Why do people take it personally?

[PickledDictator]

Agreed.

I just try to keep in mind that even when I buy nice new shiny dinnerware, I still have to wash them before I eat off them.

Yeah, the same thing happened with Elemental, too. Expectations were through the stratosphere. It was just a bit different with it being an entirely new IP and the holes were glaring.

Here... we have expectations because of the groundwork laid before us. Big expectations. Did they meet them? At first glance, no. I really want to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one, though. I *think* they have earned that from their reputation.

I guess I am of the mindset that when a game is released, what is the potential of that game? This day and age, with such diverse users and technology, it's impossible to release a bug free, perfectly balanced game of any complexity. So when I load it up for the first time, I'm thinking "am I going to play this game 1/2/5 years from now?" So far with Civ 5, I'm saying "Yes!" just like I did with Civ 4 (and just like I am with Elemental, btw ).

So yeah, there is a lot of work to be done. I think we can help tremendously by being critical, yet civil, and not storming the Firaxis castle with pitchforks and torches.

I agree with all your saying, but can't help feel that designers owe it to gamers to release things honestly and with their best efforts put forth. It appears evident that the game was rushed, and in order to still make sales targets we weren't really told that the game was this flawed until after. I know this is a business, but I feel as though we are forced to just accept this b/c that is the way it is.

I am going to have to check out Elemental

 

[PickledDictator]

I tend to have a heavy production tile locked down in most of my cities without regard to what their focus is otherwise.

And yeah, I'd kill my own grandmother to have this tile-lock feature in Civ4.

They really need to spice up the tiles though. The yields are far too boring and too uniform and health resources need to be far more useful.

As I said, Civ5 is deeply awful in many ways and truly grand in others. I'm still very optimistic about patched/expanded Civ5 and I think rightly so.

Diplomacy, building diversity, AI competence, tile yield variety and the tech tree are all disappointing to awful.

1upT(discounting the AI), hexes, city management and many of the more fundamental aspects of gameplay are reasons for at least cautious optimism.

All I can say, and I think I can say this for the majority of us here is "I hope you are correct sir!"

glad we could find common ground, gotta jet to the forest with my dog, look forward to the next head to head

 

[JLoZeppeli]

No, I certainly don't want Civ to be dumbed down either, and the truth is I am not even close to content with the current state of Civ5. My largest issue right now, however, is with the forum warriors that are, for some reason, freely allowed to engage in a griefing campaign on what is supposedly a moderated forum.

I'm alt-tabbing to Civ4-BTS between posts for what it is worth. Despite my apparent Civ5 defense I haven't actually played it for a week. My issue has a lot more to do with forum etiquette and the potential future of Civ5. I agree that the current game is borderline indefensible.

I agree, joking may be an issue for sometime, then we need to move on.. Who likes Civ V will play it, who not will wait eventualliy for expansions\mods, that could make it a game with serious mechanics and challange, or Civ VI.

But i think that we need to leave who enjoy the game with their forum free, if it will live on or die slowly is not a matter that concerns us any more.

 

[charon2112]

I didn't say that the bugs didn't exist, just that I've never experienced them.

So the actual script and gameplay bugs aren't present on your system? The Great Wall actually causes units to slow down and you don't get the trade bugs? Amazing

 

[charon2112]

You know, it's not like every person who likes Civ 5 thinks it is a flawless masterpiece.

In fact, I've never seen anyone say it's a flawless masterpiece. Almost everyone on these forums who enjoys the game has admitted that it has problems.

 

[JLoZeppeli]

I didn't say that the bugs didn't exist, just that I've never experienced them.

It's more possible that you experienced them, but fail to notice... Playing a little superficially can be the mean reason, maybe. It happens more often than you could think...

 

[charon2112]

It's more possible that you experienced them, but fail to notice... Playing a little superficially can be the mean reason, maybe. It happens more often than you could think...

Well, we already figured out in this thread that you were wrong about the Great Wall bug, maybe you or others are wrong about other bugs too...?

 

[AlpsStranger]

Well, we already figured out in this thread that you were wrong about the Great Wall bug, maybe you or others are wrong about other bugs too...?

The trade bugs are certainly very, very real. I don't know if any serious doubt about that can be entertained.

