Guardian_PL
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,231
Yeah, and you probably think that Fallout 3 has been made too, right?
Who else agrees that Civ 5 has been dumbed down?
- Thread starter KingYosef
- Start date
- Status
ThunderGod
Chieftain
Well I'm back, after a week of playing the different levels, I am now playing Diety level and WINNING, its currently 1475BC, I have over 47,000 gold, happiness is at 23, I have 19 cities and it looks like I will win, therefore I am bored. There is a sweet spot, that no matter what options you take or civs or heck anything else, if you hit that sweetspot the game is won, no need to continue playing as it gets boring.
So tell me, a civ fanatic who has played all the civs and have NEVER been good enough to win on anything above prince level, that Civ 5 is not simplified and dumbed down!!!!
So tell me, a civ fanatic who has played all the civs and have NEVER been good enough to win on anything above prince level, that Civ 5 is not simplified and dumbed down!!!!
Charvel1
Chieftain
Sure do.
afa2000
Time to die
Just curious. PL means you are from Poland ? And you're a Fallout 2 fan ?
Threedog43
Warlord
I assume he refers to the abomination that dares blight the name of one of the greatest rpg series in history.
afa2000
Time to die
I guess that too. The comparison between Fallout 2/3 and Civ IV/V is very appropriate. But I've asked because I've seen many people with PL in the nick who are from Poland and are Fallout 2 fans. Don't know why specifically Fallout is so popular there. I'm wondering if he is one of them too.
Threedog43
Warlord
So I realize after reading your post more carefully 
afa2000
Time to die
just another example on how good companies have become in killing great series: Final Fantasy XIII.
I hope they can fix that at Fallout New Vegas.
I hope they can fix that at Fallout New Vegas.
Guardian_PL
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,231
/offtopic mode
PL is simply because barebone "Guardian" was taken by some inactive bastard, so I had to come up with that ^^
And yes, Fallout 1 and 2 were awesome. Fallout Tactics was a fun shoot'em up that got boring after a little while. Still waiting for Fallout 3
PS. It's silly, right? I've had an aquaintance at highschool, he was like a 100% typical countryside simpleton - with stinking, dirty clothes, throwing manure at his barn all day long etc. And he was OBSESSED with Fallout series. I mean, he was Fallout otaku, he finished the game bazillion times. That's just an example how popular that game in my country was - it was a legend. Civilization and Fallout, and Diablo/Warcraft - THE most popular games in Poland
/end offtopic
Yay! It's been four days now since I couldn't force/convince myself to play Civ5. I had no idea that so many awesome mangas/manhwas were released since they've closed onemanga - I'm actually over grieving about borched-up Civ5 release, around Christmas when my free-due-to-D2D-offer DLC's will come out I'll check the game again. For now, I have other stuff to do
Wow, as it happens, yes
PL is simply because barebone "Guardian" was taken by some inactive bastard, so I had to come up with that ^^
And yes, Fallout 1 and 2 were awesome. Fallout Tactics was a fun shoot'em up that got boring after a little while. Still waiting for Fallout 3
PS. It's silly, right? I've had an aquaintance at highschool, he was like a 100% typical countryside simpleton - with stinking, dirty clothes, throwing manure at his barn all day long etc. And he was OBSESSED with Fallout series. I mean, he was Fallout otaku, he finished the game bazillion times. That's just an example how popular that game in my country was - it was a legend. Civilization and Fallout, and Diablo/Warcraft - THE most popular games in Poland
/end offtopic
Yay! It's been four days now since I couldn't force/convince myself to play Civ5. I had no idea that so many awesome mangas/manhwas were released since they've closed onemanga - I'm actually over grieving about borched-up Civ5 release, around Christmas when my free-due-to-D2D-offer DLC's will come out I'll check the game again. For now, I have other stuff to do
Well, it's blatanly dumbed down. But one shouldn't mistake removal of content with "dumbing", as these are two fairly different issues, even though they interact together.
Religions, vassalizing, and similar mechanics got the axe we are today bound to see in EACH AND EVERY series of games with planned expansions. Just think of The Sims, everytime they start from scratch with a barebones game and then crank out a buttload of expansions that do what they already did in their previous incarnation, just to bleed your wallet dry.
