why are there still so many recurring questions about Steam, mods, game versions, DRM, patches, price-gouging, DLC, multi-player compatibility, etc?"

Is all of that information "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.

See the Australia/New Zealand threads for unanswered questions about price gouging and the threads on the $10 Babylonia/Nebuchadnezzar content.

Again, I'm not taking a side. I'm just pointing out the unhappiness and confusion that exists.

I complain *constantly* on most game forums that I am on. I simply see nothing to complain about with Civ5 so far...The Civ5 complaints are unreasonable and largely unwarranted.

No problem. Please remember that others may hold a different opinion than you do and respect their right to post their complaints about Civ5 on this Civ forum. It's not your job to rule what is or is not warranted. If you see trolling you can contact a mod.

Yeah, you guys DO need to shut the hell up. Not because you don't have the right to complain, but because your complaints are moronic.

I'm not "you guys" and it's not your forum or your call to make - let alone your place to tell anyone else to "shut the hell up". If you find a thread moronic then simply move on. You can also unsubscribe from the thread if it really bothers you.

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.

That's your opinion and that's fine. But again, you're not the judge and jury as to who can post here and who can't. Please show the same respect to others to post their opinion as you would like shown to your opinion.

 

[Commander Bello]

Unhappy customers are far more likely to be vocal on a forum.

I don't think so.
Unhappy customers (as far as the gaming industry is concerned) are more likely to just move on and pick up another game.

It's only the hardcore fan who sacrificies his precious time to articulate his concerns. Joe Average just drops a certain game and looks out for the next one with shiny boxes and big advertisements, may they be whatever they are.

It is only the hardcore fan who values a certain game that high that he actually cares.

For Joe Average, the same certain game is just one amongst so many others and can easily be substituted.

 

[LegioCorvus]

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

I wish more people would realize that.

The attitude on these forums is largely exclusive to these forums. I'm also a frequenter of places such as Kotaku, where the reaction to new Civ5 news is almost always excitement, and even the Steamworks announcement was met with a lot of praise. I've even run into a few other CivFanatics there, and we've discussed how hard it is to visit these forums because of the current mentality.

Even offline, where a good number of my friends also play Civ, the attitude has been almost entirely positive. There has certainly been no one I know trying to organize boycotts of the game among our social circles.

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.

While I agree that people have the right to complain, and your post was very well thought and out and expressed, it has become an all encompassing part of the Civ5 forums. Every single thing that comes out about the game makes the forums erupt in a chorus of complaints, and there is not a single thread that is safe from raging about how bad Civ5 will be.

Some of us are here because we're excited about the new game, and we want to talk about how cool some of the new features are. It's frustrating to try and start a "check out this cool new feature!" thread and having half of the first page of responses be nothing but, "This is the worst thing ever! I hate it! I'm banning this game, and will continue my never-ending campaign to make everyone else hate this game & not buy it! "

Where's the forum for those of us who are truly excited and want to share in that excitement? It's certainly not this forum. Those of us that were excited in the beginning have mostly abandoned this sub-forum. I've only recently come back myself because of some new announcements, and am frankly both unsurprised and a little disappointed that this place is still an echo-chamber of hate.

 

[Commander Bello]

While I agree that people have the right to complain, and your post was very well thought and out and expressed, it has become an all encompassing part of the Civ5 forums. Every single thing that comes out about the game makes the forums erupt in a chorus of complaints, and there is not a single thread that is safe from raging about how bad Civ5 will be.

Some of us are here because we're excited about the new game, and we want to talk about how cool some of the new features are. It's frustrating to try and start a "check out this cool new feature!" thread and having half of the first page of responses be nothing but, "This is the worst thing ever! I hate it! I'm banning this game, and will continue my never-ending campaign to make everyone else hate this game & not buy it! "

Well, that's what freedom of speech is all about, isn't it?
What you are literally asking for is a place where complaints cannot take place, will be surpressed or whatever.
You want to have a niche in which you can cheer with others, while the ones who disagree have to stay outside.

By the same token one could ask "where is the place where I can discuss my concerns without every five minutes somebody dropping in and bothering me, why the critizised features will be great".

Where is the point?
In a community there will be different opinions, and we should get accustomed to this very fact. This, after all, is one of the basic principles of a free society, that anybody is allowed to articulate his opinion in a meaningful manner, may you like it or not.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

While I agree that people have the right to complain, and your post was very well thought and out and expressed, it has become an all encompassing part of the Civ5 forums. Every single thing that comes out about the game makes the forums erupt in a chorus of complaints, and there is not a single thread that is safe from raging about how bad Civ5 will be.

