Lexicus
Deity
The really funny part of this is that we all know thicc yields are a thing in Civ 4 but not in 5 or 6
What IYO does IV do better than V?
- Thread starter Leathaface
- Start date
The really funny part of this is that we all know thicc yields are a thing in Civ 4 but not in 5 or 6
Nightinggale
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,383
That strategy works well for some games, but part of the reason why civ4 is modded more than civ5/6 is that civ4 is more friendly towards modders. If they count on modders to do the work for them, at least open up the game for the modders. I won't even try to mod civ 5/6 because I know I will quickly get annoyed by not being able to do what I do now with the civ4 engine.
If I am to buy a new civ game, the top of the wishlist is actually civ4 with more modding features, like the diplo screen and music controls not hidden in the exe file and possibly a modern compiler too. Ideally an exe-DLL interface, which doesn't require a specific compiler. Interestingly if such a new version would be required in order to play mods, selling such a new version would likely more than pay the development costs as it seems like minor changes for anybody with the full source code. However it seems that getting everybody hyped on the newest civ game is what they are aiming for and they abandon old versions of the civ engine once they move to a new one.
The problem with that approach is who will pay for FHH2 when we all have it already with source code and everything? Colonization is essentially a big mod. The changes to the non-modable parts (mainly the exe) are minor. The biggest difference is that Colonization added support for drag-n-drop widgets, allowing moving units and cargo in the colony screen. It's just 2 new python functions to add widgets and dropping a widget will make the exe call a DLL function with info on both dragged widget and the widget it is dropped on. Fairly simple implementation, but it unlocks a whole lot of modding possibilities.
Fippy
Mycro Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 15,017
I think the Devs know exactly what they are doing..
many peoples today are more interested in writing messages all day, or discussing streams, than thinking about their strategies ig.
They are reaching out for that market, and could care less about how their AIs work..
most of their buyers could also care less since it's more important what new countries are added, and what everybody has to say about them,
than planning something ig.
many peoples today are more interested in writing messages all day, or discussing streams, than thinking about their strategies ig.
They are reaching out for that market, and could care less about how their AIs work..
most of their buyers could also care less since it's more important what new countries are added, and what everybody has to say about them,
than planning something ig.
plasmacannon
Emperor
I get what you are saying. I should have listed more and in detail.
If FFH2 were done like Colonization or Beyond Earth. More than just a mod of CivIV, with similar styles, research tree, etc, but with different themes, then they could sell multiple copies around $20-$30 after the we purchase the main game for around $40, though they would not require the original game. They would be separate. Instead of selling us an overpriced CivVI for around $100 and getting fewer options, less modability, and less complexity.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
One decision in civ 4 is as complex as a full turn of civ 5 or a whole game od civ 6.
Aristos
Lightseeker
This. Civ 5, and even more so civ 6, are made for the instant gratification generations. Sad, but true. They are making millions off that target market, what @TheMeInTeam likes to call "doormat market". So, from a cold, short-term short-sighted business-only point of view, it makes sense as profits are their main driver. The problem is that in the process, they basically blatantly ignored their hardcore fanbase (us), which ironically is what made them successful in the first place.
In other words, how I wish a smart, determined competitor comes in to the civ market and makes them pay for their oversight. A business can and should try to capture more market if possible, but not at the expense of those customers who really make their long-term core base. When that happens, you open the doors for a new player. I hope that happens here.
Civ urgently needs what Schumpeter called Destructive Creation. If FXS has to be on the destroyed part, so be it; well deserved, if you ask me.
Paradox, what are you waiting for? (Jomini engine, perhaps?)
Tomahawk? Come on, Soren...
The problem being the ones that made it a success are getting older and fewer while the younger generation is getting larger.
Are the few of us less enough to justify the effort. Reading up, quite a few of them find the newer generation of Civ acceptable and will argue that it's actually better.
Are the few of us less enough to justify the effort. Reading up, quite a few of them find the newer generation of Civ acceptable and will argue that it's actually better.
Fippy
Mycro Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 15,017
Partly true, but also easy to forget that many old school players (also among young ones) are silent,
so they appear to be few only.
Why..you cannot argue with instant gratification players,
we know what we say makes no difference there, no point in going against hype trains.
