Who else is refraining from hanging out in Civ forums?
- Thread starter stethnorun
- Start date
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
I don't think that it is outlandish to be so incredibly upset over purchasing a game as sloppy as this.
stethnorun
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2009
- Messages
- 164
Obviously you don't know what the word hate means. Let me help you:
hate (ht)
v. hat·ed, hat·ing, hates
v.tr.
1.
a. To feel hostility or animosity toward.
Pointing out flaws in a computer game is not hate. I haven't even bought the game so I have nothing to be angry about. I don't play games very often and if I do, I would be perfectly happy with Civ IV. But at the same time, I believe that customers should demand much more than this. It's like some people don't get that it's all just business.
Oh, and yes, my opinions are as objective they can be, since I base them on my facts. As a Master of Engineering with deeper knowledge in visual ergonomics, product realization and programming, I know that A good UI for example is not a matter of opinion. There IS a right and wrong. For example:
This is wrong. It doesn't matter who did it or why they did it. It's wrong. And it doesn't make me hater because I've read enough to have that knowledge.
Civ 5 have some errors with the UI. I see them and I know that Firaxis would agree with them if I pointed them out. And there are ways to objectively evaluate this, by studying how much a person has to move his eyes across the screen, how much time and many clicks it takes to change production etc.
Oh yes they would. Magazines sell numbers by writing early previews. In order to get early copies, they need to give high grades. Also, they earn a lot of money on ads. If a magazine would have given Civ V a 40% rating, 2k Games would most likely stop sending out early games to that magazine.
Secondly, the flaws in a game like Civ become more apparent the more you play it. If you haven't play the series before and play 2-3 games, you will most likely enjoy it.
I know appealing to my own authority is a flawed way of presenting a point, but you seemed to have no problem doing it. I'm a writer/editor for Crispy Gamer (a small-ish game site) and the conspiracy theory of game sites giving good ratings to horrible games is just nonsense. Yes it happens here and there, but it's far from the norm. If I had to guess, I would say it's somewhere in the 5-10% range.
Secondly I promise you that your knowledge of PC games pales in comparison to mine. Not just the Civ series, but almost all PC gaming. I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you because I don't need to. I would never claim to be better at engineering than you. But saying "The only way you will like Civ is if you are some newb gamer" is ludicrous. Yes in life most things are right/wrong, but in games the "fun" factor is entirely subjective. A game can be wonderfully made and still not be fun to you (Like Blizzard games are for me). Likewise, a game can have dozens of flaws and still retain something special that makes it worth playing (I played Star Wars Rebellion WAY more than it deserved, back in the day).
You sound knowledgeable about many things, so it's surprising you took such a juvenile position here.
Drake L. Dragon
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2010
- Messages
- 128
Moderator Action: *snip* no trolling here.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
May Day 10
Prince
I dont think its fair to label people who like Civ V as a "Noob" or criticize their tastes, age, or Civ experience.
I also dont think its fair to tell people who ae disappointed with the game that they are afraid of change, they are crybabies, or just wanted BtS 1.5 or whatever. A lot of people who criticize are just met with responses that are putdowns. As a lot of people who like the game are met with challenges that they are a noob and a list of reasons to convince them to hate the game.
One side isnt going to convince the other side one way or another here. Determinations of preference are made in the Civ "world".
Personally, I was looking forward to this game with a 100% positive attitude for a very long time. It came out and I was positive. I started playing and I really didnt enjoy a lot of things, but denied it... but within a couple games, I just couldnt do it anymore. I just feel like there are a lot of awesome things progressed in the series that werent improved upon, just abandoned. In addition, I dont particularly enjoy most of the changes made (dont enjoy 1upt, City States, and Ranged attacks as they are, amongst other things). I didnt want IV.5, nor am I afraid of change. I wouldnt have minded if things like leader traits and religion were in there and completely reworked, as I wouldnt mind it if a few things were completely left out. I just feel too many great features were completely turfed... and the game isnt as challenging.
But that is my preference, some people really like the changes, and that is cool. I have in fact reverted to playing Civ IV on my free time. Maybe Ill come back if there is a significant change in the way of patches, expansion(s) or mod(s).
People need to stop putting each other down and stop trying to convince each other to like or dislike. Its turning into Democrats vs Republicans, Red Sox vs Yankees, Celtic vs Rangers, or Tea Party vs. Reality. We are all Civ fans and like a line of very intelligent immersive games.
I also dont think its fair to tell people who ae disappointed with the game that they are afraid of change, they are crybabies, or just wanted BtS 1.5 or whatever. A lot of people who criticize are just met with responses that are putdowns. As a lot of people who like the game are met with challenges that they are a noob and a list of reasons to convince them to hate the game.
One side isnt going to convince the other side one way or another here. Determinations of preference are made in the Civ "world".