Bold by me.

It's looking good

Sorry, couldn't resist. You made that waaaay to easy.

Some of us are here because we're excited about the new game, and we want to talk about how cool some of the new features are. It's frustrating to try and start a "check out this cool new feature!" thread and having half of the first page of responses be nothing but, "This is the worst thing ever! I hate it! I'm banning this game, and will continue my never-ending campaign to make everyone else hate this game & not buy it! "

Where's the forum for those of us who are truly excited and want to share in that excitement? It's certainly not this forum. Those of us that were excited in the beginning have mostly abandoned this sub-forum. I've only recently come back myself because of some new announcements, and am frankly both unsurprised and a little disappointed that this place is still an echo-chamber of hate.

Just ignore the threads you aren't interested in or don't like. Part of the message of my post was to point out exactly what you noticed too - that there are a large number of unhappy threads and posts and many unanswered questions and confusion clogging this forum. My suggestion was for the 2K corporate PR staff to step up and answer some questions and post the FAQ and try to clear some of the backlog, including answering Rhye from the OP post of this thread.

 

[LegioCorvus]

It's looking good

Sorry, couldn't resist. You made that waaaay to easy.

Pointing out a single thread with a handful of replies isn't exactly an argument. It reminds of a play I say recently where someone yells, "Everyone here is unhappy!" and someone points away in the distance and responds, "That guy's not." (EDIT: Yes, I realize what that was a response to, but I believe it obvious I was speaking in hyperbole to express an extreme state that has no hard 'n' fast statistics).

I'll admit, however, that the mods have done a good job of cleaning up the forums since the arrival of representatives from 2K games posting in these forums. I doubt that's a coincidence. It's still a pervasive part of these forums however, and it has fostered a culture which has allowed people who claim to not want to play this game, but who spend several hours a day loudly and angrily expressing this fact, to thrive. You can't deny that.

In the end it doesn't really matter, though. A lot of us have already pre-ordered the game, lots more will buy it when it comes out (even some here who claim they wont), and these protests will have the same effect that the L4D2 or MW2 protests had.

Until the game is released, this forum will remain a place where people complain and rage, and there is honestly nothing any of us on either side can do about it. Every once in a while one of us will get frustrated enough to step in and say, "You know the attitude here isn't the reaction a majority of people are having, right?" ...but we simply aren't as passionate at those who believe someone killed their baby. "It'll be fine" doesn't exactly have the same rallying ability as "It will ruin everything!!!"

So we'll just go back to lurking the forums, secretly enjoying any new info we can find about a game we're excited for, and let the loud minority run around yelling that the sky is falling. Like I mentioned before, it would just be nice if more people here realized that they're in an echo chamber.

Though I honestly can't wait to see the massive amounts of cognitive dissonance that will manifest here the week the game comes out.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

Pointing out a single thread with a handful of replies isn't exactly an argument.

I know. I just couldn't resist the easy shot.

Though I honestly can't wait to see the massive amounts of cognitive dissonance that will manifest here the week the game comes out.

Me too. Until then we get to endure the downside of free speech and letting everyone have and express their own opinion. Sort out the parts you like and ignore the rest. Here is a legitimate thread you might enjoy:

Arioch's Analyst Thread

And the link to Arioch's page. Great stuff for the information-hungry Civ fan.

 

[Disgustipated]

Yeah, you guys DO need to shut the hell up. 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."

There's so many things wrong with that statement. It's very elitist first of all. Who are you to decide which complaint has merit or not? And why is it unreasonable to expect the same quality game we got back in 2000? It seems to me you suggest we accept lower quality games because that is the norm for 2010. I disagree. I say we should uphold developers to the same standard they had back in 2006 or 2007 (whenever civ4 came out).

I will not shut up. Basically you are saying we have to only say good things about the game, or shut up. If the moderators make me shut up, then I will.

But until we get official word that our complaints are not worth merit, they are not idiotic. It's the developers fault for not giving us more information to clear up the confusion.

 

[AlpsStranger]

There's so many things wrong with that statement. It's very elitist first of all. Who are you to decide which complaint has merit or not? And why is it unreasonable to expect the same quality game we got back in 2000?

It's not the we have to accept *lower* quality games. We have to accept different trends. 1999-2004ish was about MOAR of everything, massive micromanagement, and every feature but the kitchen sink. 2010+ is about streamlining, balance, moment-to-learn and lifetime-to-master. A 2010 game usually tries to be accessible yet deep. It's actually a much better school of design than the feature-stuffing that characterized some of the classics-I'm looking at you Master of Magic.