10 bucks on the table we are going to see most of this content back in the expansions (and as I'm fairly sure to win, at least MY wallet will not suffer as much from the aforementioned bleeding syndrome).
So, more than "dumbing", this mechanic is just business. As long as customers have no complaints at (re)buying 3-4 (if not 8-10 like in The Sims) games to finally have a full game they already had but with prettier graphics and a couple different mechanics... well, good for the devs and the publishers, I would do the same. Hell, people keep buying each year pretty much the very same product when it comes to sport games, 50 bucks for an updated DB with players in the new squads and maybe a bit of texture polishing? They deserve this treatment
The dumbing down rather resides in how what content actually IS in the game is handled. And while everything is much simplier, some things aren't as bad as they might look. On certain things, you're saved from nightmarish micromanaging that certain CIV4 features required, which isn't bad in my book. This lets you concentrate in actually having fun staging wars, and diplomatic relations, and... yeah, and what? Too bad this "advantage" collides with the aforementioned lack of features to have fun with now that your hands aren't tied (and craptastic AI, ok, but that's a whole different issue).
Let's take religions or corporations as an example: I never, ever really bothered with 'em in CIV4 (with the exception of Fall from Heaven of course, religions were something really meaningful and terribly fun to play with in FFH, completely changing your approach to the game based on what religion you chose). All those missionaries or representatives to train, manually send here or there to spread what they were related to, all for a dubious effort/gain ratio (mostly for dull bonuses that added nothing to the gameplay per se): not worth my time.
If (when... ahem) religions were to be added in an expansion, keeping this streamlined approach at gameplay, they could actually manage to add their needed flavour and be fun to play without becoming more of an hassle than anything else.
Certain other things, that I like: the removal of tech trading in favor of the research agreements is a nice step forward from the extremely exploitable tech brokering mechanic we had before. It could be more advanced, to realistically depict two civilizations working together in the same field of research, but it's a start. Embarkment instead of painful micromanaging of transport storage, yay, way to go (though, it's funny how the AI is still dumb as heck when it comes to explore and colonize oversea lands when now it hasn't to manage that mechanic but units can just straightforward walk over water as any respectable messiah can).
There are several instances where this streamlining isn't dumbing down but actually what I consider an improvement in gameplay, it's just even in those instances, well, things are done in an easier way, which is good, but sometimes do too few things, which is bad.
OT P.S. @ afa2000
IIRC, also several good mods for our beloved Fallout 2 were done by Polish and Russian players, especially the latter. I remember almost crying seeing how many features the russian mods had compared to the english ones
Anyway, I don't know how appropriate the comparison is. Fallwhat 3 was a completely different game, from a completely different software house, which just happened to buy (and controversially at that) the rights for the names and setting of the original two games. Not even a bad game per se, in it's genre, I would say, just nothing to do with the originals, and nowhere near as smart in maintaining the fine irony that permeated 'em.
New Vegas, being developed by many of the old devs, might be a refreshing experience even if it uses the same engine as F3, not really an engine suited for "deep" rpg playing. Let's hope so
Religions, vassalizing, and similar mechanics got the axe we are today bound to see in EACH AND EVERY series of games with planned expansions. Just think of The Sims, everytime they start from scratch with a barebones game and then crank out a buttload of expansions that do what they already did in their previous incarnation, just to bleed your wallet dry.
10 bucks on the table we are going to see most of this content back in the expansions (and as I'm fairly sure to win, at least MY wallet will not suffer as much from the aforementioned bleeding syndrome
). So, more than "dumbing", this mechanic is just business. As long as customers have no complaints at (re)buying 3-4 (if not 8-10 like in The Sims) games to finally have a full game they already had but with prettier graphics and a couple different mechanics... well, good for the devs and the publishers, I would do the same. Hell, people keep buying each year pretty much the very same product when it comes to sport games, 50 bucks for an updated DB with players in the new squads and maybe a bit of texture polishing? They deserve this treatment
The dumbing down rather resides in how what content actually IS in the game is handled. And while everything is much simplier, some things aren't as bad as they might look. On certain things, you're saved from nightmarish micromanaging that certain CIV4 features required, which isn't bad in my book. This lets you concentrate in actually having fun staging wars, and diplomatic relations, and... yeah, and what? Too bad this "advantage" collides with the aforementioned lack of features to have fun with now that your hands aren't tied (and craptastic AI, ok, but that's a whole different issue).