Personally, I was looking forward to this game with a 100% positive attitude for a very long time. It came out and I was positive. I started playing and I really didnt enjoy a lot of things, but denied it... but within a couple games, I just couldnt do it anymore. I just feel like there are a lot of awesome things progressed in the series that werent improved upon, just abandoned. In addition, I dont particularly enjoy most of the changes made (dont enjoy 1upt, City States, and Ranged attacks as they are, amongst other things). I didnt want IV.5, nor am I afraid of change. I wouldnt have minded if things like leader traits and religion were in there and completely reworked, as I wouldnt mind it if a few things were completely left out. I just feel too many great features were completely turfed... and the game isnt as challenging.
But that is my preference, some people really like the changes, and that is cool. I have in fact reverted to playing Civ IV on my free time. Maybe Ill come back if there is a significant change in the way of patches, expansion(s) or mod(s).
People need to stop putting each other down and stop trying to convince each other to like or dislike. Its turning into Democrats vs Republicans, Red Sox vs Yankees, Celtic vs Rangers, or Tea Party vs. Reality. We are all Civ fans and like a line of very intelligent immersive games.
Psyringe
Scout
It's good to see that some people are able to withstand the rampant "Us vs. Them" mentality and maintain respect for both positions.
MeteorPunch
#WINNING
If you're of this mindset, you should definitely be thanking the complainers. If everyone was "happy" with the game, then there's little reason to fix all the problems.
stethnorun
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2009
- Messages
- 164
Again, spoken like someone who has little understanding of game development/publishing. Games don't get more/better patches due to the amount of complainers on forums. Talk about an inflated sense of self-importance.
They do absolutely. Games do get better. If the majority of people are disliking the game and they also voice their opinion than they can be sure that a great number of users won't buy a dlc/addon. They know (thanks to "the haters") that this game needs serious fixing, because if they don't fix it they miss a lot of future profit. They also know they can get away with lots of stuff (horsearmor dlc anyone?), because there are irrational fanbois that would defend firaxis even if the game causes the computer to explode.
falconne
meep
Um, no. Firaxis is a company and companies want to make money. They will always be trying to expand their customer base. This isn't Sid Meier making his dream game... that's been done. To move forward they need player feedback, because those of us dissatisfied with this release won't be spending any money on future versions till it appeals to us again and they need to know what we don't like about it.
Firaxis have mentioned numerous times before release how much they're going to work with the community (and most of the developers with the best reputation do this). It's the best way they have to figure out what the market wants - especially for a game in it's 5th iteration.
comatosedragon
Emperor
stethnorun
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2009
- Messages
- 164
There are so many things wrong with this line of thought. It really is like a child trying to grasp calculus. First off, random forum sampling doesn't even come close to giving you an accurate picture of your player-base. The idea that a company would form a policy based on a very loud (very small) group of people is laughable. They have focus testing, scientific surveys, etc to draw on. Forum sampling is not even a consideration.
Secondly, yes constructive criticism is always welcome (with good developers anyway), but shrill shrieking is often not only less effective, often times, it's flat out ignored. And most of the "haters" have been shrieking, not helping.
The only forum mindset that may, MAY factor into future patch quality and frequency is one where the poster is objective (doesn't use ridiculous hyperbole like "this game is a 2 out of 10!") and genuinely wants to help make the game better. Of COURSE there are problems with the game and Firaxis is VERY aware of it (and was aware of it before it even launched...they aren't idiots). But spastic shrieking accomplishes nothing.
I really can't believe I had to spell this crap out for you all. No one seems to know how business and the real world works. It's like you all think everything is just an extension of high school:
"Everyone hates our game because lots of people on the forums say so! We were planning on sitting back and doing nothing while raking in tons of money, but I guess we better patch now!"....utter nonsense.
I think that the main forum is getting overwhelmed with the many posts from people expressing their opinions of Civ V and I remember the same happening when other version were released. It does settle down after a while.
I do like what they have done over at these forums...
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=469
...there you can see two of the sticky threads are titled...
The Official ETW Criticism Thread
and
The Official ETW Praise Thread
(To help clear up the forum, so threads stay on the front page for longer, I'm going to start a series of general threads for common thread topics. Older threads will be left alone, or closed if they're no longer needed, but newer threads will be moved into these general threads.
This is the thread for praising Empire: Total War. If you want to express your appreciation of the game, do it here.)
It might have been worthy of consideration to have something similar here..?
I am thoroughly enjoying Civ V but perhaps it should have been called Civ "Marmite" - maybe not many people will understand that one
Notice that the ETW haters have moved on to NTW, leaving the ETW lovers to enjoy their game. Before Napoleon was released, every forum post had at least one reply on how bad ETW is and how much it sucks. It ended when the people went on to play NTW, but once a while a new buyer of ETW pops up and tears open the wounds and the rage war continues.
I for one enjoyed ETW, even though the big patch to fix the 10 minute AI turns in the endgame hasn't been released. Good game, but VERY annoying to play.