They are "loud", so the numbers seem overwhelming.
But good traditions rarely die, not being in the spotlight thankfully does not mean disappeared.
so they appear to be few only.
Why..you cannot argue with instant gratification players,
we know what we say makes no difference there, no point in going against hype trains.
They are "loud", so the numbers seem overwhelming.
But good traditions rarely die, not being in the spotlight thankfully does not mean disappeared.
Nightinggale
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,383
Looking at Steam's top sellers for 2018, Civ 6 is platinum and Civ 5 is bronze. Civ 4 is nowhere to be seen. From a business model, what they are doing makes sense. Odds are that their new customers aren't civ veterans and serving the veterans apparently just isn't the best business model for them. I suspect it's like Star Wars. The veterans flame the new movies, but they wouldn't actually make them if they didn't profit from doing so.
Civ 6 is apparently 70% off right now, but I still still stick to the civ 4 engine.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
This is an unfair assessment. Civ4 was developed during a time when steam was but a fledling. It was a game for a different age of computers. Release civ4 today, built for graphics capabilities of 2019 And you’ll have a bestseller. There are plenty of smart games out there that are doing really well. Not everyone plays candy crush or Fortnite.
The direction civ franchise is taking has little to do with sales volumes and everything to do with its developers not knowing how to create a game that appeals to wide masses and complexity-looking gamers at the same time, something that many, many segments of the computer industry are doing really well. So it’s not impossible.
Fippy
Mycro Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 15,017
Yup those numbers are actually quiet unimpressive..
as one of the biggest names in gaming history, they could sell "thin air named Civilization" well on Steam.
An outstanding Civ game like IV would sell much much more nowadays (and many are not buying IV on Steam),
geez cash shop scams like Black Desert Online are Gold on Steam, their user base is probably not too bright.
as one of the biggest names in gaming history, they could sell "thin air named Civilization" well on Steam.
An outstanding Civ game like IV would sell much much more nowadays (and many are not buying IV on Steam),
geez cash shop scams like Black Desert Online are Gold on Steam, their user base is probably not too bright.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
If these numbers are to believed, Civ4 is being played by 1980 people, compared to 25-26k for Civ5 and Civ6.
https://steamcharts.com/search/?q=Civilization
Which would place it comfortably into the top 200 played games on Steam, out of at least a 1000 titles. Not too bad for a 13-year old game.
Incidentally it also beats the crap outta Beyond Earth, which was an abomination and a good indication of things to come.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
Agreed. Much of the strategy genre could use it in general, aside from indy developer stuff I haven't tried so can't comment on. Maybe someone out there is doing it well, but the current major players are pretty bad. This isn't true in other genres - for the derision it tends to get Fortnite is actually pretty well put together in gameplay terms for example. It outcompetes, and it has to because it actually has some competition that tries. In contrast something like Civ or Madden don't and their quality tanks.
I'm not on the inside so I can't reasonably estimate how much development mistakes hinge on poor project management vs simple emphasis on milking the DLC model. Certainly the low bar this part of the gaming community sets allows them to get away with putting out junk.
Bibor
Doomsday Machine
That's because some companies use DLCs as a risk management tool (this title didn't sell well - let's make up for it by DLC sales), instead of just calculating risk into the title itself. This worked well for Witcher 3 and people universally appreciated the forward info about how DLCs will work: which will be free, which will cost money.
I'm into building something of my own right now (only remotely computer related), and the problem is already apparent what's going on. Too much time is spent on actual production (manufacturing), which in relation to computer games, means creating graphics, animations, sounds etc. and too little time is spent on creating a working prototype, i.e. game design.
The bonus problem is that people designing these things are not game designers, they are just game developers, which is - i cannot express how critical this is - not the same thing. They are musicians dabbling in composing - they are not composers. Sure, there are people that can be both, but not in 2019 and not in Firaxis anymore, and certainly not in many other AAA companies. These companies deserve the title, as it's truly only credit rating that's relevant about them.
Reminds me Michael Bay movies: "We paid for 25 minutes of explosions. Lets have lots of explosions. If you give me 24 minutes of explosions and a storyline, you're fired!".
plasmacannon
Emperor
I think what they are getting at is that Civ5&6 are being played more because they are newer, not because they were better made.