It seems to me you suggest we accept lower quality games because that is the norm for 2010. I disagree. I say we should uphold developers to the same standard they had back in 2006 or 2007 (whenever civ4 came out).

You don't need to accept *lower* quality anything. You need only accept the general style difference in 2010 games and 1999 games.

You mean to force developers to make unbalanced games with MOAR units and MOAR techs and MOAR arcane mechanics. *That* is the essence of what I mean when I say it is 2010. Some visionary developers, such as Blizzard, were making games in the present style all along. It's all about the change from MOAR to more. Thankfully, MOAR is fully out of style. I hope it remains so for some time. I sincerely hope that backwards-looking PC Gamers do not manage to bring unbalanced, buggy, bloated games back to the scene.

I will not shut up. Basically you are saying we have to only say good things about the game, or shut up. If the moderators make me shut up, then I will.

No, what I am saying is quit emo-kidding the place up with post after post of despair. I am so sick of all the variants of:

I wish it was 1999 back when games were good

It's too bad that Civ5 is a console game

:suicide: I think I'm going to go slit my wrists because longbows have more range than rifles :suicide:

I wish those money grubbing bastards hadn't sold out for their dirty, dirty money

and on and on and on they go....

But until we get official word that our complaints are not worth merit, they are not idiotic. It's the developers fault for not giving us more information to clear up the confusion.

You are trying to create a "mood" to do actual damage to the retail sales of the game. You and your ilk, in the name of a twisted pseudo-religious belief in "hardcore" gaming, want to create enough bad buzz to lower sales. That is exactly what all of you are hoping to do, and that is exactly why I am so upset.

We have a perfectly good game coming out, one that will likely be my favorite in years, and a bunch of people want to sacrifice it as a pawn in the imaginary "hardcore vs the world" conflict.

Moderator Action: Flaming/Trolling - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Celevin]

I am personally really confounded that people think this game is simpler than Civ4. I just don't get it. They are concentrating on features that are missing rather than the whole.

 

[AlpsStranger]

I am personally really confounded that people think this game is simpler than Civ4. I just don't get it. They are concentrating on features that are missing rather than the whole.

They are MOARists, it's that simple. Less techs and less units in a tile and they whine. In the real world less is often more. To a MOARist there is only MOAR...

 

[Commander Bello]

We have to accept different trends.

No, we have not.

If I don't like a trend, I will articulate my disfavour of that trend.
You're stating that allegedly back in the past other trends were predominant. Whether that's true or not would be another topic, but who are you to decide which "trend" is better?
Who are you to have the right to announce your preferences, while others may not?

I sincerely hope that backwards-looking PC Gamers do not manage to bring unbalanced, buggy, bloated games back to the scene.

So, what you are saying is that today's games aren't unbalanced or buggy?
Good to know.

We have a perfectly good game coming out, one that will likely be my favorite in years, and a bunch of people want to sacrifice it as a pawn in the imaginary "hardcore vs the world" conflict.

Well, you seem to have some experience with the final version already.
It's "perfectly good"?
And you know that it will be likely your favourite game?

I am pretty sure you haven't had a second of playtime yet, but you know...

 

[AlpsStranger]

I am pretty sure you haven't had a second of playtime yet, but you know...

Hasn't quieted you down at all, has it? Neither of us has played it yet.

It will very likely be good based on what little I have heard coupled with a little common sense to fill in the blanks. We are looking at another stage in the streamlining of Civilization.

As for current trends, ask the Developers why things are done a certain way. I, by and large, have liked games the last few years better than those same genres in the so-called golden-age of PC Gaming. There is generally a higher level of awareness of balance, and an acknowledgment of the fact that "less is often more." The games aren't all balanced, of course, but they are all at least *trying* to be. This is a key difference in, say, Civ4 and Master of Magic.

Yes, I am willing to bet Civ5 will be very good based on what I have heard so far. What of it? I think it is the anti-Steam curmudgeons and the chicken little doomsayers that have to justify their (often extreme)position. My position is simply that of a fan looking forward to what looks to be a worthy installment in a great series.

Moderator Action: Flaming/Trolling - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[The_J]

Moderator Action: Turn down the aggression level, or the thread will get closed!

 

[Commander Bello]

Hasn't quieted you down at all, has it? Neither of us has played it yet.

But you know it will be perfectly good.

It will very likely be good based on what little I have heard coupled with a little common sense to fill in the blanks. We are looking at another stage in the streamlining of Civilization.

I really have to wonder why Civ4 was a mega-seller then.
I mean, obviously - if following your words - it desperately needed "streamlining".

