The Final Analysis?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You only have limited development and coding resources. The choice of no stacking meant that a lot of the effort in making the game had to be devoted to adjusting the many drastic changes that resulted. For example, I'd bet that coding how pieces moved without stacking was a massive coding effort. This then left a lot less room to fix other aspects of the game, thus the issues with happiness, civics, and the like.

Here is a post really worth quoting; I think you've hit the nail on the head about just what happened in CiV development. Iupt was to be the NextBigThing but it was much more than they bargained for and swamped the boat. They know there's so much missing or badly done--honestly, seriously, how can they not?--but they tried to sell a decorated skeleton as CiV for the masses.

I wouldn't be surprised if the truth was that "dumbed down"/streamlined CiV is actually just Firaxis/2K making lemons from lemonade.
 
Dale, I'm really worried about the future of this franchise when some of the better minds in the modder/player community have abandoned hope for the future of C5. If I may, what about C5 has convinced you to not pursue your personal projects further?
 
First off, Aziantuntija, mukava tavata toinenkin suomalainen täällä.

I played cIV a few hours today and yesturday. And to my immense surprise, I got bored and was disappointed with cIV after playing the fifth. With civ V, you have much less "Make a few choices, 30x next turn, make a few choices, 30x next turn", you have more to think about and more to manage. You don't need to plan forwards. Yes, I know that you will come to complain with the "but in IV we get to set this thing to either 1%, 2%, 3% et cetera", but that really isn't the big thing that is necessary to make civs great. Come on, how many of you actually don't min-max these things?

The happiness system is a no-brainer. And so is the health, which is practically almost a copy of the happiness system. Combat is just "spamspamspamspamspam, then move these to that city or SoD". Every game is quite the same, and there is not that much variation.
Sorry to say, after playing V I don't enjoy IV that much anymore. Theres not just enough variation and decisions. Everything is too much min-maxing and and exactly following some pre-set "build" as you would call it in a RPG.
 
interesting that you say that aatami, since I had a similar experience, I couldn't imagine going back to civ 4. otoh, like Sulla, I suspect that is because I have played it to death before civ 5 came out. What I realize when I play civ 5 is that I am bored. not "civ4 I have done all this before" - bored, but "there is no variation here"-bored.

there are numerous reasons for this, the tile yields certainly make things boring. the low difference in yields make cities bland and indistinguishable. another problem is the tech tree, it's a boring linear progression with few strategic choices, no real paths to choose from, just grab everything (you'll have to in order to progress), and illogical connections. Chivalry leads to Banking? Economics gets me windmills? ok... whatever, that's not the real issue. I need to tech the naval path even if I am playing on a pangea with no coastal cities? still not the point, just minor annoyances. the main issue I realize is that everything is just a slight improvement on what you had before. First I get monuments, then I get temples, then I get opera houses and so on. first I get barracks, then I upgrade to armory, and then whatever comes after that.

Every building is a linear ladder, build new building for slight improvement. keep doing so from 4000bc until you're bored out of your mind. same with units. I start with my warriors, who become swordsmen, who become longswordsmen, then I have to skip a step since musktemen are weaker than longswords, and then get back on track with rifles, infantry, etc etc.

Every unit, every building, every tech is just a small improvement on its predecessors. developing my civ is utterly meaningless and boring. all I do is upgrade units and buildings. for hundreds of turns! the peace-time aspect of the game is in my opinion absolute crap, and the only reason we haven't realized is because occasionally a war breaks out that is exciting and requires our attention, the civ merely runs in the background while the wars are fought, and you hardly notice it is there. building new units is near pointless if you need them quickly, just buy them and continue to have your cities upgrading their libraries into universities. by the way, what the hell is the notion that Universities are a prerequisite for public schools..?? not the point, again.

as for the hex tiles, I like them. as for the fighting... I recently played a lot of panzer general, the original, for some reason I can always come back to that game and love it. civ 5 does not inspire that feeling. the combat system has some really cool ideas, but it just doesn't excite me enough, especially since civ is not supposed to be a war game. which seems to be what it has become. in every game I have played I have gotten bored by the industrial era and just gone off and conquered all enemy capitals.

I am disappointed in this product.
 
Dale, I'm really worried about the future of this franchise when some of the better minds in the modder/player community have abandoned hope for the future of C5. If I may, what about C5 has convinced you to not pursue your personal projects further?

I posted a thread on my two major complaints not that long ago. Basically it comes down to immersion and maths.