People still listen to Beethoven and Bach and they were produced hundreds of years ago.
A good example might be Gangnam Style with it's 3,266,033,984 views.
It subsequently won Best Video at the MTV Europe Music Awards held that year.
If we followed the numbers, all other music produced by anyone else on the planet for all time weren't that good, because they couldn't beat this so well liked song.
I know of no one today that listens to that song. Luckily, many from the 70s are still played on several stations.
Chinese American
Hamtastic Knight
Older Civ games from 1-4 and including Civ Rev, the player spends a lot of time in the city screen. First, the city screen in these earlier versions were much easier to view and parse. Most importantly the player bonded with these cities they painstakingly nurture. I would check up on them every turn to make sure they're growing well and fully optimized.
Otoh Civ 5/6, I felt no connection to my cities. First, their city screens feel so cluttered and difficult to get the information you want. Most importantly there's just fewer interesting choices in city management. For one, resources seem to matter less, so there's no point to minmax tiles.
Moreover the entire map look so cluttered, it's difficult to see where my cities are. Can't tell the terrain apart. Not that that matters, resource minmax no longer applies, and building a district pretty much removes all resources from that tile.
I can go the whole game and not visit the cities. Just change production whenever the last one has completed; they even alert you, so I'm not intentionally visiting my cities. Meanwhile I'm stuck babysitting my army; the game should be called traffic controller, trying to uncongest the map takes up 99% of the game. Not feeling at all like ruling a civilization. I paid for a civilization game, instead got a cheap wargame with no strategy or tactics.
Otoh Civ 5/6, I felt no connection to my cities. First, their city screens feel so cluttered and difficult to get the information you want. Most importantly there's just fewer interesting choices in city management. For one, resources seem to matter less, so there's no point to minmax tiles.
Moreover the entire map look so cluttered, it's difficult to see where my cities are. Can't tell the terrain apart. Not that that matters, resource minmax no longer applies, and building a district pretty much removes all resources from that tile.
I can go the whole game and not visit the cities. Just change production whenever the last one has completed; they even alert you, so I'm not intentionally visiting my cities. Meanwhile I'm stuck babysitting my army; the game should be called traffic controller, trying to uncongest the map takes up 99% of the game. Not feeling at all like ruling a civilization. I paid for a civilization game, instead got a cheap wargame with no strategy or tactics.
Last edited:
Lennier
Emperor
Reviews like this are the reason I haven't purchased Civ V or VI (and don't plan on doing it).
Blacklanner
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2010
- Messages
- 82
Civ IV is likely the last civ I will own because everything later requires steam. That being said i tried out 5 a little just after release and it was disappointingly easy. I'm an emperor level occasional civ 4 player still, but I could beat the release version of V on deity effortlessly. It was basically build horsemen, win, especially as Greece. Also it lacked theme for me. I still go back to alpha centari from time to time and play for the awesome theme, even though the ai is terrible and there are a lot of poorly balanced features. 5 and BE both feel bland. I didn't even try 6, from what i heard it wasn't much different from 5 or BE in its weaknesses and well they won't sell it to me anyway so I'll keep enjoying other games instead.
Nightinggale
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,383
You can get Civ4 on steam and that version is inferior to the GOG version or the disc versions. The problem is that steam has some anti cheating system which intentionally crash games if a player tries to snoop around in memory or the code. The goal is to avoid FPS games where one player can see through walls and similar cheats. It is however horrible for the modding community that modders are locked out of the running game because it hides important information like where in the code a crash occurs. If the game crashes for no apparent reason, GOG or disc versions allow using a debugger to get a whole lot of information on what happened while the steam version is like "none of your business. You aren't supposed to know anything about this".
It should be noted that Steamless actually works and can remove this feature from Civ4. However it's still bad that you have to do something extra for the steam version for something, which just works out of the box for the other versions and a lot of hours have been wasted before we found Steamless.
There are a bunch of other pros and cons regarding steam, but killing the ability to debug mods is a big negative, which most people are unaware of.
Gawd! No wonder I can't debug anymore. I thought it was Windows 10. GoG here I come!