 

[PieceOfMind]

Pointing out a single thread with a handful of replies isn't exactly an argument. It reminds of a play I say recently where someone yells, "Everyone here is unhappy!" and someone points away in the distance and responds, "That guy's not." (EDIT: Yes, I realize what that was a response to, but I believe it obvious I was speaking in hyperbole to express an extreme state that has no hard 'n' fast statistics).

I'll admit, however, that the mods have done a good job of cleaning up the forums since the arrival of representatives from 2K games posting in these forums. I doubt that's a coincidence.

One could say that the 2K representatives have gone some way to increase the confusion and frustration around here. What ever happened to that FAQ anyway?

Much of the anger being vented is pretty understandable IMO given the poor communication from 2K.

Two fairly new things to the civ series - steamworks and DLC - have naturally brought many questions to be asked. 2K came here and promised to answer them all in a matter of a few weeks. More than 2 months later we're still left arguing with each other about what the answers could be and occasionally asking when the FAQ is going to come to the rescue.

Both the move to steamworks and to a DLC model are likely to be seen in a negative light by a large number of players of the civ series. This would probably be the same of any other single player game that has a large established fanbase including a very large modding community. 2K have more or less left us completely in the dark about both of these things. Greg promised me that he would pass on any details of DLC as soon as he knew. Yet we hear about DLC from the D2D offer and a day or 2 later Greg is scrambling round trying to confirm things for us. It leads me to believe Greg is for all intents and purposes out of the loop on most of these things. That or he is withholding information on purpose (possibly as required of him). It does not foster a kind relationship between customer and producer when the customer is promised things that are not delivered.

It's still a pervasive part of these forums however, and it has fostered a culture which has allowed people who claim to not want to play this game, but who spend several hours a day loudly and angrily expressing this fact, to thrive. You can't deny that.

Actually you'll find that many of them say they want to play the game. However they may claim they refuse to buy the game or that the game will be bad to play if feature X is implemented/removed.

They're all equally welcome in the civ5 forum though. Owning or wanting to own civ5 is not a pre-requisite for participating in these threads.

In the end it doesn't really matter, though. A lot of us have already pre-ordered the game, lots more will buy it when it comes out (even some here who claim they wont), and these protests will have the same effect that the L4D2 or MW2 protests had.

Yes I too doubt that any protests here will have much effect as well. However it seems to be the case that some of the opinion and questions that have been put here have gone directly back to 2K or Firaxis so it is not all in vain. The main example I have in my mind at the moment is that pitboss, pbem and hotseat are in the pipeline thanks to probing questions about them. 2K or Firaxis (I forget which) said they had not anticipated how many people wanted those multiplayer modes.

Until the game is released, this forum will remain a place where people complain and rage, and there is honestly nothing any of us on either side can do about it. Every once in a while one of us will get frustrated enough to step in and say, "You know the attitude here isn't the reaction a majority of people are having, right?" ...but we simply aren't as passionate at those who believe someone killed their baby. "It'll be fine" doesn't exactly have the same rallying ability as "It will ruin everything!!!"

So we'll just go back to lurking the forums, secretly enjoying any new info we can find about a game we're excited for, and let the loud minority run around yelling that the sky is falling. Like I mentioned before, it would just be nice if more people here realized that they're in an echo chamber.

IMO there are plenty of threads at the moment that are mostly free of the complaints. When threads turn into arguments it's because there are (at least) two sides who want to do it.

You seem to dislike that people complain and rage a lot and that sometimes it's necessary to step in and try to turn things a bit more positive. What then of those who dislike the adoration that some express, often without any real reason other than their emotional attachment or something similar which is just as irrational as the "hating"? Is it necessary to step into happy threads to get a bit of disappointment at 2K going?

If threads have people expressing their frustrations or disappointments with the game then on the whole we can get a feeling for the mood of the community. Sure some members post a lot more than others but everyone here is intelligent enough to take that into account. There have also been lots of people come here expressing their disappointment in only one or two posts before going. As others have said, the forum doesn't need to have a constant happy vibe to it. Things will likely change when the game is released anyway so if you dislike reading threads with complaints in them then either steer away from those topics (usually pretty obvious from the thread title) and stick to the gameplay discussions or just take a month-2month break til the game is released. There really isn't much danger that people are going to be dissuaded from buying the game because of any complaints around here. It's about as likely as any of the protests around here having a massive effect on the game design.

 

[AlpsStranger]

But you know it will be perfectly good.


I really have to wonder why Civ4 was a mega-seller then.
I mean, obviously - if following your words - it desperately needed "streamlining".

It was streamlined compared to Civ3, and Civ5 will be streamlined compared to Civ4. It's pretty much that simple. The goal is to create the "Civ experience" with as few moving parts as possible. They appear to be groping for the next plateau in elegance.