Immersion is fine because I can just mod in my own stuff to fill the huge gapping hole. But core maths errors means I have to re-program the core before even being able to start.
 
Chance and luck are not randomness.

What do you mean by this? Do you mean that there is something that you describe as a change and something you describe as luck in the game of chess but there is absolutely nothing in chess that could be described as a random? Then, can you please give me an example from real life that what exactly can be called as random?

If I understand your point of view completely, and I think I do, you actually agree with me about the biggest point I had in this chess conversation, wich is that chess is not 100% skill game. It might be nearly pure skill game but not 100% skill game. So I see that you agree with me about this one, im not 100% sure though.
 
Luck: a combination of circumstances, events, etc., operating by chance to bring good or ill to a person.

Luck as applied to chess: Your opponent has a heart attack before he plays you.

Chance: a possibility or probability of anything happening.

Chance as applied to chess: Flipping a coin to see who plays white.

Random: characterizing a process of selection in which each item of a set has a probability of being chosen.

Random as applied to chess : ... impossible.

Random is not a person making a choice to make a move, evaluating the alternatives. Random is spraying a deck of cards all over the place and then picking one up, and it turns out it's the queen of spades.

Random is never conscious choice. There is never a random chance of one unit in chess failing to capture another one, as there is in Civ of one unit failing to defeat another one. There is never randomness in which unit a pawn will be promoted to; that is choice. You can say that there's a chance that the pawn will be promoted to any possible unit, but the unit it ends up as is never random. You can say that there's a chance that your opponent will make X move next turn, but where he finally moves is not random, it's choice. Unless he flips a series of coins to determine his next move, it is not random!

Now.. um. I think what you were trying to say, perhaps, is that chess is not entirely a logical game. No game played by humans is. There is certainly a bit of emotion and bluffing involved in it. But it ain't random! It's unpredictable.
 
Wow. You guys know that noise in Oblivion when you shoot a fireball> PHOOOGPHMM!!< or something like that. This thread makes me think of that ;)
 
Wow. You guys know that noise in Oblivion when you shoot a fireball> PHOOOGPHMM!!< or something like that. This thread makes me think of that ;)

It makes me think of a different sound:

*WHOOSH!!!*

(with a hand waving overhead)
 
Random: characterizing a process of selection in which each item of a set has a probability of being chosen.

Random as applied to chess : ... impossible.

Ok thanks I appreciate that you bothered to answer me politely. But im also sorry because this wasnt exactly what i was asking for.

I asked for someone to give me an example of some event that might be described as random:

Then, can you please give me an example from real life that what exactly can be called as random?

So this is what im looking for. Im not looking for a definition of random but instead im looking for an example.
 
Ok thanks I appreciate that you bothered to answer me politely. But im also sorry because this wasnt exactly what i was asking for.

I asked for someone to give me an example of some event that might be described as random:



So this is what im looking for. Im not looking for a definition of random but instead im looking for an example.

Seriously, this is not the right thread for this.

If you don't believe in Free Will, then randomness doesn't exist, not truly.

If you do believe in Free Will, than any sufficiently hard to predict event is considered random.

Now stop posting in a thread that has NOTHING TO DO WITH this.
 
I know this is not the right thread for this. But as long as the conversation stays civil, i belive we can all just fit in.

Why? You're going seriously off-topic here and are really putting a lot of people's backs up with your constant inability to comprehend something simple and constant talking about it. If you want to talk about randomness, there is a perfectly good off-topic forum for it.
 
Moderator Action: Please stay on topic.

aziantuntija if you wish to start a new topic in the appropriate forum (off-topic) about this subject, please do so, but please don't continue this discussion here.
 
Moderator Action: Please stay on topic.

aziantuntija if you wish to start a new topic in the appropriate forum (off-topic) about this subject, please do so, but please don't continue this discussion here.

Thank you!
 
Ok thanks I appreciate that you bothered to answer me politely. But im also sorry because this wasnt exactly what i was asking for.

I asked for someone to give me an example of some event that might be described as random:

I would've answered you, but I refuse to participate any longer in a forum where civil discussion gets moderated. (And I don't mean Moss's comment above, but further back).

Thanks.

Moderator Action: Please don't discuss moderator actions publicly, PM the moderator instead. Thanks. :)
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
God does not play dice with the universe.

'nuff said...

That will always be the greatest BS to have ever come out of Einstein's mouth. However witty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom