So where's the catch in BtS, I wonder?

[Commander Bello]

The real catch isn't with CivIV it's with Civ V. The problem they have with civ is that the game is so complicated that it's hard for new players to learn. I'v played from civ 2 so I could pick up civ IV vanilla and play prince no problem. With Bts new players have had a time to learn the game. To pick up a civ game for the first time with the amount of content it's gona have with Bts would be very very hard to learn. So from a realistic and economic point of view Civ V will have to have much less features then CivIVBts....which will kinda suck.

Also they wana branch out to platforms which could be good but could end badly.

Sorry, but I have to disagree.

All they'd have to do would be to make certain features intuitive.

Artillery? - Well, this must be a thing for the direct attack. In no way arty can be meant as to sit somewhere back and fire from the distance...
Helis? - Well, they should suffer from crossing rivers, no doubt.
Collateral damage? - Should only be dealt to other units, not the one which I did attack...
Building X reduces the cost by 50%? - It is obvious that this only can mean that the production rate is increased by 50%.

Just some examples.
Actually, I always wondered what was going on in their heads, when they developed these ideas.

The learning curve for Civ4 was unnecessarily high due to things like this. Make the new features of an assumed Civ5 understandable, and there won't be that much of a problem to get into the game easily and quickly.

 

[dh_epic]

Saying they won't make Civ 5 isn't pessimistic. But it is kind of shortsighted. Even at your most cynical, you KNOW that Firaxis wants to cash in on one of the best selling franchises of all time. It's a cash cow!

The main issue for any company is how you can make the most money for the least effort. So, if you want to get cynical, you could conclude that BTS has a lot of features implemented, but poorly. They will be sloppy: ruining game balance, and adding a lot of micromanagement rather than powerful strategy.

I don't think this is true, though. Especially in the case of modding and multiplayer, they want to add to replayability. Why is replayability profitable? Because it builds loyalty. Counter-strike is essentially a free game, but is so popular that it catapults Halflife into "must have" status. Halo 2 sucked (single player), but because it had multiplayer, people HAD to buy it, and are STILL rabid for Halo 3.

I just think they want people still hooked on Civ 4 when they announce Civ 5. That's how you cash in.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well the real catch I could see is Corporations, and possibly spying.

Just like Vassals were messed up in unpatchedWarlords, Corporations are the thing most Likely to be messed up in this one, because they seem to be the biggest change. The changes in Air+Siege Warfare might be bad as well, but I think there is less potential for disaster there. The new AI might have problems as well.

 

[anandus]

The real catch isn't with CivIV it's with Civ V. The problem they have with civ is that the game is so complicated that it's hard for new players to learn. I'v played from civ 2 so I could pick up civ IV vanilla and play prince no problem. With Bts new players have had a time to learn the game. To pick up a civ game for the first time with the amount of content it's gona have with Bts would be very very hard to learn. So from a realistic and economic point of view Civ V will have to have much less features then CivIVBts....which will kinda suck.

Also they wana branch out to platforms which could be good but could end badly.

I think you're very right there.
You see exactly the same thing happening with SimCity.

SimCity 4 was immensely complicated for newcomers and delicious for die-hards. So now they're 'rewriting' the formula to make it easier and more accessable (see: SimCity Societies).

It wouldn't surprise me if the'd do the same with Civ (see: Civ Revolutions)

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

Exactly ! CivRevolution purpose is to catch the next generation because the CivI get old now and there is a risk of quiting. They want fresh blood !

 

[dutchking]

Let's just wait and see if BtS is as great as it is and then we'll worry about Civ V, sound good?

 

[methane]

The real catch isn't with CivIV it's with Civ V. The problem they have with civ is that the game is so complicated that it's hard for new players to learn. I'v played from civ 2 so I could pick up civ IV vanilla and play prince no problem. With Bts new players have had a time to learn the game. To pick up a civ game for the first time with the amount of content it's gona have with Bts would be very very hard to learn. So from a realistic and economic point of view Civ V will have to have much less features then CivIVBts....which will kinda suck.

Also they wana branch out to platforms which could be good but could end badly.

I don't think civ is hard to learn for newcomers. It's hard for newcomers to get good at it. But I think most newcomers can start a game at the lowest or 2nd lowest level with hints and do OK. If they're the type of person who will enjoy civ (control freaks who like a bit of history), they'll get hooked pretty quickly.

 

[dh_epic]

Hate it or love it, every great software and game design company is careful to make a game accessible. That means axing certain features, and constraining the scope of a project. If SimCity is axing some of its features, I wouldn't be surprised to see Civilization doing it.

The question for Civilization 5 won't be "what do you want to add". The question will be "what are you willing to replace?" That means you'll have to simplify one aspect of the game to improve another aspect of the game.

 

[cybrxkhan]

The question will be "what are you willing to replace?" That means you'll have to simplify one aspect of the game to improve another aspect of the game.

very true. thats what they did moving from Civ3 to Civ4. they removed a number of things... and added others...

 

[Virulent]

very true. thats what they did moving from Civ3 to Civ4. they removed a number of things... and added others...

Interestingly enough some of the most anticipated features of BtS was stuff that were in previous Civs but didn't make into Civ IV. Paratroopers, Extended Space Race, non-sucky spies, etc.

 

[DaviddesJ]

The nagging little pessimist in me wonders, why do they give away an opportunity for making even more revenue?

I think Take2 decides how many expansions the market will absorb, at what price. Firaxis decides what to put in them. Putting more stuff in just takes some people at Firaxis who want to do that. And Soren's departure might correlate with a reshuffling of responsibility and thus a slightly different approach.

The main argument against larger expansions, imho, is that the more things you put in, the more likely there will be some big problem buried within it. So it's really a risk/reward tradeoff, as far as Firaxis is concerned.

 

[The Flame]

I have a few ideas about this also:

a) Sid loves this game and wants to make it awesome. Could be very likely.

b) This large expansion pack will get more people interested in Civ and sales will go up, for Civ IV and its expansions

and, like you already said

c) They will be working on a Civ V after that, which may take longer.


I highly doubt that they would want to quit the series.

 

[Jon Shafer]

There is no catch. BTS was lead up by Alex and myself. For those of you who have been around Apolyton and CFC 3+ years ago you'll know we were huge Civ 3 fans long before we ever worked with Firaxis. It was our goal to make the best Civ expansion ever because Civ is our favorite game. And that's what we tried our hardest to do. You can try to come up with as many business reasons for it as you want, but that's really all there is to it.

Jon

 

[V. Soma]

There is no catch. BTS was lead up by Alex and myself. For those of you who have been around Apolyton and CFC 3+ years ago you'll know we were huge Civ 3 fans long before we ever worked with Firaxis. It was our goal to make the best Civ expansion ever because Civ is our favorite game. And that's what we tried our hardest to do. You can try to come up with as many business reasons for it as you want, but that's really all there is to it.

Jon

Thanks, Jon!

This post made my day

 

[Willowmound]

the type of person who will enjoy civ (control freaks who like a bit of history)

That is so funny, and spot on!

 

[anandus]

thanks Jon, I can put my paranoia-genie back in the bottle.

*plop*out comes the rumour-genie though*
So can we take this as an implicit announcement that there might be a CivV?

 

[Shigga]

There is no catch. BTS was lead up by Alex and myself. For those of you who have been around Apolyton and CFC 3+ years ago you'll know we were huge Civ 3 fans long before we ever worked with Firaxis. It was our goal to make the best Civ expansion ever because Civ is our favorite game. And that's what we tried our hardest to do. You can try to come up with as many business reasons for it as you want, but that's really all there is to it.

Jon

Jon, I cannot thank you enough for this statement. You just restored a big piece of my lost faith in ppl. It is uplifting to know there are still ppl that do things for reasons other than money&fame in a world that is so heavily saturated by the principles of the free market economy.

@Yeosol: I have to disagree with your statement. Most of the new features are either based on the functioning of already existing features, either in cIV or in previous iterations of the franchise, which makes them largely intuitive.

Generally, I think the way Firaxis is going is well balanced, b/c you can play the game without in-depth-knowledge of the game, have fun and even win; as well as having enough stuff under the tip of the iceberg that is satisfying for the die-hard civfanatics.

 

[eric_]

Corporations are basically an extension of the religions model, so I don't think there should be too many bugs there.

Colonies are basically an extension of the vassals model, so that shouldn't be too buggy either.

That said, we'll see (and not soon enough, either!)!

 

[dutchking]

I want the advisors to have heads...It sucks with just the info and no juicy stuff...I miss the military advisor saying:
"We have captured ____ and liberated ___ Gold!"

 

[Saim]

Of course, following the success of Civ4 and BTS, Firaxis is going to produce a Civ MMORPG next. I bet it will be called World of Civilizations.

That wouldn't make any sense... it would be too difficult to do. If it was in the tradditional MMORPG style, it would just be wierd (if you play as one character and stuff). Sticking with the ordinary Civ formula, you'd only be able to war with people online. Plus, the builders could be forced into warring.