The Civ series has reached the top of MOAR hill. The best way forward is through massive, but conscientious, cutting of widgets and gewgaws. Is my position clear enough now?

If the fans had their way Civ5 would be an unplayable mess with even more dubious and rarely-used features. I am glad they will not get their way.

EDIT: Admittedly, Civ4 was only partly streamline-oriented. I still maintain that streamlining was at its core(no per-building upkeep, no corruption, overflow handling, etc), but they did lose it a bit with BTS.

 

[Celevin]

It was streamlined compared to Civ3, and Civ5 will be streamlined compared to Civ4. It's pretty much that simple. The goal is to create the "Civ experience" with as few moving parts as possible. They appear to be groping for the next plateau in elegance.

The Civ series has reached the top of MOAR hill. The best way forward is through massive, but conscientious, cutting of widgets and gewgaws. Is my position clear enough now?

If the fans had their way Civ5 would be an unplayable mess with even more dubious and rarely-used features. I am glad they will not get their way.

EDIT: Admittedly, Civ4 was only partly streamline-oriented. I still maintain that streamlining was at its core(no per-building upkeep, no corruption, overflow handling, etc), but they did lose it a bit with BTS.

How is Civ5 being streamlined? What moving parts were removed?

 

[AlpsStranger]

How is Civ5 being streamlined? What moving parts were removed?

I'll give a few examples, from what I know so far:

-Transport ships are no longer needed
-Religion subsystem is gone
-Espionage subsystem is likely gone
-Master sliders are now gone
-Multiple leaders and combo-powers replaced by explicit per-nation powers
-Tech tree split up between civics and techs, resulting in smaller tech tree
-Tech trading will no longer be a factor in research priorities
-Smaller total number of military units is very, very likely
-Border pop system replaced by more direct, empire wide means of acquiring tiles

So, in general, I think the game will have far fewer individual systems clinking around.

 

[mjs0]

It is my experience that people who care passionately about a subject will express their views passionately. Doh!

I enjoy hearing the views of both sides. I have my own opinions that I rarely express because I don't think they are particularly interesting to others (and which are pretty set in stone at my age) but 90+% of the comments I hear have some merit and even the remainder can be entertaining!

In fact the only posts that really get under my skin are the ones telling people their opinions are wrong; it's fine to hold a different opinion, or attempt to correct facts on which their opinions are based, but calling opinions dumb or childish or any of the other myriad insults we see on here is not helpful. (In my opinion )

Fans can be the worst judges of how successful new iterations of things they love will be.

One of the other fansites I frequent sporadically is related to the UK scifi show Dr Who (yes the guy from the 70s/80s with the long scarf) and the reaction to the new remake that started its run in 2005 is identical to the response here every time a new version of civ is announced. Of those that remember and were fans of the original series that ended in 1989 there is a sizeable minority that dislike or actively hate the new incarnation of their beloved show.

The fact that it has been the most popular and appreciated (UK equivalent of Nielsens include both ratings and appreciation) light entertainment drama on UK television for the last 6 years is irrelevant, they feel it lacks the soul of their show and is filled with modern agendas, has shallow characters, is too fast, lacks depth, has too many plotholes (seriously a show about a 900 year old guy who travels time in blue box has plotholes!), is too modern, caters to the masses, etc. etc.
Did you see what I did there!
(Hey, maybe we could address 1UPT concerns if troop transports were bigger on the inside)

Any time someone tinkers with something with which hardcore fans have an emotional attachment they risk losing a segment of those fans. As evidence I would point at the significant minority that still prefers Civ3 over Civ4. Does the popularity of Civ4 make them wrong? Of course not...but neither does it mean Civ4 should just have been a rehash of Civ3.

I think a big problem here has been the erratic nature of the 2K 'community management' effort. The folks from 2K are very personable and will engage in a conversation when they are PM'd or when they are here in the forums, but they do an absolutely lousy job of setting and meeting expectations. Attention from them comes in bursts, and as someone who has done extensive work with software UI experts I can assure you erratic response time is far worse, and more likely to irritate, than consistently slow responses. (In one product we were made to put contextual delays in our UI responses to smooth out the response times!)

When Greg announces there will be several new features documented every week and then delivers 4 followed by 2 followed by 0 (my impression, I'm only certain about the 0) it is far worse than promising and delivering one each week.
[@2K: We know you are busy but it's amazing what 30 minutes a day can accomplish.]

Uh oh, this post is starting to ramble and I already said my opinions weren't that interesting so I'll stop here.