Move on? MOVE ON?!?
You're not a true Civ fan if you EVER MOVE ON. Never forgive. NEVER forget.
(This humorous parody was brought to you by the letter J and the number 42.)
Hell hath no fury like a Civ player scorned.
Move on? MOVE ON?!?
You're not a true Civ fan if you EVER MOVE ON. Never forgive. NEVER forget.
(This humorous parody was brought to you by the letter J and the number 42.)
"Make it a FPS!". And Firaxis would probably end up doing it; which is what I'm afraid of.
What puzzles me how some view this kind of "regression" of game as a good thing?
Settling for this crapola just vindicates what Firaxis and 2K Games have done.
It's much easier to make a tool than to be a craftsman. I.e. it's much easier to incorporate a solid mechanic into a game than it is to program an AI to use it. Again, I think many of CiV's issues will be resolved when the AI is improved upon. Currently, it feels like a 5 year old child, just moving things around the game board because it's cool to. Horsey neat! The 5 year old doesn't know it's strategic benefits, he/she just likes making whinney noises.
The more complexity that you introduce into a game, you increase the complexity that is needed for the AI immensely, even exponentially. This leads me to believe that CiV has the *potential* to be a *very* complex game. It's just too hard to tell at this stage since we're still playing against 5 year olds.
What they need is to code a memetic AI to play CiV, that *learns* how to play CiV as it plays, and improves along the way. That learns from what it does, as well as from what human players do.
means a true "polished" game will cost over 100 dollars.
I agree with what your saying, I don't think we are in disagreement. I want complexity, I am that guy who wants to micro manage my empire. As it stands now, I either don't get to, or don't have to.
So lets look at diplomacy: Currently other than some cheeky speak, its hard to actually quantify how the AI feels towards you. Inevitably no matter what you do, they will come for you. This is not about it not being polished, this is about a concept being only half done.
this is one of many concepts "not finished". If expansions packs are the new way to give us a completed game, it means a true "polished" game will cost over 100 dollars.
A video game was always a finished product, where the money was collected after the game was released. Its not a house, where you pay the plumber half his money just to show up and the other half when he's done.
This is a disturbing trend which does not sit well with me
I think there have been mentioned 2 very reasonable explanations as to why people are so upset.
- The game was released unfinished, thus they, the customers, have payed good money for a product that is, in its current state, not worth that money.
Since they payed for the product, they're entitled to complaints. Those complaints may be a bit more vocal than if they bought for example a new piece of dissatisfactory hardware, because they could give that back and get a refund, which seems to be impossible with software.- Players, especially those that grew up with Civ and have played since cIvilization, feel emotionally attached to the name Civilization and what it represents and don't find it in ciVilization - for various reasons, most prominent amongst which seems to be the "streamlining."
- (belongs to the second point really)Players expected a better product because they can't see while standards should be lowered from cIVilization to ciVilization.
Somewhere someone argued in favour of the "streamlining" aka "dumbing down" with a comparison between Mahler and Peter Glass - that's spot on:
If you're a fan of Mahler and his complex compositions you'd probably be utterly shocked if he composed something like Glass (minimalistic music) (and vice versa). Just like that, many fans of the earlier civs are now pissed that complexity has been taken out of a game. They expected this complexity, deepness etc. pp. because it's been composed by Mahler, not Glass ... sorry, been published as Civilization, not Civilization Revolutions or Panzer Generalization or something.
At AlpStranger
I don't have a problem with paying more for quality....I realize quality costs money in real life.
I don't like someone telling me this game is worth 60 bucks when its clearly not. I buy all the expansions and have no problem with that stuff, that is how it is in the gaming industry.
I don't want civ 4.5 and I don't want civ rev 2 which is what we got.
What made civ so great in the past was the fact they understood the strategy gamer's needs. Now they are trying to appeal to the first person shooter player (which is fine if you do it for the console) and still give the PC gamer what they want too.
Do we want civ 2010, 2011,2012 etc like Tiger Woods golf... I Hope not
Yeah, I think we are on opposite sides on the same coin. It's just so hard to tell what is "broken" in the game when it's hard to play the game with any modicum of challenge. I suppose I could try multiplayer, but I really am scared of wasting hours on a game against people exploiting the *actual* bugs and imbalances that are present (yes, I know they do exist ). I also remember the good old days when increasing difficulty actually meant a smarter opponent, not the dumb or average opponent with resource cheats.
For instance... I would love to have an actual reason to build walls and castles, but as it stands, it's completely unnecessary because my cities are never a priority when I have a couple of units hanging around. I've literally had one archer unit in and adjacent to a city, it was one hit away from falling, and 3 full health enemy longsword units FLED! Doesn't the AI know that just by occupying my city for one turn that it can really severely impact my economy and productivity?
And I agree with the diplomacy. It all seems... a bit hollow. And there are some basic things missing (why can THEY cancel Open Borders but I cannot?).
FYI, seeing where Civ 4 started and where it ended up after all of the expansions, I was glad to shell out my money for the complete experience. I'm willing to gut it out for Civ 5, too. But yes, it feels like it took one step back. But for me, it's because of the silly behavior of the AI.
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.
My fear is that Civ V is more like Civ Rev 2 and not staying true to the franchise. I question this new direction and what it truly means for a franchise that IMO is the best out there of all video games.
Nah, I've played rev and I don't think the games have the same conceptual DNA.
I think what we're looking at is a lot more like a new Civ1. This is a franchise reboot and it is still fairly barebones. Those bones will eventually have plenty of meat on them, but for now the pickings are a little slim.
Really think its a reboot? Was Civ IV the end of that era, to me it seemed as if there was so much more that could have been done.
Am I the only one who likes micromanagement?
See this is the kind of discussion I like. Someone who can admit that even their side of the coin is flawed. I really appreciate that because for one, its more civil, and two it actually helps us find common ground with the same goal in mind.
I remember the outrage over Civ IV as well. I guess expectations were so high after BTS that we all forget some games humble beginnings.
My fear is that Civ V is more like Civ Rev 2 and not staying true to the franchise. I question this new direction and what it truly means for a franchise that IMO is the best out there of all video games.
I'm torn about micromanagement. I can see the appeal but in practice it gradually saps my will towards the end of a game of Civ4. I'm not opposed to it on principal but I think it becomes tiresome in practice.
Do you know what my favorite Civ5 feature is? You can lock a tile while letting the governor handle all of the *other* tiles, and the lock isn't lost if an enemy unit crosses the tile. Pretty obscure, I know, but I think that's the kind of subtle feature that increases playability a lot.
No I love this little ability, I think made easier b/c tile yields have a lot less variability than in previous releases. I wish it had been in previous ones as well, I mean, you never took your worker off a whale in Civ 2
admittedly moving 100 engineers in civ 2 was tedious, but micromanagement IMO has always been something that I enjoyed, besides that only happened in building games
No I love this little ability, I think made easier b/c tile yields have a lot less variability than in previous releases. I wish it had been in previous ones as well, I mean, you never took your worker off a whale in Civ 2
admittedly moving 100 engineers in civ 2 was tedious, but micromanagement IMO has always been something that I enjoyed, besides that only happened in building games