That goes to heart of the manner. With little doubt, Civ5 is much simplified and streamlined. The question is can the game be modded to be less so. For instance, can the really simplified global happiness mechanic be modified back to individual city happiness? Of this I doubt because this is a core mechanic now.
Who else agrees that Civ 5 has been dumbed down?
- Thread starter KingYosef
- Start date
- Status
That goes to heart of the manner. With little doubt, Civ5 is much simplified and streamlined. The question is can the game be modded to be less so. For instance, can the really simplified global happiness mechanic be modified back to individual city happiness? Of this I doubt because this is a core mechanic now.
afa2000
Time to die
His updates on results show clearly that the more everyone plays Civ V, the worst it seems.
charon2112
King
That's not true at all. Considering the negative nature and title of the poll, and looking at the posters that that thread is attracting, I'm not surprised at all that the negative votes are increasing.
This (MUCH less biased poll) shows increasing positive numbers all the time:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=382765
Aristos
Lightseeker
less biased for whom?
"He is only blind who doesnt' want to see", an old and wise spanish saying...
isau
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 3,071
To answer this question in a purely technical way, it probably depends on what's under the hood in the DLL file (which we have yet to be able to edit, from what I've heard.) ModBuddy does not work for me or I'd consider looking in there to see if its doable in Lua. As it happens I did some heavy DLL modding in Civ IV, and at one point added some extra +Happiness features to the core engine. Here's what we're up against if Civ V works like Civ IV:
Global happiness actually did exist in Civ IV, but it worked differently. On a pure data level, every City and every Player object had several dozen happiness variables stored on them. There was a variable for each individual thing like Resources, War Weariness, Traits, etc. Then each variable was further subdivided into good or bad, so you'd actually see GoodResourceHappiness, BadResourceHappiness, GoodWarWearinessHappiness, BadWarWearinessHappiness, etc. The reason for tracking it to such a granular level was that the game interface reports a breakdown of each individual source of Happiness and Unhappiness (i.e. "bad happiness") when you mouse over the display in game. Civ V does this just like Civ IV, so I'm hopeful it's set up the same way.
If that's the case, to make it work like Civ IV, you'd need to find the portion of the city code that does population growth. We'd total all of the Happiness being generated in that city from the various sources, then combine it with the Happiness being generated empire-wide (likely stored on a Player object). You then check to see if this number is less than the city's current population. If it is, allow the population to grow that turn, if not, don't.
The next part is reporting to the player what's going on in the city. To do this in the city screen is just a matter of changing the Lua code for the screen so you include a section with the happiness number. You'd probably also want to write a script that displays how that total is calculated. You'd also probably want to find the screen that shows statistics per city and at least modify it to show the total happiness in each city.
Right now I'm not totally sure which parts of this are exposed to Lua. If it works like Civ IV, the stuff that's needed to change the city screens is already in there and does not require a DLL recompile. The only part I'm not sure about is limiting city growth when the city is Unhappy, because I don't know if City::doPopulationGrowth or whatever it was called is an exposed method. If it is, then if I can get ModBuddy working I may volunteer to build a prototype for folks. That's a big if though, since ModBuddy is telling me I'm "missing resources" even after installing Visual Studio components.
You already have your mind made up and will defend ciV at any cost so your stance on this is highly predictable and not particularly convincing.
People voted very early on that poll and I'm sure many, many people would vote much differently now if given the chance.
I wish ciV wasn't dumbed down but it is. People have seen this and the more people play the game, the more they realize this.
It's pretty obvious that people are voting on their own experiences as well as seeing no convincing argument from the apologists side. All they see is, "Trust us. It's Civ. It can't be bad. It'll get better. There, there. They wouldn't do this to us. *group hug*" Well they did do it to us and it's a shame.
afa2000
Time to die
That's not true. If it was, the first updates wouldn't show majority on those who disagrees, because it's supposed to be biased. But you see a TREND CHANGE, showing more and more people getting bored, probably coming to the forums to express their frustrations about the game.
I don't find a thread who shows "meh" as an option (WTH is "meh" ? It could be either "neutral", "underwhelmed" or "somewhat satisfied", depending on your point of view) as a serious poll. You can't prove there's a trend on numbers becoming positive, because OP doesn't show the updates. Last, but not least, here we have almost 1500 votes, against less than 700 there.
It's like chasing the wind isn't it?
This poll says 45.38% of people find ciV mediocre or worse. Pretty damning I think.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=387240&page=8
afa2000
Time to die
It's like chasing the wind isn't it?
Sure
Apart from that last option, I find that thread options serious and balanced. What really matters is that all polls show the same: a very high rejection towards the game. No matter if we are the majority or not, it's not good. This thread is the only one who shows that became a trend.
Worth mentioning:
Pretty damning review here. This guy knows his stuff:
A snippet:
http://www.theengineeringguild.co.uk/forum2/index.php?showtopic=5185
A snippet:
His conclusion is below. Pretty good article and worth the read.
http://www.theengineeringguild.co.uk/forum2/index.php?showtopic=5185
Sure
Apart from that last option, I find that thread options serious and balanced. What really matters is that all polls show the same: a very high rejection towards the game. No matter if we are the majority or not, it's not good. This thread is the only one who shows that became a trend.
Worth mentioning:
That's just it, people who mock this poll are forgetting that it was the other way around with the majority being those who don't think Civ 5 has been dumbed down. The trend change shows proof that this opinion is changing amongst users.
The one thing though is whether they will gain more new "casual fans" to Civ than the "hardcore" veteran fans that they will lose. That is the calculation.
I highly doubt it however. Civ was always such a big hit because it was a deep and complex empire building game. For shallow, simplistic, dumbed down games there are plenty of other choices especially RTS games. And of course there was Civ: Rev.
I highly doubt it however. Civ was always such a big hit because it was a deep and complex empire building game. For shallow, simplistic, dumbed down games there are plenty of other choices especially RTS games. And of course there was Civ: Rev.
r_rolo1
King of myself
Or even those browser based strategy games
And those are free ( atleast at the beggining 
)I find it funny that some people actually think that it is a good idea to make strategy games for people they think as so dumb they can't even understand the concept of odds ( yup, I'm talking to you, Sid
). It is like making a FPS aimed specifically for people with poor reflexes Where's the fun, i ask ? CIV II , THAt was FUn, that was hilarious! ADvisors, stumbling over eachother, with voice and animation, pissing eachother; telling all at the same time!
Build barracks, no Temples, NO Embassies....noble leader; Hilarious, i loved it!
Build barracks, no Temples, NO Embassies....noble leader; Hilarious, i loved it!
falconne
meep
I see you brought up the one poll that agrees with your view once more. Not that you will be reading this post, but for anyone else who is wondering, that poll got up to about 500 people in the first week after release, when all the "first impression" folks were voting. After that it mostly kept getting buried and only had 150 or so new people vote. This poll on the other hand, started a day before that one, had a similar number of votes after the first week and showed the same kind of bias, but ever since then it has remained on the front page and has more than twice as many votes as the other one. The trend has sharply turned since the days of the first impression folks and people who have had more time to play began to vote.
charon2112
King
Poll titled "Who else thinks that Civ V has been dumbed down" = completely negatively biased, for everyone. and the results show this.
Poll titled "Civ V: thumbs up or down" = not biased at all, for everyone. and the results show this.
I'm very sorry that the unbiased poll shows overwhelming support for Civ V. But it does.
Sorry guys.
charon2112
King
I brought up the one poll I could find that was clearly un-biased, in it's title and poll choices. Whether I agree with the results is irrelevant.
- Status