Let's take religions or corporations as an example: I never, ever really bothered with 'em in CIV4 (with the exception of Fall from Heaven of course, religions were something really meaningful and terribly fun to play with in FFH, completely changing your approach to the game based on what religion you chose). All those missionaries or representatives to train, manually send here or there to spread what they were related to, all for a dubious effort/gain ratio (mostly for dull bonuses that added nothing to the gameplay per se): not worth my time.
If (when... ahem) religions were to be added in an expansion, keeping this streamlined approach at gameplay, they could actually manage to add their needed flavour and be fun to play without becoming more of an hassle than anything else.
Certain other things, that I like: the removal of tech trading in favor of the research agreements is a nice step forward from the extremely exploitable tech brokering mechanic we had before. It could be more advanced, to realistically depict two civilizations working together in the same field of research, but it's a start. Embarkment instead of painful micromanaging of transport storage, yay, way to go (though, it's funny how the AI is still dumb as heck when it comes to explore and colonize oversea lands when now it hasn't to manage that mechanic but units can just straightforward walk over water as any respectable messiah can).
There are several instances where this streamlining isn't dumbing down but actually what I consider an improvement in gameplay, it's just even in those instances, well, things are done in an easier way, which is good, but sometimes do too few things, which is bad.
OT P.S. @ afa2000
IIRC, also several good mods for our beloved Fallout 2 were done by Polish and Russian players, especially the latter. I remember almost crying seeing how many features the russian mods had compared to the english ones
Anyway, I don't know how appropriate the comparison is. Fallwhat 3 was a completely different game, from a completely different software house, which just happened to buy (and controversially at that) the rights for the names and setting of the original two games. Not even a bad game per se, in it's genre, I would say, just nothing to do with the originals, and nowhere near as smart in maintaining the fine irony that permeated 'em.
New Vegas, being developed by many of the old devs, might be a refreshing experience even if it uses the same engine as F3, not really an engine suited for "deep" rpg playing. Let's hope so
Kadath Just one line of your story, completely ruins the game for me.
While as you say, micromanaging is alot better and you can concentrate on warfare is a good thing; i 100% agree. What ruins it for me, is that while doing so; i notice
a) the game balance is horrible
b) fighting in CIV 5 is too childies for me. 1upt icm lesser forces == easier battles/wins for me.
Plain and simpe, i cannot put in any more simpler to you. There is no challenge for me to make WAR in CIV 5, because the AI fights dumb and with the new 1upt it's even dumber then ever before. Picking of his weaker units is a piece of cake. But that only counts for people who KNOW how to make warfare, where te move and when to attack. Add to that, that's hardly/NONe surprise element (thanks to your allmighty advisor, who tells you the win/loss ratio before hand) and there you have it "a very boring game for the above average warmongerer" ; i say above average, because you even don't have to very good at it.
Since i like to "feel threathened" when going for a another Victory condition, the bad fighting AI, ruins the game completely for me. So as someone sais, well make no WAR then, try another strategy. I say; WAR is part of history, you have to deal with it. Leave that out, and what to we have for a game ? Diplomacy ? Discovery's "great culture" game ? I mean, come on. The game is crippled, plain and simple.
While as you say, micromanaging is alot better and you can concentrate on warfare is a good thing; i 100% agree. What ruins it for me, is that while doing so; i notice
a) the game balance is horrible
b) fighting in CIV 5 is too childies for me. 1upt icm lesser forces == easier battles/wins for me.
Plain and simpe, i cannot put in any more simpler to you. There is no challenge for me to make WAR in CIV 5, because the AI fights dumb and with the new 1upt it's even dumber then ever before. Picking of his weaker units is a piece of cake. But that only counts for people who KNOW how to make warfare, where te move and when to attack. Add to that, that's hardly/NONe surprise element (thanks to your allmighty advisor, who tells you the win/loss ratio before hand) and there you have it "a very boring game for the above average warmongerer" ; i say above average, because you even don't have to very good at it.