Oh, and ''civilization 5'', just so my post wouldn't be too off-topic.
Psyringe
Scout
Do you see the "intelligent debate" and "unbiased opinion" in the following statements?
I think I understand now why you didn't want to discuss my observation of double standards being at work in your posts. So far you've ignored my remarks, but perhaps the collection of quotes above might make you re-evaluate your approach.
If someone talked this way to you, while just having a different opinion, you'd criticize him for his behaviour, as you did in the first quote.
The forums have become very negative because of a few who are aggressively posting that everyone hates Civ5 which is totally wrong.
I thought the threads would have died down by now so we can get back to talking about what we really like, civ5.
I thought the threads would have died down by now so we can get back to talking about what we really like, civ5.
I don't think you're quite right here. Let me give you an example of how the real world works: I work for a cable company. We produce cables. Do my customers want to know how my industry works? Believe me, they don't. Once in a while, when I'm in a tight spot, I can get away with explaining why something didn't turn out the way it was supposed to by blaming it "on the industry" or the situation.
(Reference here is made to - "first release, then patch - this is how the gaming industry works" - play the game as it is, you actually paid to be some sort of a tester.)
But in 99%+ cases, the customer wants a product with this and this spec, and preferably at a cheaper price (although not necessarily, cause quality comes at a certain price). We give a sample (=demo) and let them test it (=play it). If they're satisfied, they place an order. If not - they order to someone else.
Now, what do you think happens if they do not receive the quality they have paid for? They make a claim. And they get their money back.
Of course we're talking about our beloved Civilization here. But it's also our real world money. And just as with every other industry, when we have spent our money on a product, we want it with the decent, promised quality.
Side note: Of course, insulting and ranting is pointless. Asking for CIV 4.5 just as well. But receiving unbelievable tech slingshots, exploits concerning the cultural system, inadequate AI, a tech tree that allows you to reach infantry without researching muskets - all this is bad quality. And it has nothing to do with hate. Most of us even don't want our money back. Hell, CiV has some of the best ideas I've seen in a game - I want to play this game with the proper fixes to the above.
In the real world the customer would have asked for its money back a long time a go.
Peace.
Spot. On.
(Have you noticed the rise of the Internet has somehow made a lot of people / consumers think they're experts in many fields and industries? I see that all over the place, not just in the more histrionic posts here on CivFanatics.)
MeteorPunch
#WINNING
It's nothing to do with self-importance, but money. Future DLC and expansion purchases are based on whether they address complaints.
You must either be in marketing or you give way too much credit to market research --
I work for a professional services software and content provider -- our market cap is about 10 times that of Take 2, as is our number of employees (my specific division's comparison to Firaxis is even larger). Granted, there's a difference in our 2 markets -- but given our higher revenue, higher price points, and the nature of our market, you'd think "focus groups, market research, etc" would be even MORE true...
It's not.
Yes, we conduct focus groups. Yes, we do market research.... but the single biggest driver of enhancements, fixes, etc?
Complaints on segment-focused websites. Sure, there's just inherently fewer law librarian blogs or legal research discussion boards than there are boards discussing a given game -- but even the shrillest and seemingly most inane complaints are given attention, and nearly all of them (within reason... sure "this sucks" isn't helpful feedback no matter what you're building) are at least discussed for potential improvement. In fact, our marketing communications team will quite often jump into discussions -- and not anonymously, but spelling out who they are -- to dig deeper into forum/blog complaints. I manage a team of technical analysts -- and it's also not at all unusual for US to be put in touch with the complaining party to figure out how to alleviate the complaints.
We especially focus on long-time users and customers -- retention rates are absolutely critical, and as far as pure metrics go -- it's the one area that DOES have an extremely rigorous and detailed analysis (i.e., we measure retention rates down to the hundred of a percent and every subscriber that drops a product when we move to a new platform or release is interviewed and cataloged). Everyone likes to expand their market base -- but I don't care what industry, organic growth is always a focus...
BUT -- it's truism that keeping an existing customer is MUCH easier and more profitable than chasing new ones. If the effort to chase new customers bleeds off too many existing customers, the company is in trouble no matter what they produce.
In short -- if Firaxis ISN'T heavily monitoring these boards and ISN'T concerned about the complaints (I think it would be fair to say that at least 1/3 of Civ veterans are relatively to extremely unhappy with this release) -- they're not only fools, they're fools doomed to go out of business at some point in the not to distant future.
Development is both art and science, but really -- more the latter. Market research is both art and science, but really -- more the former. These boards are a goldmine -- and what's more, they're an absolutely FREE goldmine for both Firaxis' marketing and development teams... why spend time and money on surveys and market research if you can get the same information for free from people passionate enough your product to discuss it?
If they're NOT focusing their post mortems, enhancement, and patch plans on what people are saying here and other places like weplayciv, etc -- well... I'm glad I have nothing invested in Firaxis/Take2 beyond the money I plunked down for the current Civ iteration.