 

[charon2112]

The trade bugs are certainly very, very real. I don't know if any serious doubt about that can be entertained.

what are they exactly?

 

[AlpsStranger]

what are they exactly?

One side of a contract is for 20 turns while the other is for 30 and you end up with 120 units of iron. That sort of thing.

 

[JLoZeppeli]

Well, we already figured out in this thread that you were wrong about the Great Wall bug, maybe you or others are wrong about other bugs too...?

What are you speaking about??? Are you, as always while complaining, mistaking me for someone else, dude?

 

[AlpsStranger]

What are you speaking about??? Are you, as always while complaining, mistaking me for someone else, dude?

Good question. We are apparently the same person JLoZeppeli. Not sure when that happened. I'm scared

 

[charon2112]

What are you speaking about??? Are you, as always while complaining, mistaking me for someone else, dude?

ok, I apologize. We already figured that whoever mentioned the Great Wall bug was mistaken.

 

[Callonia]

Too easy to argue OP.

I have to pay just to get Babylon Civ, meanwhile in every previous civ games, Babylon been a part of it.

I refuse to pay for any civs that I must pay for.

 

[AlpsStranger]

I refuse to pay for any civs that I must pay for.

It is *very* difficult to pay for Civs that you don't have to pay for after all

 

[HiroHito]

So that's why you flooded the inbox at 2K/Firaxis instead of crapping up the forums?

No, the point is to annoy and belittle people that aren't sufficiently disdainful of Civilization 5. Your camp may claim that isn't their goal, but their actions betray them. Your target is squarely your fellow gamers and not those who developed the game.

Civfanatics is the biggest and most important Civ related forum, it IS the right place to voice discontent.

 

[Thormodr]

Civfanatics is the biggest and most important Civ related forum, it IS the right place to voice discontent.

Correct. The forums are here for discussion of all things Civ and things related. Whether someone likes or dislikes Shafer 5 is irrelevant. Either view shouldn't be censored.

Simply put, some people need to learn that other people have different opinions.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Correct. The forums are here for discussion of all things Civ and things related. Whether someone likes or dislikes Shafer 5 is irrelevant. Either view shouldn't be censored.

Simply put, some people need to learn that other people have different opinions.

Ok, but let me use a very direct example of the tactics I am criticizing. Look at your viral sig there. What is someone who liked Civ3 and Civ4, didn't really like CivRev, and doesn't find Civ5 "completely unacceptable"? Am I some kind of pseudo-fan or false fan?

Are you implying that others that have been generally optimistic about the game, such as Kael or PieceOfMind, are not really fans because their outrage isn't sufficient?

Your signature is the kind of thing that I am referring to when I speak of organized griefing. It makes the assertion that you can somehow establish a 'Community Orthodoxy' when you have neither the power nor the right to do so.

A distinct camp of detractors is attempting to browbeat less outraged fans into leaving the forum so they can exaggerate consumer dissatisfaction to over-represent people with their particular opinion and make it appear as if a much, much larger percentage of fans share their level of outrage than actually do.

I'll counter by saying it is the responsibility of any 'true' civfanatic to defend the forums from becoming a battlefront in a proxy war between outraged fans and Firaxis.

 

[King_Course]

you've eaten there for 20 years. So don't take it personally.

Here it is... THE TRUTH...

In other words, the people who come short are the people who wasted too long infront of the computer. Not "The Kids" sadly, the adults. And seeing this game being confronted with such harsh critisiscm only concludes one thing; the players of this game are older than the average game forums, and much much more bitter. Generally and overall.

Hey you wasted your life pretty much, gonna blame the newest game on the block? Acting all young and stuff. Get real...

 

[Scaramanga]

Criticism of the game laced with arrogance, however, is also not appreciative of others opinions. You may be right on numerous points, but waving that around will only make people resent you. All of us are going to be wrong a good chunk of the time in life and pointing that out in others is not a good way to win friends. After all, "a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still".

Saying that "reasonable customers" would find the game defective and "true fans" of Civilization would abhor Civ V are ridiculously offensive as who wants to be part of the former group and who doesn't want to be in the latter? These are beyond just stating an opinion.

Regards.