Since i like to "feel threathened" when going for a another Victory condition, the bad fighting AI, ruins the game completely for me. So as someone sais, well make no WAR then, try another strategy. I say; WAR is part of history, you have to deal with it. Leave that out, and what to we have for a game ? Diplomacy ? Discovery's "great culture" game ? I mean, come on. The game is crippled, plain and simple.
AI issues are... a different issue, as I stated in my post
It's not a gameplay design issue per se, but the result of a too rudimentary combat AI. IF the combat AI were to play out decently, with its units able to protect their artillery, take advantage from terrain, try to outmanouver you and so on, as they are supposed to do and don't, would you define the 1upt mechanic as a "dumbed down mechanic" in comparison with the old one of just building a OMGstackofdoom and sending it on a rampage, where the only winning or losing factor for it was how much "ofdoom" it was (and so, you have a strong economy---->you have many and modern units---->your stacks of doom are stronger ----> you win)?
The combat mechanic of CIV4 wasn't a combat mechanic at all, it was all dependant on how good you were at empire building: really, can't get much "dumber" than this, can it? It was a wonderful strategy game, but there was no tactical game whatsoever. This civ tries to also be a tactical game, as, for instance, several fantasy TBS games did since MoM. Which is the very opposite of a dumbed down mechanic: now both your skills at empire building AND at tactical combat matter in winning. Or at least they should, if you were to be offered a worthy opponent. The issue comes from a dumb AI unable to work under these much more complex rules. That's clearly not a core design issue though, it's a specific issue cornering the "bug" definition.
The only dilemma in this is: will they ever be able to really fix this up to being at least decent? The rules for this tactical approach to combat are 10 times more complex than before, and as such the AI code must be aswell. Whatever the answer will be, you can rightfully complain about an undeniable issue, yes, but definitely not calling it a dumbed down design choice, as it is clearly the opposite. Turned out badly, yep, at least for now, but it's the opposite. And this thread is about dumbed down game or not
afa2000
Time to die
Reply to Guardian_PL and Kadath:
Sorry for the offtopic, guys.
Spoiler :
Sorry for the offtopic, guys.
Threedog43
Warlord
Yosef must be happy, it passed 50%!
People already complain about the time it takes the Pc have to "compute" things. How much longer should they wait when they make the AI smarter ?
I think alot longer, if you want to give any "real intelligence" at all. Take Chess, for example. The "smarter" you want the computer chess machine to play, the longer you have to wait for a turn; each turn. And that's just another reason why we don't gonna see a smart AI in games like this. Not unless you are willing to wait 15 minutes or so.
So it's not only a matter of "if they code the AI well", the time it takes to process "this enhanced code" is just as important.
What i am saying is; suppose they could "fix" it, they still can't use it because there are only a handfull of people patient enough to wait several minutes every time the pc-player have to compute things. So while they could do "something" , it will never be good enough. That's my point.
And yes, fighting it out in the old SOD-stack way is not what i am waiting for either. What i prefer is a new system, with the option to park more units on a tile (like a army = 1 unit = multiple units). It ain't SOD , the old way. It should be new, refreshing. TW-style Army's. Not exactly Like that, but someting in that direction.
UKScud
Warlord
The thing is...five years back that might have been an excuse when there was only one processor in my computer....but now that there are four...or however many?!?!
Turn times in Civ are not something we have seen improve over the years much, despite what seems like a larger leap forward in processing capability. It been a few years now since we've had multicore processers. When are the AI programmers going to catch up?
Just made an account here for this particular poll . imo I feel V has been dumbed down. Also wonder how many resources were spent making it available for ps3/360 , and then removing stuff just so console kiddies can play it. Seems 2k / firaxis are have jumped on that bandwagon too.
Welcome to the forums. You seem to understand the situation perfectly.
The game has been dumbed down/watered down/streamlined for the mass market. The console version is coming. We all know it.
- Status
